The Cosmic Speed Limit: a Cosmic Coincidence, or the Key to Understanding our Relative Perception of an Infinite Universe?

Is it a coincidence our eyes see because of light, and light is the fastest thing in the universe?

  • yes

    Votes: 1 50.0%
  • No

    Votes: 1 50.0%

  • Total voters
    2

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105
Imagine a hypothetical tachyon that moves at 13.8 billion light-years/second. Now imagine a lifeform that evolves a biological mechanism to perceive the universe via interactions of this tachyon with its environment. It would experience the universe as we know it in a single second, and in two relative seconds, the age of the universe would double relative to our own perception. Now, imagine a life form that evolved to experience their reality through observation of an energy wave moving half the speed of light. They would experience time in slow motion relative to our experience, every second we percieve taking two relative seconds for them. Because the universe is infinite, there is no limit to how fast or slow a lifeform could hypothetically evolve to perceive our universe. All perception of time and space is relative to infinity! Light speed is *our* cosmic speed limit because life evolved on Earth to perceive its environment through interactions of light with our spatial environment (remember that all cause and effect is relative, superceded by all effect relative to infinite cause, which is why the thermodynamic arrow of time theoretically can work in reverse https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/scientists-reverse-time-with-quantum-computer-a4090781.html ), and to process information using electromagnetic signals! All relative existence must be based on an experience of space contextualized by time, and the possible rules for any given relative perception are infinite. Every singularity is an infinite spacetime characterized by observable geometric properties such as a measurable event horizon. These properties define relative characteristics of each relative observation. Every observation of our infinite universe includes an observation of accelerating expansion of spacetime defined by external properties of observation which can also be viewed as internal properties of emergence. Einstein's Theory of General Relativity points to the existence of a singularity beyond the dawn of time and at the heart of a black hole, because the singularity is the fundamental nature of existence.
 
Mar 4, 2020
275
38
730
c is not a limit. c is a result. If charge fields rotated faster than c, then light would travel at that faster speed. As for the rest of your comment, Mr. Spock could not convince me.
 

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105
c is not a limit. c is a result. If charge fields rotated faster than c, then light would travel at that faster speed. As for the rest of your comment, Mr. Spock could not convince me.
Nothing can travel faster than light in a vacuum, hence the use of the term "cosmic speed limit". As to why you would broadcast that you are impervious to logic and reason like it's a badge of honor, consider me stumped.
 

Finch

BANNED
Nov 22, 2020
59
0
105
Nothing can travel faster than light in a vacuum, hence the use of the term "cosmic speed limit". As to why you would broadcast that you are impervious to logic and reason like it's a badge of honor, consider me stumped.
Actually entangled particles are always faster than light. 10,000 times faster in fact
 

Finch

BANNED
Nov 22, 2020
59
0
105
only in terms of information transfer
So you were wrong when you said, "Nothing can travel faster than light in a vacuum, hence the use of the term "cosmic speed limit".

Also NASA says that they have measured entire galaxies moving at 5 times light speed.

Are you aware of this
 
Mar 4, 2020
275
38
730
Would you like to witness something faster than light? Turn your porch light on and off real quick. The light that is traveling eastbound, is going at 2 times c, relative the the light that went westbound.

That was hard wasn't it. Both durations(eastbound and westbound) of light are physical entities.
 

Finch

BANNED
Nov 22, 2020
59
0
105
Would you like to witness something faster than light? Turn your porch light on and off real quick. The light that is traveling eastbound, is going at 2 times c, relative the the light that went westbound.

That was hard wasn't it. Both durations(eastbound and westbound) of light are physical entities.
Why does light travel different speeds going east or west
 
Last edited:

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105
Would you like to witness something faster than light? Turn your porch light on and off real quick. The light that is traveling eastbound, is going at 2 times c, relative the the light that went westbound.

That was hard wasn't it. Both durations(eastbound and westbound) of light are physical entities.
When we say that nothing moves faster than light in a vacuum, the frame of reference is the vacuum, which leads me to believe you do not understand your own point.
 

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105
So you were wrong when you said, "Nothing can travel faster than light in a vacuum, hence the use of the term "cosmic speed limit".

Also NASA says that they have measured entire galaxies moving at 5 times light speed.

