How to have light move faster than C

[simster]

@pancakes3

That would probably make for a more entertaining thread than this current one. Feel free to create a new topic. There’s no rule saying you can only engage in one topic at a time.

If his evidence of that is of the same quality as the evidence he has presented thus far - he should open that in the pit as well.

[mythoughts]

@Truman_Burbank

The claim I was challenging was when you stated you were a physicist. You could look it up.
Keep dancing, you’re almost there!

I am a physicist.
I am not a credentialed or professional one.

I could be called an amateur physicist, but I am actually doing it as my profession while not being paid.

So maybe I am a professional that is unpaid?

But if I hope to make money from it eventually, maybe professional would be fair.

At any rate I never said nor suggested I was credentialed, indeed I have said that is why I am willing to disagree with the status quo IMO more freely than those with a reputation and job to protect.

If you managed to read some posts and not others and form the wrong idea, that is on you, not me.

IMO physicist is a description of what someone does, if I said I was a singer I would not need to have had a sold out concert or a gold record or have gone to a music school to say I am a singer.

[Smeghead]

Would you expect them to be able to sing? Should they be able to recognize music when they hear it?

[simster]

music/singing is a very subjective thing with lots of ‘raw’ as well as ‘learned’ talent. (IOW, you can be one hell of a musician and not have one shred of “musical theory” or education to reading/writing sheet music itself).

Physicist? not so much (while raw capability comes into play, theres alot of book learning too)

Let me guess - you work at the Springfield power plant? DO you have a propensity for donuts?

[mythoughts]

@simster

music/singing is a very subjective thing with lots of ‘raw’ as well as ‘learned’ talent. (IOW, you can be one hell of a musician and not have one shred of “musical theory” or education to reading/writing sheet music itself).

Physicist? not so much (while raw capability comes into play, theres alot of book learning too)

I have done a lot of book learning as I have mentioned, pulling 100 books on physics from the library at once.

Let me guess - you work at the Springfield power plant? DO you have a propensity for donuts?

D’oh!

[mythoughts]

This is all distraction from the thought experiments you refuse to face.

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

@mythoughts

“Science advances one funeral at a time.”

― Max Planck

It really isn’t a fruitful area of discussion though,

You’re right! The far more fruitful discussion has to do with your ideas.

They’re crap.

Thread over? Apparently not, because when someone said pretty much the same thing in the first reponse, it wasn’t. For some reason.

[Trinopus]

@mythoughts

Don’t read this…

My very great pleasure.

[simster]

@mythoughts

I have done a lot of book learning as I have mentioned, pulling 100 books on physics from the library at once.

That library owes you a refund.

beyond that - its more than just ‘reading’ - and since you refuse to do the math - or any ohter work beyond “thought experiments”- you are unqualified to be a 'physicist" in any meaningful sense of the word.

[simster]

@mythoughts

This is all distraction from the thought experiments you refuse to face.

Your thought experiments are a distraction from the reality you refuse to face.

[pancakes3]

Why would you read hundreds of books and yet adamantly refuse to learn math? You say it’s because math misrepresents reality but… HOW? For one, it doesn’t. For another, you don’t know math so how can you just assume so?

You’re right though. This does distract from the original post.

Now that you’ve had some time to think about it, can you, very simply, very plainly state what your assertion is? Something along the lines of:

“Special relativity is incorrect in setting the speed limit at C because it doesn’t adequately explain [blank]”.

That’s all. A starting point. Don’t delve into thought experiments. Just consolidate and crystallize your thoughts. That will go a long way to you making a point and for others to refute it.

[Asympotically_fat]

@mythoughts

IMO physicist is a description of what someone does, if I said I was a singer I would not need to have had a sold out concert or a gold record or have gone to a music school to say I am a singer.

Can you understand though if you couldn’t sing and said you were a singer, people wouldn’t take you seriously. And this is the problem, credentials IMO don’t mean a great deal here IMO, I don’t know you and you don’t know me. But if you want to critique a physical theory you need to understand it first and if I’m honest special relativity isn’t that hard to understand and a lot of the maths is pretty easy (that said earlier in the thread I noticed a made a stupid sign error in one of my calculations when talking about a physical situation). But conceptually you’re struggling massively with the theory and mathematically, by your own admission, you don’t have the first clue.

[mythoughts]

@Budget_Player_Cadet

You’re right! The far more fruitful discussion has to do with your ideas.

They’re crap.

Thread over? Apparently not, because when someone said pretty much the same thing in the first reponse, it wasn’t. For some reason.

Actually the reason the thread isn’t over is a 2 way thing.

It takes 2 to tango.

Even as I become convinced no one here has much chance of seeing reason (or at least reason as I see it), there are attacks I must defend.

So against my better judgement I reply defending my augment and myself.
This often leads to new original ideas to expose Special Relativity as false, and other interesting ideas

Others feel compelled to defend SR in any way they can which includes attacking me, misrepresenting my argument and so forth. (Oh, and one case of pointing out I was truly mistaken.)

This induces me to again defend…

And since I am not apparently willing to be slandered or misunderstood without pointing out the error we go around and around in this loop.

