Talk:Superluminal motion: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
==Dubious sections?== |
==Dubious sections?== |
||
If the ideas proposed in the section "Laser ranging" are based on a mistaken calculation on the part of Gezari, as explained in Franklin's paper, rather than an actual observation, it seems a needlessly distracting detour. The section "Messier 87 etc. Gas Jets" appears to be based on a non-standard theory (the Wikipedia article on this theory is disputed as original research), but that isn't made clear in this article. [[User:Dependent Variable|Dependent Variable]] ([[User talk:Dependent Variable|talk]]) 00:49, 5 April 2010 (UTC) |
If the ideas proposed in the section "Laser ranging" are based on a mistaken calculation on the part of Gezari, as explained in Franklin's paper, rather than an actual observation, it seems a needlessly distracting detour. |
||
The paper of Gezari was recently updated. ([[User:Bgeelhoed|Bgeelhoed]] ([[User talk:Bgeelhoed|talk]]) 15:38, 31 August 2010 (UTC)) |
|||
The section "Messier 87 etc. Gas Jets" appears to be based on a non-standard theory (the Wikipedia article on this theory is disputed as original research), but that isn't made clear in this article. [[User:Dependent Variable|Dependent Variable]] ([[User talk:Dependent Variable|talk]]) 00:49, 5 April 2010 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 15:38, 31 August 2010
Can someone post a diagram. This is one of those things that is very easily explained on a blackboard, but hard to explain with words. Roadrunner 20:24, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
First the blob is moviong towards me and then the blob in on a path perpendicular to me. This doesn't seem to match another explanation I found but I don't fee comfortable changing it.
More explanation needed
This result is not that intuitive (if the object is moving mostly towards you, the tangential velocity cannot be very high, and it is not obvious that the time interval decreases faster), so I think a quantitive treatment is necessary, something like the explanation here. I'll add that as a "See also" link before someone gets around to do a good explanation here. R6144 09:54, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
How to achieve real superluminal velocity of mass particles see:
http://www.petar-bosnic-petrus.com/science-articles/ conical-and-paraboloidal-superluminal-particle-accelerators/
- I agree. From current explanation it is not clear that there would be any apparent superluminal velocity involved. In fact, as usual with physics wikipedia pages, the explanation is dim and dense.Crusty007 (talk) 20:37, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
See http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/0031-9120/32/1/016/pe7103.pdf?request-id=536d1dcd-4580-4a47-b434-93dd3b9a89bd for another explanation, i find it clearer, and it includes quantitative analysis —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.1.66 (talk) 13:59, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
The explanation relating to signal velocity is far more logical, at last. Nothing moves faster than C, but the information; 'change of position' can of course give the impression of something in a different inertial frame moving faster or slower. Interesting implications too.Nimsdixon (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:46, 10 February 2010 (UTC).
Dubious sections?
If the ideas proposed in the section "Laser ranging" are based on a mistaken calculation on the part of Gezari, as explained in Franklin's paper, rather than an actual observation, it seems a needlessly distracting detour.
The paper of Gezari was recently updated. (Bgeelhoed (talk) 15:38, 31 August 2010 (UTC))
The section "Messier 87 etc. Gas Jets" appears to be based on a non-standard theory (the Wikipedia article on this theory is disputed as original research), but that isn't made clear in this article. Dependent Variable (talk) 00:49, 5 April 2010 (UTC)