Are you aware of this
Quantum entanglement is reflective of the infinite nature of every particle. Entangled particles are not moving faster than the speed of light, they are part of an interconnected existence you do not seem to understand. I hope you are not permanently banned so that we might continue this conversation.
 

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105
So you were wrong when you said, "Nothing can travel faster than light in a vacuum, hence the use of the term "cosmic speed limit".

Also NASA says that they have measured entire galaxies moving at 5 times light speed.

Are you aware of this
Is this what you are referring to?
 
So you were wrong when you said, "Nothing can travel faster than light in a vacuum, hence the use of the term "cosmic speed limit".

Also NASA says that they have measured entire galaxies moving at 5 times light speed.

Are you aware of this
You are such a hypocrite, denying NASA's position on climate change but then using them to support your made up claims.
 
  • Like
Reactions: efarina96
Nov 26, 2020
7
7
35
I have never disputed that climate change is happening, as it has always been happening. NASA knows this
Today, we know that our climate is changing at an unprecedented rate and that humans are a key part of that change.

The above link is a quote from NASA's FAQ page . Click it and read the second paragraph to see for yourself.

By denying AGW, people like you are part of the problem. If you have children, how can you gamble with their future? If you don't have children, have some consideration and compassion for those that do.

It is deplorable the way you spread disinformation to advance your own selfish agenda.
 
Last edited:

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105
The funny thing about you is that you seem to know everything that eludes every other physicist.
Quantum "spooky action at a distance" travels at least 10,000 times faster than light (newatlas.com)

Unlike you I am not claiming to know just repeating what has been tested.

"Quantum entanglement is one of the central principles of quantum physics, though it is also highly misunderstood. In short, quantum entanglement means that multiple particles are linked together in a way such that the measurement of one particle's quantum state determines the possible quantum states of the other particles. This connection isn't depending on the location of the particles in space. Even if you separate entangled particles by billions of miles, changing one particle will induce a change in the other.

Even though quantum entanglement appears to transmit information instantaneously, it doesn't actually violate the classical speed of light because there's no "movement" through space."

Quantum entanglement exists not because of any violation of the cosmic speed limit, but because any finite observation of particles made according to general relativity is directly connected to the fundamental existence of all particles in infinite spacetime.
 

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105
The funny thing about you is that you seem to know everything that eludes every other physicist.
Quantum "spooky action at a distance" travels at least 10,000 times faster than light (newatlas.com)

Unlike you I am not claiming to know just repeating what has been tested.
"Einstein, as the primary prophet of relativity theory, was revolted by the notion of nonlocality, and hence regarded the EPR result as a demonstration that underlying quantum mechanics was a deterministic hidden-variable theory. On this occasion, however, Einstein was wrong."

Einstein was right, but like so many others he failed to understand the true nature of the hidden variable, which is infinity. Because so many attempt to wrap their heads around infinity in a way that is not possible, they fail to grasp that relative infinity is the fundamental principle underlying all known physics. What appears from beyond to be a black hole with a singularity at its heart, is observed from within to be an infinite universe governed by relative properties of observation. These properties correlate directly to externally observed characteristics of a singularity. I.e. mass, charge, and spin of a black hole determine the relative physics of any given observation of our infinite universe, and within every black hole is an infinite universe constrained by unique properties of observation. Ultimately, our universe is infinite, but all observation must be governed by precise rules which arise naturally from the existence of the eternal continuum. These rules of observation can be described but never perfectly so, for example while you claim we have made a precise measurement of the speed of light, there is actually infinite room to improve the precision of our measurements regardless of how we make them. Such is the nature of an infinite universe.
 
Nov 26, 2020
7
7
35
I have never disputed that climate change is happening, as it has always been happening. NASA knows this
You completely missed the point of the NASA quote I linked to. The above quote of yours implies that the climate change we see today is completely natural and that humans bear no responsibility. You then try to gaslight the issue by asserting that NASA agrees with you. The link I gave contradicts your claim that " NASA knows this".

But the main point I am making is that you are this militant denier of AGW (an enemy of nature) who then quotes NASA when it suits you. Do you think you are being slick and nobody is going to notice? All I ever see you do is act like a know-it-all and arrogantly spew your condescending attitude wherever you go. Normally I ignore "trolls" like you, but this politicizing of climate change has become a real scourge that threatens peoples' future and I will not look the other way. If you want to be an argumentative attention getting buzz kill, try the flat-earthers or evangelicals, or get creative.

