real time is the person experiencing the action.

Maybe the Higgs particle is moving at FtL and that is why we have yet to find it!

__________________
<span style='font-family:Arial'><span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'><span style='color:blue'>setiman
If I had a cousin, his name would be Yoda.</span></span></span>

True.

None of the particle accelerator tersts to date had a detector capable of detecting any particle going faster than light so the partical accelerator proof of FTL is considered flawed.

__________________
Thomas Hulon Jackson
Scientist/Engineer/Technician

I might add, as one researcher out here in this area, that the FTL question is becoming a bit less Science Fiction, and a bit more accepted science now. We currently have what is commonly refered to as variable speed of light cosmology(VSL) being debated now in Journal publications. It is true that by what we know at present that the ability to navigate if some system of FTL was ever developed is an issue. For one, every version of navigation we now have is based upon C limited means. However, playing a bit of devils advocate here, lets say at some future time we do develope and exploit gravity wave sensors of one form or another. Following a bit of logic here, the incoming gravity waves towards a ship under some version of hyperdrive, warp drive, etc, etc, would be amplified as far as energy goes. They could be utilized to detect objects in ones path.

In the older days of SF it was common for stories to propose that hyperdrive driven craft made jumps through hyperspace, dropped back into normal space, recaculated their position, then made a jump again. A bit of a look at current navigational means would say that option is still possible also.

The point is our knowledge and understanding are changing daily. Even Hawking has gone on record a few times by saying that we cannot rule these ideas out at the present and that was in reference to the subject of warp drive and wormholes. The acceptance of exotic energy of some form or another is founded upon cosmological observations showing an accelerated expansion to the universe, observations indicating dark matter, and certain lab experiments with the Casimir effect. Once you include exotic energy into the universe's mix then the door is open for some version of FTL being possible since every known version-ie Warp Drive, Wormholes, etc, all depend upon exotic energy to work. The trick is actually finding the method the universe itself utilizes.

Consider this: During inflation the universe expanded FTL. That much is common accepted modern theory at the present. During inflation is the speed of communication for the evolving universe was its speed of expansion. Even by modern theory the universe once existed in a condition when its current value of C was exceeded. If the universe can do it then there must exist a way to achieve the same. Now is it going to be easy? No, not by a long shot and I suspect the means to achieve such will require a far better understanding of physics than we have at the present.

A good point being mentioned in all these debates is that we could get to the stars by less than C methods. Even some of Alcubierre's ideas on propulsion are well geared to less than C or sublight usage. For one, such a drive would allow us to snuggle up close to C without the mass increase and time dilation effects. That is one option often overlooked in all this FTL propulsion discussion. For one a child has to learn to first crawl(Something we do now when it comes to space travel), then walk(Sub-light drives), before he can learn to run. The original goal of programs like BPP under NASA, Stardrive organization(Jack's group), ESAA(now Stardrive1), etc was not actually FTL drive. It was developing better modes of space travel than those we have now. To that end we tend to play a bit outside the box by looking at possible FTL means of travel with the eye on what could we develope and deploy now that would one day allow us to travel faster even if we do end up with a strong C limit in the end run.

By the way, it is correct that wormholes actually never exceed C when it comes to travel through them locally. You still travel at C or less through them. What has changed with them is the distance between two points which is something even relativity under GR allows. It is only when you compare the travel time through the shortcut to that outside that one encounters what appears as a violation of C. The same holds for warp drive alos. The craft in its local frame never actually moves at all. What moves is space itself in the case of Alcubierre's idea. Again a short cut brought to you by Einstein's original creation. These are all tricks that gravity in general allows. Somewhere in those bags of tricks there may well exist a means that allows one to travel between two points in a fashion that does not actually violate the normal C restraint. To an outside observer who could not measure the local effects it would seem like the craft in question traveled FTL. But, the actual travel time for the craft may still be far less than C.

I might suggest some links here: http://tprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/archive/000..._Warp_Drive.pdf
http://65.108.189.168/Docs/Exotic_Mater_an..._Propulsion.pdf
http://65.108.189.168/Docs/EGMwarpdrive.pdf
http://65.108.189.168/Docs/WAS%20DR%20NATA...RIO%20RIGHT.pdf
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0202/0202021.pdf
http://arxiv.org/html/gr-qc/9903068

Your's
Paul Karl Hoiland

I would also add that since all detectors operate on EM means of one form or another we have no ability to detect anything moving FTL, except by an indirect means from its radiation signature in a vacuum.

