us.2u

An interesting link more to follow in the near future

http://elektro.cmhnet.org/~robert/science.html

My title was 'Exceeding the speed of light?'... with a ? Not once have I said we are, we can, but more so to the effect can we? Which IMHO none of us are sure of yet....maybe light speed can be broken, maybe it cannot, I really do not know; however according to archives reports which I'm researching it has already been done...this is not my reckoning, but space dailys & other IT tabloids which hopefully I will be able to recover & forward their posts...us.2u

A black hole is a concentration of mass with a gravitational field so strong that the escape velocity from nearby points exceeds the speed of light. This implies that nothing, not even light, can escape its gravity, hence the word "black." The term "black hole" is widespread, even though the theory does not refer to any hole in the usual sense, but rather a region of space from which nothing can return.

From the above link....PLEASE READ THE FIRST SENTANCE....us.2u

http://www.yotor.com/wiki/en/bl/Black%20hole.htm

more links on this subject to follow...us.2u

I read approx 5-6 months ago that a black hole had rejected a star & threw it so violently, it travelled faster than the speed of light? Can this be possible? If so was the force which was used 'Gravity' & if so how could that speed be measured? or is it possible that this was just a report by some crank bordering on the realms of Sci-fi to make interesting reading? I do not know, meanwhile I will try & dig up the article.

I seem to recall this was in a space daily report, also in space.com news however, I will do my best to restore this story if anyone is interested.....us.2u

http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/HistTopics/General_relativity.html

This is a good insight...us.2u

Einstein predicted the speed of gravity equals the speed of light, but it's never been proven.

Albert Einstein

Sunlight takes 8 1/3 minutes to travel to Earth. Scientists believe gravity has the same property.

"If you had some monster or deity able to pick up the sun and completely move it away from our solar system instantaneously, what would happen to the Earth?" asked Ed Fomalont, an astronomer with the Radio Astronomy Observatory, on CBC Radio's As It Happens.

Fomalont said the Earth would continue in its orbit around the sun for another 8 1/3 minutes until the sun and its gravity disappeared – the gravitational time lag would equal the time lag of light. Then the Earth would go in a straight line.

Since no one can move the sun, astronomers had to find another way to measure the speed of gravity.

Jupiter meet quasar

Fortunately, on Sept. 8, Jupiter passed close to the light coming from a quasar, a star-like object billions of light-years away. The alignment offered astronomers their chance.

Astrophysicists used the alignment and their modern telescopes to test Einstein's assumption that light and gravity travel at the same speed.

'You can't bet against Einstein. I'd bet 100 to 1 that he's right'

-Ed Fomalont

Radio and optical astronomers are able to measure the direction to celestial objects in the sky very well. They knew the quasar was going by as Jupiter happened to be almost in front.

Jupiter's gravity should have nudged the light coming from the quasar, causing it to appear to shift its position slightly in the sky.

My idea is that the singularity was of the 4th dimension only at t=0. Space is infinate and eternal in the three spacial dimensions, it is the 4th dimension of time that began at the big bang. The 3D infinate was an infinate scalar field and it is useful to consider it an infinate Higg's field (although not neccessarily). Unlike m-brane theory I propose that there was only one infinate brane that was entirely homogenous with no dynamics or gravitational gradiant....a 3D infinate t=0. The Big Bang event was not an expansion of a super condense state of mass, it was a decay of the infinate scalar field into a matter/anti-matter quantum soup.......

 

 

If we are correct to say that time is the fourth dimension not separate from x, y, and z, then is it correct to say a mass, at spatial rest, has a velocity of 'c' in the fourth dimension?

 

If masses at rest do have a velocity of 'c' in time, then what is "pushing" the mass in that dimension (ie, forward in time)? Where does the 4th dimension get its energy for forward velocity?

 

 

us.2u

Cheers Swansont so that's cleared that up then...us.2u

I see what you're asking Sayonara; but my original question was 'wiill moores superceed nano technology' all is a bit of a grey matter to me as they seem to work along side each other; however here is another link to throw more light on the subject God I hope we all get there eventually......but I am a bit slow to pick things up....us.2u http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/05/08/moores_law_retains_grip/

I think it probably is true that men have higher sex drives, but also I believe compatibility plays an extensive part, also occupation & timing. Are we discussing sex for sex's sake or meaningful sex i.e. a relationship where partners express each others love naturally? I think sex drive can't be measured as so much depends on various situations...us.2u

As I presume magnetism light & gravity are c; then surely they must all be constant? I presume by that none of them can be variable, or that would contradict them being a constant would it not?...us.2u

Is it possible Moores law technology; will supercede nano technology?...us.2u

Anything that happens to change velocity is' date=' by definition, an acceleration.

 

You need to be more specific in your objections. I don't understand what you're discussing.[/quote']

 

 

Thanks Swansont I misunderstood; but all seems clear now...us.2u

You have to look at all of the forces to deduce the motion; I'm not sure what you mean by 'slows to a stop without obstruction' since the behavior will depend on what direction you throw it. Gravity (acceleration) near the earth's surface is approximately constant; any fluctuations are from mass distribution variations.

I don't understand 'Directional Throw' also I see gravity moderately as a brake- not "Acceleration" unless there is a type of 'centrifugal force' initated by Earths rotation which I believe would make gravity near the Earth constant; but I feel relativity dosen't quite add up here unless of course I'm failing to see what is really happening...us.2u

I don't believe gravity has a deceleration, the deceleration would depend on the object breaking the fall.. IE A stone falls through the tree tops, it decelerates as it hits the leaves, and then hits the ground to stop.. The gravitational pull is constant, even when the object isn't in motion..'So why is it then if we cast a stone across a river or throw one across a field it slows to a stop without obstuction? Is this friction greater than gravity? If so surely gravity cannot be constant?'....us.2u

Gravity doesn't have a velocity. If anything, it would have an acceleration, but even this is only in a manner of speaking. It makes more sense to ask what's the velocity of an object falling in a gravitational field after a certain amount of time after being dropped from rest. And then you'd have to specify what the force of that gravitational field is (the Earth's gravity is more powerful than the moon's).

But gravitity must have decelration as well, as to when an object hits the ground so as the object slows; gravitys properties must change so that it isn't a constant any more is that correct?...us.2u

I'm sure Blair & Bush will amalgamate together, to save the world; C'mon on Tony get on the blower to Georgy boy...us.2u

Thank you martin for your interest I would've loved to go to Berlin but the expeses are too much for me...I hope you go & I'll be looking forward to your minutes...us.2u

Can the speed of light & gravity have various velocitys? The reason I ask is a brighter light, faster than a dimmer one? & is a stronger force of gravity faster than a weaker force? some argue that darkness is the abscence of light, but if that is so; is light the abscence of dark? or maybe they're equal relatively speaking? your thoughts?...us.2u

This is interesting. Would these universes have the same physical laws as their parent universes?

 

Will the life of the black hole dictate the duration of their Big Bang' date=' or is this universe going to have a white hole continuously spewing matter into it's space?[/quote']

 

As far as we know to date; relatvity has the same laws everywhere, we have not found the laws change anywhere to the contary as yet, but being open minded we all could be in for a shock; or maybe Relativity applies anytime anywhere...us.2u

Isn't it just so fact is stranger than fiction...us.2u