What stops matter from exceeding the speed of light

[observer7]

Time and Space are fundamental properties of our universe.<br /><br />Space is the "stage" upon which all acttions take place. Without it, we cannot even begin to describe interactions between matter and energy. Space provides the location in which everything can happen. Big Bang theory has space being created, as the universe expands. This brings up the question "what is space made from?" Is it possible that space has a quantum unit? Is there a fundamental 'unit' of space and if so, what is it? Is space continuous, like a rubber sheet that constantly stretches to acommodate more matter and energy? The nature of space is so fundamental that we have a hard time even thinking about what it is, or even what it means to not have any space.<br /><br />Time is a similar concept. While space provides the stage, time provide a reference for change. Without time, there is no change and everything remains static. If there is to be any dynamic interactions, then time provides the framework for detecting the differences. It is the "glue" that connects one state with another. <br /><br />The interaction of space and time, that is having a place for things to happen and a mechanism for detecting differences, creates our universe. Within the confines of space and time, we have several other fundamental building blocks. Matter and energy. When matter and energy interact with space and time they produce an effect that comes in several flavors (gravity, electromagnetism, strong and weak) depending on the nature of the interaction. Gravity is represented mathematically by curvature and twisting of space and time. Light and other EM forces help to define space and time, as we know it, by providing a constant reference source. <br /><br />But Einstein was correct in that it is all relative to your position and motion (degree of change?). From a photons point of view (always travelling at the speed of light) no time as passed since the creation of the universe and no time wil <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em><font size="2">"Time exists so that everything doesn't happen at once" </font></em><font size="2">Albert Einstein</font> </div>

 

[weeman]

Lukman, I'm not totally sure if the Cosmic Inflation happened for the first 300,000 years. From what I understand, it happened only for a split second after the Big Bang. The Universe might have gone from something as small as an atom, to the size of our Solar System or even our galaxy, in trllionths of a second! <br /><br />This might indeed prove that matter can exceed the speed of light. However, we have to look at it in a different perspective. I had actually posted a comment about this very argument in another thread. The matter itself may not have moved faster than the speed of light, but rather the space between it had expanded faster than light speed. A simple analogy can be used to visualize this.<br /><br />Lets say you are baking a loaf of bread with raisins in it. You toss it in the oven, and when it is finished, the raisins will have appeared to move farther apart from one another due to the dough expanding. From a raisin's viewpoint, it didn't necessarily move at all, but rather the dough between itself and its neighbor, pushed them apart. <br /><br />This might be the same process that causes all the galaxies to be moving away from us. Galaxies themselves are not moving, but the space between them is expanding more and more all the time.<br /><br />As for Steve's post about Quantum Foam, well I don't even know where to begin for that argument <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> All I know about Quantum Foam, is that it negates the fact that "void" can exist anywhere in the Universe. In other words, it is impossible to have complete void. Where we think void may occur, Quantum Foam comes into play. <br /><br />Anyone know anything about this theory? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><strong><font color="#ff0000">Techies: We do it in the dark. </font></strong></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>"Put your hand on a stove for a minute and it seems like an hour. Sit with that special girl for an hour and it seems like a minute. That's relativity.</strong><strong>" -Albert Einstein </strong></font></p> </div>

 

[vandivx]

"And yet, everything in the universe at the macroscopic scale is affected, or even controlled, by time"<br />----------<br />you got it wrong way around, the primary here is the matter and the way it changes, those are the physical phenomena that we detect via our senses and are aware of<br /><br />time is an abstract concept or our making, we observe that universe around us changes and we device a concept of time to measure it - time is a measure of change<br /><br />the various changes we observe in matter (and in world around us) are not 'caused by time', they just happen, change happens because of energy, energy is responsible for forces which are responsible for change (causing it) - energy causes change - so you could say that time which is a measure of change is also the measure of energy, the two - time and energy - are directly related (as anybody who knows his physics is aware) <br /><br />of these two, energy and time, it is the energy (manifested as force) which is the primary existential element, time is a concept created by intelligent beings to describe their awareness of the physical changes they observe in the world they live in<br /><br />vanDivX <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[oscar1]

I don't think that we can describe space as something tangible, other than as a sphere that is controlled by gravity. Where gravity force is not around, there also is no space. So if space and time are somehow the same, gravity must also be part of that union. To my mind therefore, gravity is not an effect, but rather a cause.

 

[observer7]

I disagree. You can have space without gravity. Space is more "fundamental" IMO. Space and time are not the same. Space is a place, time is a concept that allows changes in the place.<br /><br />Julian Barbor wrote a book called "The End of Time" where he describes this concept in some detail. Our universe consists of all possible configurations of matter and energy (from the big bang singularity until the heat death of the universe). By tracing pathways through these configurations that are consistent with a set of physical laws (conservation, causality, and consistency) an illusion of time is created. <br /><br />It seems to me that gravity is a manifistation of the interaction of space with matter/energy, not a cause as you postulate.<br /><br />--<br /><br />"Time, keeps flowing like a river" Pink Floyd <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em><font size="2">"Time exists so that everything doesn't happen at once" </font></em><font size="2">Albert Einstein</font> </div>

 

[oscar1]

If we assume that the universe ends somewhere (in line with the Big Bang theory that must the case), than you cannot leave the universe; gravity would forbid you to do so. Within and around the universe there is gravity all over (produced by -if we can call it that- all the matter and the barycentres within it). I think that beyond the universe and the influence-zone of the gravity it carries, there would be an unreachable nothing; nothing as in 'not even space'!

 

[observer7]

This is beginning to sound like the chicken and the egg. Which comes first, gravity or space?<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em><font size="2">"Time exists so that everything doesn't happen at once" </font></em><font size="2">Albert Einstein</font> </div>

 

[Mee_n_Mac]

<font color="yellow"><i>"If we assume that the universe ends somewhere (in line with the Big Bang theory that must the case), .. {snip}"</i></font><br /><br />Maybe both my remaining neurons aren't quite up to speed today but I have to ask, why does the BB imply "the universe" must end somewhere ? Am I misunderstanding the word universe to imply entire vs observable ? If so then never mind.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>

 

[lukman]

This might indeed prove that matter can exceed the speed of light. However, we have to look at it in a different perspective. I had actually posted a comment about this very argument in another thread. The matter itself may not have moved faster than the speed of light, but rather the space between it had expanded faster than light speed. A simple analogy can be used to visualize this.<br /><br />- This is what my answer to the question, not my question, yes space expand caused matter seemed to move FTL. Thanks <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[oscar1]

"..., then events can precede their causes"<br /><br />I think that that is only the way we percieve it. Since there are many quantum states, we likely do not see the full picture at any given time. If I am in a room where a fan I am looking at is sucking air out of that room, while the only door is closed and there is no other air inlet, the moment someone opens that door, the fan increases its blade rotations. I notice that happening before I turn around to see who is entering (for the sake of argument, the hinges and/or the handle don't make a sound). In other words, I am seeing the consequence preceding the cause, in a case where the two events are taking place virtually simultaneously.

 

[vandivx]

"case where the two events are taking place virtually simultaneously."<br />------<br /><br />that remainds me of simultaneity of special relativity, SR inside QMs - the heresy or it LOL<br /><br />I think the cause/effect ordering and the direction of time flow has a lot to do with interchanbility of particles, that one electron or proton etc is totally like another one so that full reversibility of events is possible (in contrast to macroscopic events)<br /><br />vanDivX <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[observer7]

Causality on a macro level is usually associated with thermodynamics (entropy) to determine 'times arrow'. Entropy is another macro level effect like the speed of light. <br /><br />These macro level "laws" determine how we perceive the universe, and therefor must have some special significance. Even if determinism and light speed fail to hold at quantum scales, they remain primary in our perception of events.<br /><br />I like to think of it in this way. There exists a collection of all possible arrangements of matter/energy/space. Each individual arrangement has certain characteristics, one of which is an embedded "history" or memory of past events in a logical (that is governed by entropy and light speed limits) order. From this, we can project a number of possible future states. Many of these have 'imperfections' on the quantum scale, and we perceive these as violations of causality or light speed. These quantum events cannot manifest themselves on a macro scale, because the arrangements with a logical history are the only ones that we can perceive.<br /><br />This is a different interpretation of the many worlds view of QM, first given by Julian Barbor in "The End of Time". I have given this a lot of thought and it makes a lot of sense. Time is just the perception of change from one arrangement to another. It is essential that the "history" remains logical and consistent, which means that any future state must also follow the rules in order to have a consistent history.<br /><br />I strongly recommend that you read Julians book for more details.<br /><br />--<br /><br />"The only reason that time exists is so that everthing doesn't happen at once" A.Einstien <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em><font size="2">"Time exists so that everything doesn't happen at once" </font></em><font size="2">Albert Einstein</font> </div>