Skoteinos

Thanks for correcting me on that heh, I should have elaborated light in vacuum.

okay then, that makes sense. One thing i want to understand: A observer in motion at a fraction of c will witness the world around him age much faster than him. An observer in motion at minute fractions of c will be witnessed to travel much faster than the 1st observer in the eyes of the 1st observer? Observer 1 : Large fraction of c Observer 2 : minute fraction of c Obvr 1 travels so and so distance in so and so time witnessed by Obvr 1, he views Obvr 2 travel so and so distance much faster relative to Obvr 1 witnessing time according to Obvr 1. does Obvr 2 witness Obvr 1 traveling at a large fraction of c or at minute speeds because his time rate of change (dt) is less than Obvr 2's dt? I must be missing something.

A planet-sized magnet (magnetized iron, neodyminium, nickel, whatever) will easily have more force than a planet-sized non-magnet (aka earth) , ( Not including the gravitational effects of a planet-sized magnet )

...That is possibly the funniest thing i've heard all week.

The basis of disproving relativity is that the relative motion of the observer is not included? As i heard swansont say, and i repeat: the motion of the photons of light moving relative to the observer are based on the fact that the observer is the stationary object. If light is moving relative to the observer, why is the observer moving at all, relative to what? The observer is stationary because the relative motion between 2 objects is based of just that, the relation between two objects, there is no absolute space geometry against which both observer and observed are moving relative to. I'm probably missing something here which your all going to educate me with very soon, but just my 2 cents

Thanks for trying to keep everything close to the field of science (rather than speculation) [Tycho?] , basic facts of relativity, if you break these, make a new theory that doesn't include relativity: 1- Speed of light, c, is constant and unattainable by particles with mass 2- particles can't accelerate to c for the same reason particles at c can't decelerate to sub-c. Photons never slow down, even from a black hole, they get trapped, but their speed is constant, the wavelength changes. 3- The higher a fraction of c, the more inertial mass you have, the more inertial mass, the harder it is to accelerate, you reach infinite mass, unattainable speed limit. The speed of light is constant because no matter how fast you move, you will always measure a photon's velocity to be c, reason being your measuring device is altered by the velocity your traveling relative to the photon, it combines very effectively to cause c to be constant. time is relative, the faster you go, time remains constant to you, but to observers around you, you age slower, hence a photon never ages, its 'immortal'. If you were to take a spaceship and travel at a high fraction of c from and to earth, you would age a small amount of time, while millenia will have passed on earth. noz92, no offence intended, but try to keep everything you say within the field of science by including links to where you get your theory's, and if its created by yourself, make sure to rid of as many holes in your theory by studying around the site and the web and (god forbid) school (though i've never found that to be a good place to learn these things ). But some of your ideas have roots in certain theories being created by physicists around the world so your not completely out of the blue, just keep looking around. I'm still trying to make sure i understand what happens to an observer traveling at a fraction of c viewing the unaccelerating universe around him, and vice a versa for a relatively stationary observer viewing an accelerating observer (right now i'm thinking the accelerating observer appears to shorten/squish at higher speeds, akin to the term 'pancaking')

Thanks Martin, That sounds pretty interesting, i'll probably surf the web about that stuff once its not 4:21 AM right now , and noz92, you summed it up in a sentence , good man. I've made a few amateur computer simulations of galaxy collisions, problem is that invoking rotation upon the stars is somewhat more difficult than i thought, too far and the stars fling apart, too close and the stars fling apart, just right and the stars fling apart, its problamatic. They haven't 'confirmed' black holes as of yet, there's huge amounts of possibilities, and most people agree black holes exist, we're just looking for em now, galactic centers, binary systems etc. A black hole simulation would be really interesting. And once the newer and more powerful particle accelerators come online, and if we find out there are more than 3 spatial dimensions, then perhaps we will be able to build miniature black holes right here on earth, expelling all doubt.