The positive side effect of this is that the arguments actually force me to think of stronger evidence, and have better ideas, like practising sword fighting against an opponent would be better that jousting with an invisible and imagined foe.

So even though I become increasingly certain no one left is really open minded enough to agree, and if any are they would not say so simply to avoid a torrent of criticism.

It takes two to tango, if you want the dancing to stop, short of proving me wrong (which you can’t do) you must fail to reply to my post disputing SR.

Or possibly wait for me to get tired of the whole thing, or have me banned so I can’t answer attacks.
Like winning an argument with someone on the phone by saying your piece and hanging up on the other person before they can reply, not a real win.

[Kimble]

@mythoughts

Expansion on the idea of self induction from a solenoid with a steady DC current…

Ok, let’s say we imagine a solenoid of about 1 might minute across.
Next we will assume that the maximum velocity the change in a magnetic field can propagate is C.
And for now we will assume that there is no difficulty accelerating all parts of such a solenoid in a manner that does not lead to deformation of the solenoid or cause any issues with simultaneity.

Next we will look at the coil sitting stationary in space, the different parts are creating forces on the opposite side, if we simplify the loop into a square and identify the sides as left, right, top and bottom, the left and right sides would mutually repel each other.
And the top and bottom portions would mutually repel each other.

But this would all be equal, no net force, naturally.

Then we suddenly start moving it (left to right) all at once, as the left side moves it does not yet see that the right side has moved (as that would violate the speed of light) and so it notices that it is now closer to the right side than it was before, it is in a denser portion of the magnetic field and hence it repels more strongly.

Meanwhile the right side would see that it is further away from the left side since again the change in the magnetic field can only propagate at C.

So it finds it’s repulsion has decreased.

If the force of the left side has increased and the force on the right side decreased, then this creates a force that resists acceleration.

This seems impossible to deny, provided we do not let the speed of light exceed C, then a static magnetic field would create an increase of inertia, or an inertial like force.

This would seem substantially similar to a stationary photon being that a photon is merely an electromagnetic field that has decoupled from a wire or an otherwise moving electron.

(bolding mine) So, you’re using a solenoid in which the speed of light is c and the speed of sound is infinite? And we’re supposed to use the fact that the solenoid is impossibly rigid to eventually invalidate Science As The Zealots Dictate?

[Colibri]

@mythoughts

I am a physicist.
I am not a credentialed or professional one.

I could be called an amateur physicist, but I am actually doing it as my profession while not being paid.

So maybe I am a professional that is unpaid?

No. You’re not a professional in any sense of the word.

Merriam Webster:

2professional noun
: someone who does a job that requires special training, education, or skill : someone who is a member of a profession

: someone who is paid to participate in a sport or activity

: someone who has a lot of experience or skill in a particular job or activity

Given that you clearly have no training, an inadequate education, no discernible skill, no real experience, and are not being paid, there is no sense in which you might be regarded to be a professional. Your understanding of English appears to be as deficient as that of physics.

At any rate I never said nor suggested I was credentialed, indeed I have said that is why I am willing to disagree with the status quo IMO more freely than those with a reputation and job to protect.

You disagree with the status quo because you’re an idiot, not an original thinker.

IMO physicist is a description of what someone does, if I said I was a singer I would not need to have had a sold out concert or a gold record or have gone to a music school to say I am a singer.

You would if you wanted to say you were a professional singer. But you’re not even doing physics - you just think you are.

[Telemark]

@mythoughts

It takes 2 to tango.

But both have to be able to count, you know, like math.

[Pasta]

@mythoughts

It takes 2 to tango.

You might have missed my post #505 since it was a simul-post with one of yours. In it I say exactly that: it takes two to tango.

[Truman_Burbank]

I’m a Brain Surgeon. I checked out books on Neurology from the library and everything!

[naita]

This isn’t tango, it’s mud wrestling, and mythoughts is the only one not noticing the difference.

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

@mythoughts

Actually the reason the thread isn’t over is a 2 way thing.

It takes 2 to tango.

Yes. And to everyone else involved: I am deeply disappointed. Shame on you.

Even as I become convinced no one here has much chance of seeing reason (or at least reason as I see it)

Thank god for that qualifier, otherwise I’d think you’re a complete moron and an egomaniac.

So against my better judgement I reply defending my augment and myself.

Here’s the best defense: “I published my idea in a peer-reviewed journal and it gained traction with the public.” Which you refuse to do because…

…Oh right. Math is hard, and science is biased. And your examples for science being biased are GMOs and parmaceuticals, which would be bad examples even if you were 100% accurate because there is not a company in the world with a financial stake in special relativity being true.

Yes, you’re going to overturn one of the most important scientific theories of the last century. Maybe for an encore act you’ll prove that gravity is an illusion.

So even though I become increasingly certain no one left is really open minded enough to agree,

Open-mindedness does not mean “buy into any crap”, it means “give everything a fair shake”. Your fair shake has come and gone. For fuck’s sake, you’re using a shoddy thought experiment to disprove one of the most fundamental theories of modern physics. At what point does your brain kick in to say, “hang on, there’s something wrong with this picture”?