Karl, there's just one thing that confuses me, I'm wondering if you could help me with this:OK, to accel. to C one's mass increases. So why is the photon massless?

Welcome to the group Karl? Paul? Paulttr, Dr. or Mr. Hoiland? . I knew I was not alone in my faster than light possibility theories I have found 100's of others who share the view since I first posted to usenet 5 years ago.

Many belivers are in this group and like all groups many in oposition are very vocal as if repeating "Though shall not exceed light speed" often enough and loud enough makes it a law.

I would like to address the question StarLab asked you regarding a photon's mass as I have a Einstein reference on hand of Einstein teaching light has mass
""Every since he published the book on relativity, to try to convince the world that light had weight" expanded on below.

Here is just a sample of my posts.

quote........: Dr. Paul Karl Hoiland
http://65.108.189.168/Docs/WAS%20DR%20NATA...RIO%20RIGHT.pdf

"When Einstein wrote down his postulates for special relativity he did not include the statement that you cannot travel faster than light. There is a misconception that it is possible to derive it as a consequence of the postulates he did give. Incidentally, it was Henri Poincare who said "Perhaps we must construct a new mechanics, ... in which the speed of light would become an impassable limit." That was in an address to the International Congress of Arts and Science in 1904 before Einstein announced special relativity in 1905." end quote...

quote......Refrence Item 16 - The infinite enegy arguement. http//:math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/FTL.html
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...Light/FTL.html

"It is a consequence of relativity that the energy of a particle of rest mass
m moving with speed v is given by
E = mc^2/sqrt(1 - v2/c2)

As the speed approaches the speed of light the energy approaches infinity. Hence is should be impossible to accelerate an object with rest mass to the speed of light and particles with zero rest mass must always go at exactly the speed of light otherwise they would have no energy. This is sometimes called the "light speed barrier" but it is very different from the "sound speed barrier". As an aircraft approaches the speed of sound it starts to feel pressure waves which indicate that it is getting close. With some more thrust it can pass through. As the light speed barrier is approached (in a perfect vacuum) there is no such effect according to relativity. Moving at 0.99999c is just like standing still with everything rushing past you at -0.99999c. Particles are routinely pushed to these speeds in accelerators so
the theory is well established. Trying to get to the speed of light in this way is like trying to get to the pot of gold at the end of a rainbow. This explains why it is not possible to exceed the speed of light by ordinary mechanical means.
End quote[/quote]

Note 1 :
Einstein explained the above given equation as a limit on particle accelerator to accelerate the particle to only sub C as proven mathematically and by particle accelerator experiments. He then said "because" a particle accelerator has to provide the energy to accelerate the particle from a rest frame base to a relativistically increasing mass towards infinity so the energy required tended towards infinity. "In relativity calculation do not mix frames of reference. "It did not rule out a different machine being found that provides the energy from a different frame reference so would require the energy calculation being redone with the proper frame of reference" "Experiments can be poorly designed so as not to prove what they are intended to such as particle accelerator experiments and the Michale-Morleson experiment" -Einstein (1955)

I can fairly assume that Einstein was the leading authority on relativity till 1955, and not Gibbs or others before and after who interpreted his equations some other way to mean a machine cannot be found to exceed C. There is zero evidence such a velocity of light speed limit mechanics was ever constructed and Einstein denied in 1955 that he ever constructed such mechanics as he taught that a massive object could be accelerated beyond light speed. He than explained "How" it could be done.

He then explained the wide spread public misconception tying his relativity theories to a C speed limit to a "German to English" translator he hired to translate his relativity papers to English.

The Translator knowing basically as a second language German and some basic physics and less relativity physics and some of Henry Poincare's workwas looking for a C speed limit mechanics so Jumped to the conclusion he had found it translating some of the equations adding his own interpretation comments to appear falsely as from Einstein to say:

"It appears we cannot accelerate an object beyond light speed" in the English translation. By the time Einstein came to America and had learned enough English to correct the mistranslations he found the misinformation so widespread that correction was found impractical so then he confined his teaching of the possibility of acceleration beyond light speed to his personal students at Princeton and private students and from that time on authorized only those works signed by
him to be published. The one signed in 1955, I read in 1963.