By denying AGW, people like you are part of the problem. If you have children, how can you gamble with their future? If you don't have children, have some consideration and compassion for those that do.

It is deplorable the way you spread disinformation to advance your own selfish agenda.
 
  • Like
Reactions: efarina96

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105
Does anyone besides yourself think that Einstein prophesized relativity?

Sheesh
I was actually quoting directly from the article you linked me to, Finch. Hence the quotations around the statement. Did you even read the article before you posted the link here?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SaveTheEarth

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105
LOL you really think you have it all figured out by copy and pasting Wiki.

I will look forward to your Nobel Prize for comedy

Reality is Apple and Google are entangled by market conditions and I own both.

How about you professor?
I never copied and pasted from Wiki. If you are not permanently banned and you have any interest in engaging in conversation based on opinions and/or supported by facts or evidence instead of this endless string of false bravado, I'll be here. You aren't countering anything I am saying just insisting I am wrong and insulting me plus throwing in some nonsensical jibes for good measure. You are making yourself look foolish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SaveTheEarth
Nov 26, 2020
7
7
35
There exist no evidence ...but please keep screaming
I called you a hypocrite and backed it up with your own words and a citation which I linked to. You completely ignored what I wrote and just came back with more of the same. You've shown your true colors. Your mind is made up and you are unwilling to consider anything that I might say. That means you won't even argue, you just want to vent. So this boils down to one last question I have for you; do you think I want a hypocrite with nothing to offer screaming at me? BTW that was a rhetorical question. Don't embarrass yourself by shooting back one of your "zingers" (unless, of course, you want to).

TOODLES!! ;+P
 

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105
You need people to agree with you, when they do not intelligent conversation stops
Finch, all I am doing is attempting to argue my perspective. I am willing to admit I am wrong when I am wrong. You are repeatedly attempting to support your perspective with information you are mischaracterizing, and I have explained to you precisely how you have done so. I actually don't think you are intentionally being a troll, you are just defensive and intent on sticking to your guns. I literally used a quote from an article you posted and you attributed it to me and basically called me stupid for saying it. That says it all.
 

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105
There exist no evidence that climate change is not natural. There is also no clear evidence to make an acceptable graph going back more than 150 years or so. Millions of year old ice cores do not do this, neither do tree rings.

But to refresh your memory, sea levels have risen 400 feet in the last 20000 years. The proof that climate change is a hoax is that banks are still financing loans on shore property that according to loons will soon be submerged. So why are banks financing property that will soon be worthless making foreclosure dumb?

So in reality no one cares about your fake news, but please keep screaming
Yeah banks always make great decisions. Are you going to claim the sub-prime mortgage crisis was a hoax too? Please explain exactly why ice cores and tree rings are phony evidence. Provide supporting studies if you can. Thanks.
 

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105
Your perspective is that you know what the Universe is, was and will be.

None of this knowledge is known to humanity, not you or anyone else.

But you have no clue and use thousands of words to say nothing
My point is that only God knows what the universe is was and will be, and that our understanding of such things is inherently and by necessity imperfect. Notably not you or anybody else has refuted anything I have said in any meaningful way. You like to headline hunt and post links to articles you havent read when it suits you. When confronted with your self-contradictions you ignore them.
 

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105
Obama caused that crisis by lending money to unqualified mortgage holders

How Obama Bankrupted Black Homeowners | Investor's Business Daily

Next
Right you know the sub-prime mortgage crisis occurred in 2007 and Obama had to do what he thought was right to pick up the pieces. I am not defending his record but I do believe his efforts were sincere. The article you have linked me to here has nothing whatsoever to do with the sub-prime mortgage crisis. You like to throw fuel on the fire? Fine by me. We should all be able to handle an adult conversation without losing our minds. But at least use your brain.
 

