Speed of Light Barrier

Actually, the expansion of the universe itself can be said to be faster than light.

My point exactly.As a thought experiment in my younger days with some friends, we imagined an engine or device that bends space in front of a spaceship in a certain way and space behind the spaceship in a certain way causing the ship to get carried along in the expansion and contraction of space. It's sort of like riding along with the waves. Because the ship isn't technically going through space, the ship could be exceeding the speed of light without actually breaking the light barrier.

Haha, thanks mod, I'm sure one of us unknowingly got the idea from Alcubierre somehow.

The linked article is deceiving. The experiment didn't actually make the light slow down. What happened was the photons were absorbed by the atoms and then re emitted to be absorbed by other atoms and re emitted. The particular state of the so-called "new matter" slows down the time between absorption and re-emission.Here is a simpler way at looking at this. Suppose I can run 10 miles an hour on a good day. One day, you decide to put a whole bunch of small boxes in my way in which in order to pass I have to enter them and exiting them on the other side. Obviously, the time it takes me to get to 10 miles away is considerably lengthened. Now, suppose you put obstacles in the boxes themselves. Say, you put super glue and all kinds of other shit in the boxes. These things will slow me down to a crawl.The speed of light through space remains constant. What's changed in this particular experiment is the presence of the "new matter" that slowed down the time between absorption and emission of the photons.Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

You're not getting this.(1) The speed of light constant, commonly referred to as C, is the actual speed of light through space.(2) The "new matter" absorbs a photon and emits a photon with delayed action. Ask yourself whether it could be the case that the photon absorbed is the same photon emitted. I don't understand what the problem is here. The universal constant of the speed of light describes it going through space. How the hell is putting obstacles in its path contradicting this constant? Might as well say you've proven the speed of light could be zero by putting a wall in it's path effectively cutting it off.Added by edit.Devil pointed out something that I wish I had. The speed of light in the experiment hasn't changed one bit. The speed of the light beam was changed. The speed of the absorbed and emitted photons between the individual atoms remained constant.That's why I said in the beginning that the article is deceiving. You have to read all the way down to the last couple paragraphs before the explained that it's not the speed of light that slowed and that it was actually the light beam that slowed.Added by edit again.By the way, I assure you that this isn't new. It's old news. It's also well known to those of us who actually care about the subject.Edited by Taz, : No reason given.Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

That was my point. He seemed to have taken my analogy about me running into boxes too literally. I wanted to provoke some thought out of him on this matter.

Just in case there's anymore confusion and our words weren't clear enough, here are a couple of drawings done by moi for those who are more visually inclined. Materials copyrighted... just joking.Here is what it looks like when a photon travels through space. And here is what it looks like when a photon travels through a medium. Added by edit.The delay part happens between absorption and emission. This so-called "new matter" simply has a ridiculously slow absorption/emission rate.Edited by Taz, : No reason given.Edited by Taz, : No reason given.Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

You remind me of the following proof that women are evil.A woman takes time and money.
Women = time x moneyWe know that time is money.
Time = moneySo, a woman is time squared.
Women = time x time = time^2It is a well known fact that money is the root of all evil.
Money = √evilMoney squared is evil.
Money^2 = evilTherefore, we must conclude that a woman is evil.
Woman = evilGoing back to serious mode, can you see what I did in that proof above? Here is another way at look at it. Suppose I say that chicken is good. God, we all know, is also good. Therefore, god is chicken.Space is a medium. Just because we call it a medium doesn't mean it's the same kind of medium when we're talking about gaseous medium or solid medium. You're playing with words to come out with your conclusion. This is intellectual dishonesty.