So my list of math or experimental proofs of any C limit for massive objects velocity contains no data.

[b]Universal speed limit at C Proof list
.............................................
(Empty-Null Set)
.............................................

like the possibility of Einstein's faster than light theory, popular science often contridicts Einstien' statements as it is populary taught Einstein did "not" complete his gravitaional unified field theory .

foia.fbi.gov/
click on electronic reading room, famous persons, Einstein, Albert, Part 9b
foia.fbi.gov/einstein/einstein9b.pdf
page 18 and 19
Washing Star Dec 27,1949
Einstein presents New Theory of all motion in Universe

"The unified field theory" It was reveled here yesterday on 20 mimeographed pages-a mixture of typewritten words and squiggly mathematical symbols that even scientists hesitated to interpret. It was the English translation of Doctor Einstein's original German........

................

......In earlier theories Dr. Einstein linked up space and time, matter and energy and gravitation and inertia, but one great force was left out-electromagnetism, an invisible force field that can act at a distance.

The new theory now includes electromagnetism and it and gravitation are viewed as two forms of one overall force.

In his general theory of 1915 Dr. Einstein showed by mathematics that gravitation and inertial were equivalent. This theory was proved when astronomers were able to detect the suns gravity bending light from a distant star.

end quote---------------------------

Einstein destroyed the infinite energy and mass argument against faster than light by teaching light had mass.

quote ......
http://foia.fbi.gov/]http://foia.fbi.gov/
click el;ectronic reading room, famous persons, Einstein, Albert to find
http://foia.fbi.gov/einstein.htm]http://foia.fbi.gov/einstein.htm
link Einstein, Albert; part 1a gives page 88
Rankin Denies Einstein A-Role
By United Press
Reb. Rankin (D) of Mississippi said yesterday that professor Albert Einstein "had nothing to do" with the atomic bomb and "should have been deported for his Communistic activities years ago" He denounced as "bunk" Einstein, proposal for a world government to prevent an atomic war that might wipe out mankind. Scientists declared Einstein, A naturalized citizen of German birth, had "just about everything to do" with making possible the US development of the atomic bomb.........
....................Rankin concludes with "Every since he published the book on relativity, to try to convince the world that light had weight, he has capitalized upon his alleged reputation as a scientist." Rankin went on. "He had no more to do with the development of the atom bomb than if their hadn't been such a thing Rankin. American scientists developed the atomic bomb and old faker Einstein had nothing to do with it."

regarding relatvistic mass
quote Einstein's point of view is described in the following quote...http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html

"It is not good to introduce the concept of the mass of a moving body
for which no clear definition can be given. It is better to introduce no other mass concept than the 'rest mass' m. Instead of introducing M it is better to mention the expression for the momentum and energy of a body in motion."

end quote

__________________
Thomas Hulon Jackson
Scientist/Engineer/Technician

Gentlemen they have just announced some breakthroughs relative to the Higgs boson particle as well as greater insight into the dark matter questions. See here for details:

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cosmology-04m.html

Cheers

__________________
<span style='font-family:Arial'><span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'><span style='color:blue'>setiman
If I had a cousin, his name would be Yoda.</span></span></span>

Ok i hate to see someone lose hope and i hope people are still reading this thread.
Dont give up on FTL you never know what can realy be done.
I see it all the time so many otherwise bright people not exploreing all the options and its funny.
Might wonder what i am talking about and its simple no one realy works on FTL anymore why becuase a few people made theorys saying it cant be done.
Things that have never been proven or diproven.
Now im going to do something i dont normaly do and give you something interesting to think about.

Ok think of space as a board and most engine systems ive seen as a kungfo master. Odd i know but bare with me not if that master makes like a the norm for engines and hits that board with his fist and holds his hand is likely going to break becuase much of the engergy he uses travles back to him.
Now im going to make you do some work to figure out a way to maximaze the transfer. Think of the master and how he would do it and see what you come up with.