[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 26 KB, 400x230, tachyon.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4393469 No.4393469 [Reply] [Original]

Tachyons. Supposedly their minimal speed is the speed of light. What the hell. I am no /sci/entist, can someone explain to me how this is possible. What else was Einstein wrong about?

>> No.4393472

until about 2 minutes ago, neutrinos were thought to be tachyons because of their faster than light travel.

Then it turns out the experiment was glitched. So yay.

>> No.4393477
File: 232 KB, 849x1277, 1329917205423.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4393477

The sex thing too.

>> No.4393479

Tachyons are just some boss ass niggas who dont need to listen to no mustache waerin nigga bout no damn speed limit

>> No.4393478

>>4393472
Source? Link?
So they were watching neutrinos faster than light and called them tachyons - then they found out it was a glitch so Einstein was right all along?

>> No.4393483

>>4393477
Get out of here.

>> No.4393487

Einstein wasn't wrong in this case.
He didn't say nothing can have the speed of light (or greater).
Einstein said something with mass greater than 0 requires infinite energy to be accelerated to lightspeed.

>> No.4393497

>>4393469

In case you're not trolling:

Tachyons probably don't exist, and if they did they wouldn't contradict relativity in any way. In fact, that's exactly why they're hypothesized - because relativity allows them.

>> No.4393499

>>4393472
No they weren't, that's nonsense. Neutrinos have completely different properties than tachyons. We have always observed slower than light neutrinos which would be impossible for tachyons. A problem with the experiment has not yet been identified so the result is unconfirmed but not debunked but there is lots of other results which say neutrinos cannot travel faster than light.

>> No.4393501

>>4393497
Explain, please. I don't know much on this subject.

>> No.4393505

AFAIK tachyons are impossible because of Einstein's theories. Theories that include them are inaccurate (although they may have grains of truth when someone finds a way of working them without tachyons).

>>4393472
>were thought
Not by people who understood that the rules of physics aren't just current world records but are actually, well, rules.

>> No.4393509

>>4393478
No he was talking shit.

>> No.4393535

>>4393505
So where did this concept of tachyons come from to begin with?

>> No.4393543
File: 18 KB, 267x360, jacobbarnett3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4393543

Did someone say, Einstein was wrong?

>> No.4393550

>>4393535
star trek

>> No.4393566

>>4393550
Thank you, sorry for seeming/being ignorant.

>> No.4393590

Special relativity does not state that nothing can move faster than light. See
>>4393487

>> No.4393598

>not having imaginary mass
>2012
Oh you faggots

>> No.4393612

I think the theory is something like particles cannot accelerate up to the speed of light, and anything past it.

So in theory, if something had always travelled faster than the speed of light, then technically it doesn't contradict special relativity

>> No.4393617

>>4393612
Bingo.

>> No.4393618

but photons have mass and they travel the speed of light

>> No.4393628

>>4393618
thus they cannot slow down

>> No.4393646

>>4393543
Who is this faggot?

>> No.4393649

>>4393618
Their energy is infinite.

>> No.4393668

>>4393618

Photons are massless, idiot.

>> No.4393683

>>4393668
>idiot
>thinks knowledge is intelligence
And you call yourself /sci/.

>> No.4393682

>>4393472
>mfw
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/02/22/loose-wire-led-to-stunning-faster-than-light-particle-find
ing/

>> No.4393685

They don't exist. Most string theories are contrived so they don't exist.

/thread

>> No.4393688

>>4393683
>idiot
>thinks commenting on a subject one is clearly ignorant about/has made no effort to educate himself on is not a display of idiocy
And you call yourself not an idiot.

>> No.4393695

>>4393685
Most string theories are contrived (FULLSTOP)

>> No.4393696

First of all, Tachyons are theoretical particles, they have never been detected. We only imagine they exist because general relativity doesn't actually have a problem with stuff being above the speed of light, it just really messes up if something CROSSES that speed limit. So just as it's impossible for all the particles we know to go faster than light, it's also impossible for Tachyons to go slower than light

That's why people aren't going completely batshit nuts over the whole neutrino faster than light thing. Maybe they are always faster than light, like Tachyons, which would be OK. Hell, maybe they ARE Tachyons.

>> No.4393709
File: 15 KB, 291x326, umad..jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4393709

>>4393696
>Hell, maybe they ARE Tachyons.
.....
/sci/ in a nutshell.

>> No.4393722

>>4393709

http://www.actaphys.uj.edu.pl/vol29/pdf/v29p0113.pdf

http://dipoleantigravity.blogspot.com/2011/09/neutrinos-must-be-tachyons.html

http://dissention.wordpress.com/2011/10/01/are-neutrinos-tachyons-or-born-of-tachyons/

If you mean name/tripfags claiming other people's HYPOTHESES are wrong without any basis, then yes! Your post clearly shows /sci/ in a nutshell

>> No.4393761

>>4393682
Just read the same thing on two other sides.

I might be biased, but fuck, foxnews articles are dripping with barely concealed contempt and sneer. what. the. fuck.

Sorry for offtopic.

>> No.4393779
File: 590 KB, 850x1275, leth_hate_ch7p1_by_lowroad75-d4psz34.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4393779

>>4393761
foxnews gonna foxnews

>> No.4393780

>>4393682
>>4393761
>>4393779
Read the comments. I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

>> No.4393793

>>4393688
I'm not >>4393618

>> No.4393804

>>4393780
Damn you. I did now. Fuck.

I know I shouldn't let that get to me so hard, but... I'm weak. I'm too weak for this kind of internet. I'm off.

>> No.4393810

>>4393722
*facepalm*
Superluminal neutrino's have been discredited. You need to say "fuck you" to Lorentz invariance to even allow neutrino's to travel faster than light.

Furthermore that paper (the only credible source you posted) is outdated as fuck. Mass of 5eV??? The experimental figure is than 0.3eV.

Any respectable physicist will laugh at the idea that tachyons are neutrino's.

>> No.4393814
File: 16 KB, 250x189, zebracon2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4393814

>>4393566
It's ok, star trek knows more about physics than some of the assholes around here. Pic related

>> No.4393842

>>4393722
>>4393810
Plus any string theory with tachyon's in it has an unstable vacuum. Good luck with that.

>> No.4393868

>>4393649

this is the most retarded thing I've read all day

>> No.4393887

>Tachyons. Supposedly their minimal speed is the speed of light. What the hell. I am no /sci/entist, can someone explain to me how this is possible. What else was Einstein wrong about?

Einstein never said that. The two postulates are light travels at the same speed in every inertial ref frame and physics are the same in every inertial ref frame.

If you write down the velocity 4 vector you find that it's inner product with itself is < 0 at it's rest frame (=-C) and since it Lorentz invariant, its always less than 0. Hence, it's timelike and V²-C² <0 => V<C. If it's spacelike, then V*V>0 and V>C always, thus a tachyons.

>> No.4393900

>>4393887
>inner product with itself is < 0
why kind of voodoo inner product is this? havent taken physics in years, how is that defined?

>> No.4393911

>>4393900
There are more than one inner products in maths
x²+y²+z²-c²t²

>> No.4393915

>>4393911
i know i was just asking how it was defined.

>> No.4394018

>>4393887
>inner product with itself is < 0
The fuck am I reading?