Are Tachyons Real?

[Andy_L]

@solost

This post reminds me of a science fiction short story I read as a kid in which a scientist invented a device he could use to view any historical event-- it used tachyons to do this.

Isaac Asimov’s “The Dead Past,” perhaps?

[solost]

@Andy_L

Isaac Asimov’s “The Dead Past,” perhaps?

Could be. It’s been many years since I read it, and all I remembered is the detail that the device that viewed past events used tachyons. The wiki summary sounds like it could be the story I read, but doesn’t mention anything about tachyons.

[wolfpup]

@Great_Antibob

Clearly, at relativistic velocities, tacos are observed to become nachos.

I find that SDMB posts often inspire creative and valuable thought processes. Those last few inspired me to have tortilla chips and 7-layer Mexican dip for lunch while I continue to peruse the board.

[Pardel-Lux]

Tachyons were real tomorrow, but yesterday they will be gone. Today, nobody can tell.

[Darren_Garrison]

Odd fact:For objects with a rest mass, the faster you move the slower time moves. For photons, time stops. For tachos, it is always Tuesday.

[RioRico]

@Darren_Garrison

Tachos.

Would you like relativistic salsa with that order?
–Tacho Bell clerk

Would anti-tachyons be nachyons? Will nachyons implode the next Superbowl? Should we take shelter or order Corona? (I prefer San Miguel Negro.) Where’s the tachomole? Or is it nachomole in this universe?

[Tachyon_Theorist]

@Great_Antibob

Clearly, at relativistic velocities, tacos are observed to become nachos.

Sounds like you think there’s some kind of tachyoniferous ether. No “medium” is required for EM transmission, and there’s no reason to suppose tachyons, should they even exist, automatically require one either.

Is there a reason you believe this to be the case? Because it’s sounding a bit like a word salad, otherwise.

I believe that with our current technology and knowledge, not being able to produce tachyons by force or by design as in nothing launches an object fast enough and no object is aerodynamic enough, we would have to consider every angle of the hypothesis in order to experiment. The medium has to be smooth with no feedback and the object must be thin and highly-aerodynamic and the tool firing the object must be aimed down but with enough space for the object to reach the speed needed and must be Very Powerful. We need everything we have to prove this.

[Andy_L]

@Tachyon_Theorist

I believe that with our current technology and knowledge, not being able to produce tachyons by force or by design as in nothing launches an object fast enough and no object is aerodynamic enough, we would have to consider every angle of the hypothesis in order to experiment. The medium has to be smooth with no feedback and the object must be thin and highly-aerodynamic and the tool firing the object must be aimed down but with enough space for the object to reach the speed needed and must be Very Powerful. We need everything we have to prove this.

People have continuously accelerated subatomic particles in a near perfect vacuum, putting massive amount of energy into each particle. None of them have become tachyons. If tachyons are possible, they will not be produced by pressing on the accelerator - we know what happens when you do that; nothing can be accelerated from slower than light to faster than light or even to light speed (particles can be created at light speed, and maybe there’s a way to create them at FTL - but that’s not the same thing).

[Great_Antibob]

Again, why do you think a medium is necessary? Why are aerodynamics relevant?

EM radiation, neutrinos, and even simple atoms travel through pure vacuum without a problem.

Also, the problem of the rest of the word salad.

[naita]

@Tachyon_Theorist

I believe that with our current technology and knowledge, not being able to produce tachyons by force or by design as in nothing launches an object fast enough and no object is aerodynamic enough, we would have to consider every angle of the hypothesis in order to experiment. The medium has to be smooth with no feedback and the object must be thin and highly-aerodynamic and the tool firing the object must be aimed down but with enough space for the object to reach the speed needed and must be Very Powerful. We need everything we have to prove this.

The medium, object shape and the angle are completely irrelevant challenges. The problem is that the energy required to accelerate anything increases asymptotically as you get closer to light speed.

The best case scenario is to have no medium, and it’s still asymptotic growth.

[ChockFullOfHeadyGoodness]

@solost

This post reminds me of a science fiction short story I read as a kid in which a scientist invented a device he could use to view any historical event-- it used tachyons to do this.

“I See You” by Damon Knight? I don’t remember a specific reference to tachyons. I do remember it being one of the first stories I ever read that was written in the second person.

[Dandan]

Great thread, and I’m pleased to introduce a terriffic (IMNSH opinion) novel on the subject, one of my twenty or so all-timers.

Greg Benford (1980) wrote TIMESCAPE, an attempt by future scientists in England to communicate backwards in time to a physics lab in California, using a tachyon stream pulsed in Morse code.

The goal? The future of Planet Earth. The obstacle, among several; bureaucracy. Relevant today.

Dan

[RioRico]

Are tachyons real? Reality is whatever bites your ass; i.e. if it affects you, it’s real; otherwise it’s irrelevant. If tachyons have some effect, I’ll credit their reality. If not, they’re fun fantasy objects and little else. I’ll propose that if peeps into past or future change the present, they’re probably unreliable. How could we know a change occurred?