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105
Okay, after reading the whole article I have to admit that I assumed the article was about Obama's presidency and not his career as a lawyer. I overreacted and was obviously wrong to say the article has nothing whatsoever to do with the sub-prime mortgage crisis. I know you are going to love that because you have done nothing but attempt to roast me this whole time, even at the expense of your own arguments. But I do sincerely wish too admit when I am wrong (even though it is frustrating knowing how happy you will inevitably be to throw that back in my face) and instead of reacting impulsively I should have read the whole article before I responded to you (please note that I have read every single article you have posted a link to, even if you have not). As Obama said, he believes sub-prime mortgages started out as a good idea. My family is white and we lost our home after a highly questionable assesment valued our home much higher than it should have in order to get us into a home equity line. The motivation for this, just like the motivation for pushing sub-prime mortgages, was short-term individual gain and a selfish disregard for the risk these practices exposed financial instititions as well as individuals and families to. The reason this became a problem in the first place is the incentives (i.e. bonuses) used to push bank employees into approving these loans. Banks take these loans and sell the liability to investment firms, who were willing to do this because they made money by selling the return on investment in the form of mortgage backed securities. Nobody accounted for the instability of this business model. Much like every other problem we inflict upon ouselves, what we see here is a bunch of individuals who comprise these institutions being unwilling or unable to see the forest for the trees. To make this into an issue about race is highly misguided and seems to be an attempt to cover up your ad hoc argument claiming climate change isn't real because banks are still financing properties on the coast, an argument that is manifestly absurd. Our government and oil companies continue to source more fossil fuels as well, and rather than being evidence of the "sham" of climate change, this is simply evidence of the selfish and unethical actions of our leadership in both the private and public sector. I'm also still waiting to hear from you with a reason why ice core and tree ring analysis does not constitute legitimate scientific evidence. Please do not say "be ause ice cores are really old".
 

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105
There is no reason that we could not decode the universe, but we will have to go there and learn. God by the way is merely a term describing what we do not know.
The reason that we cannot ever decode the universe is that we have a definitive beginning. The universe itself, and every particle in it in fundamental spacetime is eternal, meaning existing beyond beginnings and ends (hence the conservation of matter. What is eternal cannot be destroyed). God is the eternal collective experience of all things. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle tells us we cannot predict the future, but God has no need of predicting the future, because all things that are, were, or will be, are a manifestation of God that in totality only God can comprehend, because only God exists beyond beginnings and ends. If we continue on as a species for eternity, perpetually pushing the boundaries of what we know and understand, we will still fall short of God's understanding, because we have a definitive beginning and God has no such limitation. My fundamental point, is that our physics have pointed to the existence of an eternal God all along, and we have generations of physicists inspiring the world to live in denial by proclaiming that understanding of science does not logically follow from the existence of an eternal God. Our entire society has essentially become grounded in the belief that the existence of God is illogical, thus severing our ties to our obligations to God, our Earth, our Universe, and each other. This manner of thinking has left us in a state of proto-anarchy, in which individuals have no respect for anybody who does not see things their way. Since the emergence of language endowed us with the understanding of concepts imbued in narratives, the fundamental principle that allowed human beings to rise above our differences, or at the very least show each other some respect, has been the universal principle of belief. Robert Anderson was tasked with holding Fort Moultrie from southern secessionists in Charleston in 1860 at the beginning of the Civil War. "We appreciate your position," said a man as he armed against him. "It is a point of honor with you to hold the fort, but a political necessity obliges us to take it." Even as they prepared to engage in an act of Civil War, a level of respect underpinned their preparations, respect that the beliefs of their opponent might be honorable and dignified. Let me ask you something: if our society devolves into a state of Civil War today, do you believe any such respect will underpin the actions of those involved? I don't. When we ask ourselves where the blame should lie, the answer will not be with a "who" but a "what": our institutions which have failed to empower our people through any purposeful, productive construct of belief. Right now the time has come for the scientific and religious communities to admit their inherent shortcomings, to understand once and for all that nothing is superior to God, and that no understanding, no matter how profound, will ever be comparable to the eternal knowledge of our God from whom all understanding proceeds. Science will be of profound significance in its unique role in restoring our Earth, the only home we have ever known, to its rightful condition as a place where life can compete, thrive, and evolve for the glory of God. Religion and philosophy will be of profound significance in its unique role in restoring our communities to a balance of ethical guiding principles and mutually beneficial obligations. Each is necessary in its own right if we are at last to revive our hope, that this inherently unfathomable gift of life will not be squandered in our ignorant, selfish, and short-sighted ways.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY