What is Digg?Sponsored by KAYAK
Santa to stranded brother-in-law: Get a Canoe. Or is it a Kayak? view!
kayak.com - KAYAK flight search app beats elve's wooden iPhone.
23 Comments
- mighty_mouth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1A possibly easier to understand explanation is here:
http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/APPLETS/20/20.html - Rabid_Llama, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This sounds a bit fishy to me, but I suppose university researchers probably know their stuff better than me.
It seems like, since sound travels essentially via atoms bumping into each other, that for sound to travel faster than light, those atoms need to also be traveling faster than light, which is definitely impossible.
And the article mentions that they've sped a laser up faster than the speed of light, but that it doesn't violate relativity due to there being no energy transfer. If it's laser light moving faster, then there should be some energy in those photons... then gain, I've heard of that experiment before, so maybe this is credible after all. - mighty_mouth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The confusion here comes from the fact that some people mix phase and group velocity. A good explanation can be found here:
http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath210/kmath210.htm
From the page: 'The ambiguity in the definition of "wave velocity" often leads to confusion, and we frequently read stories about experiments purporting to demonstrate "superluminal" propagation of electromagnetic waves (for example). Invariably, after looking into the details of these experiments, we find the claims of "superluminal communication" are simply due to a failure to recognize the differences between phase, group, and signal velocities.' - turbopro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0dddoooooeeesss tttthhhhhaaaatttt mmmmeeeeaaaaannnn tttthheee ssoouunndd wwooouulldd bbbeee sslllooowww?
anyone who studies physics will understand the above statement - ranjur, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Wow... a digg out of my podunk college town. Utterly amazing. Funny thing about it is, I work at an electronic parts store, and I've probably seen this physicist a million times. I think we've seen just about everyone from the National Center for Physical Accoustics that was mentioned.
- JasonPrini, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0What about phonons? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonons Sound quanta might be able to exibit superluminal behavior, but it's not like you'd hear a tree fall in a forest before it happens.
- kakos, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1So, I guess we should start replacing our fibre optic networks with water that contains thousands of little beads and paper cups.
- catullus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Is it *iced* tea?"
--"No, it's HOT tea!"
^the title of the article just made me think of that celebrity jeopardy quote - ChrisPikula, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0What they've done here is just make the energy of a sound show up in points along a line, having the sound appear to an outside observer, travel faster than the speed of light itself.
It's just someone trying to make themselves sound big. Bahhhh! - dpk87, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"This sounds a bit fishy to me, but I suppose university researchers probably know their stuff better than me.
It seems like, since sound travels essentially via atoms bumping into each other, that for sound to travel faster than light, those atoms need to also be traveling faster than light, which is definitely impossible."
My thoughts exactly - hopeless_savage, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Thanks for the links, mighty_mouth, that makes a whole lot more sense now.
- TheStooge1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0So... does if a tree falls in the woods that happen to be full of water and beads make a sound if no one is around to hear it?
- Leonhard, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Nothing to see here, move along.
When talking about moving "faster then the speed of light" you should note that we are talking about something trivial. We have already slowed light down to about 100m/s so really it isn't such a cool thing.
"But what about time travel, relativity, nuclear asplosions and dudes with wild hair saying it's impossible!?!?!" you stupidly ask.
Cervitas is the speed of light in vacuum, nothing moves faster then cervitas. That's impossible. And that isn't what this is about. - mitchwilson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Well, not necessarily. If I remember correctly, the atoms don’t actually travel. The energy is actually transferred from one atom to another. So the question is not how fast an atom can travel. It’s actually how fast does the energy transfer from atom to atom in the test environment.
- BleckLord, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is completely un-digg-worthy
- Parkeway, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Ranjur: hotty toddy! Ole Miss has manged to produce something other than good looking women...
- Leonhard, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The whole "laser that's faster then light"-thing is alsow *****. They are talking about the groupspeed. It compares to a long long line of people all set up to yell out "Stop being stupid" at time intervals that are very close to eachother. Teoretically you could "start the wave" of "stop being stupid" one place and the hear it 3lightyears away 2 seconds after. But everyone has to be told what to yell before hand. So "no information" is being transfered, just pure stupidity.
- CorpT, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0Hey. You! Join the Navy!
- RandomSkratch, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0^^ HAhahahah reminds me of MC Hawking
- robowash, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0did that rhyme on purpose?
- rewritable, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0jeff = spam
- ryan_merket, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0http://digg.com/technology/AMAZING_Flash_Game_2
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+0Interesting, could lead alot of new technologys
Jeff - http://jeffeh.com