It has to do with the fact that the speed of c is constant Everywhere, all the laws succumb to it. Think of it like this, your going at a fraction of c, the headlights are going at c to a guy on the road, to you, and to an alien 500 billion lightyears away, for each observer, c is measured constant always, the measurements themselves get warped by the differences in velocities, as your going faster and faster, your length shrinks/flattens, hence if you measured how far a photon traveled in 1 second, you will always come up with 300,000 km (roughly), the faster you go relatively, the more skewed your measuring instruments. at 10% c, your meter ruler will be shorter than a ruler to an outside observer, you'll think everything's dandy, but in the end, all measurements of c always turn out to be perfectly sychronized at the universal speed of light. (P.S.- Light going through any medium [water] 'slows' via refraction, the speed of light never changes)

You can't use todays method of quantum entanglement to send information at tachyon speeds. Quantum entanglement works of the principle that since you can't observe a particle without changing it, don't look at it at all, look at a particle thats related to it and see the difference between the two, then you send the difference to the receiving end by conventional means, and the other side modifys the entangled particle to cause the related particle to have the exact same properties as the particle you wanted to send. Basically its a loophole in Heisenburg's Principle, and thats how they teleported a SINGLE photon. Problem is that though the tranfer was instantaneous, the information to cause the transfer is stuck a the speed of light, and you can't change that. Hence, teleportation is firmly grounded at the speed of light...for now. Even though the lovable properties of Quantum entanglement allow instantaneous information transfer because in the quantum world the particles are in the same place (0 time to send information), Quantum Entanglement won't work without sending the information about the difference between the related particle and the particle to transfer. And at the moment, photons have been transfered, the information to transfer it was sent at lightspeed (minus the extra time to send through routers ) The premise of Ender's Game was that ansible connection was based of String Theory Extrapolation, right now we don't know much at all about how the String Theory would work for such things as instantaneous information transfer (though i'm sure some people are working very hard on just such a thing). Entanglement occurs when in a particle accelerator two photons begin from the same origin and shoot of opposite each other, Hence entanglement is more pronounced since they're life consisted of that moment mainly. In Technicality quantum entanglement is between every particle in the universe, its just so completely diluted because of all the events occuring in the universe itself. The Quantum Entanglement of today is quite useless for information transfer, but quite useful for particle transfer, aka teleportation, though we're only at the stage of 1 to a few particles (photons/atoms?) instantaneous information transfer has a ways to go.

Well, besides the point that it is very likely that the speed of light cannot be attained by conventional means such as acceleration of bodies with mass. The gravitational acceleration upon the two spinning black holes would cause the event horizons to deform first and foremost, causing the ever popular singularity 'hole' to form within the black hole. The speeds of the black holes can not reach the speed of light even if ignoring the speed of light limit because gravity is based off the speed of light aswell, the closer the black holes angular velocity to a fraction of c, the longer/less gravitational force reaches the opposing black hole, causing the black holes to fling apart to their respective sides of the universe long before reaching a fraction of c. If the settings for two black holes to form into a nice circular tango between one another, it will drag the fabric of space with them, erm, called 'frame dragging' i believe, and the higher the mass of either black hole the larger the rotational drag imparted upon the other black hole, causing the hole simplicity of 2 body orbit to get thrown in the bin. If a black hole is going faster/at than the speed of light ( in relation to the opposing hole i suppose), then its inertial mass is infinite, this is bad, not only does this screw the fabric of space like a chainsaw, but the gravitational field of the black hole will be severely warped if gravity goes at the speed of light, though gravity is considered a property of spacetime, gravity has a speed, instantaneous it is not. If gravitrons is the preferred messenger particle of gravity, and its speed is off light, it will have a 'tough' time transferring gravity between a 100% c velocity object vs a not 100% c velocity object, i'm screwing my own mind up trying to figure out what i'm trying to say. Okay, now supposing the 2 black holes are going at a relatively high fraction of c, then the initial sphere inside will have different forces acting upon it, only at perfect origin will it have zero gravitational pull in a sense (accepting a perfect orbit and positioning of the black hole pair), the rest of the sphere will immediately be strung along at the whim of the fluctuating field values, and even a neutron star (densities of a few tons in a teaspoon, tension strength high...) would lose the battle, the strongest tensile known to man is carbon nanotube (right?), not a chance. it will be pulled apart within picoseconds (depending on the distance from the black holes), rotation be damned. And ignoring all of this, the faster (relatively) any material goes, the larger its inertial mass, with c speed having infinite mass, hence any estoric material that can survive such huge gravitational forces will have astounding tension energy and angular velocity, energy would go up exponentially as the blackholes continue feeding it (losing orbital velocity in the process), any material based of physics would come apart, supposing some estoric relic from the big bang like a 0d brane, it would probably have enough energy to cause physics to break down, All guesswork now . But it would make for a hell of a movie.