Slashdot Mirror


Physicists Spot Potential Source of 'Oh-My-God' Particles

sciencehabit (1205606) writes For decades, physicists have sought the sources of the most energetic subatomic particles in the universe — cosmic rays that strike the atmosphere with as much energy as well-thrown baseballs. Now, a team working with the Telescope Array, a collection of 507 particle detectors covering 700 square kilometers of desert in Utah, has observed a broad 'hotspot' in the sky in which such cosmic rays seem to originate. Although not definitive, the observation suggests the cosmic rays emanate from a distinct source near our galaxy and not from sources spread all over the universe.

83 of 144 comments (clear)

  1. Ooh, ooh, I have a bogus theory by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

    I have an idea backed only by my imagination.

    What if those galaxies are proof of symetry, and they're some of the few that are made of both matter and anti-matter, and the high energy ejections we're seeing are from that collision. Maybe half the galaxies in the sky are made of anti-matter and the non-particle-scale properties of antimatter are otherwise identical to matter.

    1. Re:Ooh, ooh, I have a bogus theory by OakDragon · · Score: 2

      In that case all you have to do is reverse the polarity... Then the universe fills up like a balloon and... something bad happens!

    2. Re:Ooh, ooh, I have a bogus theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Just whatever you do, do not cross that streams. that would be bad.

    3. Re:Ooh, ooh, I have a bogus theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm fuzzy on the whole good/bad thing. What do you mean, "bad"?

    4. Re:Ooh, ooh, I have a bogus theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Collisions between matter and antimatter in space produce a lot of gamma rays of specific energies corresponding to the energy equivalence of the mass of the particles involved (not exclusively at those energies, but a lot there still). This has allowed scientists to characterize collisions between gas clouds and antimatter in areas around our galaxy, but they involve very, very small amounts of antimatter spread out over a large volume.

      As far as the discovery that these high energy particles might be coming from some place close, this was somewhat expected as the GZK limit describes a process of high energy particles interacting with CMB photons to pair produce and lose energy, limiting the energy of high energy cosmic rays that travel a long distance. Unfortunately, that could mean there a lack of new physics involved at the cosmic ray energy, much in the same way that confirming a single Higgs particle is a boring outcome not hinting at post-Standard Model physics.

    5. Re:Ooh, ooh, I have a bogus theory by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      So to bring it around, what does that have to do with this specific observation in the article, because I can't quite bridge that connection in my head.

    6. Re:Ooh, ooh, I have a bogus theory by idji · · Score: 1

      because the annihilation particles are all well known and have MUCH less energy than these particles.

    7. Re:Ooh, ooh, I have a bogus theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      The GZK limit predicts essentially a drag force on particles above a very large energy limit. Cosmic rays above this limit have been seen for some time now. This means either the particles come from somewhere close, before they have a chance to lose a lot of their energy, or they come from somewhere far away and the limit is wrong. Previous data was starting to lean toward the latter, with hotspots matching up with distance sources that match early theories on what could produce such high energy particles. Now those previous results didn't pan out, and these results are pointing more toward the former option, that such particles come from some place close and that the limit may still be valid.

    8. Re:Ooh, ooh, I have a bogus theory by sabri · · Score: 1

      I have an even better theory.

      It's the Goa'uld, trying to destroy earth by slowly warming it up so we all cook to death.

      --
      I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
  2. Re:Signals by qbast · · Score: 1

    It would be interesting "conversation" with lag measured in thousands of years.

  3. translating for the athiests. by nimbius · · Score: 5, Informative

    For those of us scientists who hold Christ-gods and sky friends as important in our lives as an empty roll of shit-tickets or takeaway flyers:

    God Particle: the Higgs Boson.
    Oh-My-God Particle: ultra-high-energy cosmic ray (most likely a proton) detected on the evening of 15 October 1991 over Dugway Proving Ground, Utah.

    other particles we find similar to it could be given normal names like UHE particles, or super high energy rays but that doesnt secure grant funding in the theocratic Mormon state of Utah.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:translating for the athiests. by bunratty · · Score: 4, Informative

      Ironically, these particles are named after exclamations. The God Particle was the name of a book originally titled The Goddamn Particle because the Higgs boson was so hard to find. A better name for the Oh-My-God Particle may be the Oh-Shit! Particle. The names have nothing to do with religion.

      --
      What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
    2. Re:translating for the athiests. by Herve5 · · Score: 1

      Thanks. Just this, thanks, but sincerely.

      --
      Herve S.
    3. Re:translating for the athiests. by drainbramage · · Score: 1

      He states that he is a scientist, how dare you try to explain the well known facts to him, a scientist?
      Don't you realize this is science man!
      Take your common sense, reason, and facts and go somewhere where that kind of stuff is tolerated.

      --
      No brain, no pain.
    4. Re:translating for the athiests. by stox · · Score: 1

      My favorite particle is still the OopsLeon.

      --
      "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
    5. Re:translating for the athiests. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Religious scientist is like saying technophobic blogger.

      Actually, that's not true. But thanks anyway for letting us know about your tunnel vision of reality.

      If you ever take a theology class you will learn that there are 2 ways to determine the nature of God. The first way is special revelation (eg. scripture) and the second way through general revelation (eg. science). True theology actually encourages the sciences even though liberal media only picks up on the tabloid "theologists" who are all bat crazy.

      Sorry to turn your "reality" upside down on this.

    6. Re:translating for the athiests. by swillden · · Score: 1

      other particles we find similar to it could be given normal names like UHE particles, or super high energy rays but that doesnt secure grant funding in the theocratic Mormon state of Utah.

      If the state of Utah is theocratic and makes funding decisions based on particle names, choosing blasphemous ones is not the path to big research bucks. Mormons take the prohibition against taking the name of deity in vain pretty seriously.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    7. Re:translating for the athiests. by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      It amazes me that this needs to be pointed out. Using a deity's name in a secular and preferably angry context is one of the fundaments of swearing, by deus.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    8. Re:translating for the athiests. by swillden · · Score: 1

      It amazes me that this needs to be pointed out. Using a deity's name in a secular and preferably angry context is one of the fundaments of swearing, by deus.

      And one that is generally frowned upon by religious people. The names are essentially anti-religious, not religious, in nature.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    9. Re:translating for the athiests. by irrational_design · · Score: 1

      I think that is is wishful thinking in your narrow-worldview. I have one uncle that is a tenured professor of physics (though he also has a PHD in chemistry) at a major university and is openly religious. He spoke at the funeral of my grandfather and nobody who heard him speak would think he was atheist. I have another uncle that is a top research scientist a Fortune 100 company. Likewise he is a believing scientist. I have other relatives that are doctors, engineers, etc that likewise are religious.

    10. Re:translating for the athiests. by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      I prefer the Oh-My-Goddess! particles, OVA version.

  4. Reavers by PPH · · Score: 4, Funny

    Running ther reactors without shielding.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Reavers by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      Eating people alive? Where's that get fun?

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    2. Re:Reavers by swillden · · Score: 1

      Eating people alive? Where's that get fun?

      The screams... it's all about the screams. And dinner. Think of it as the psychotic version of dine-in movie theaters.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  5. Re:Signals by mfh · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Unless the particles aren't the message but the means of communication. Maybe they form some kind of field mechanic communications bridge to enable instantaneous communications?

    We should consider something like this instead of probes like Voyager. Eventually we'll find a way to use fields or lasers as a communications field conduit that enables immediate lagless communications. Someone is probably working on this right now. To some extent the teleportation technology we've seen for communications could use such beams as guidance and accelerators that cut down lag. So maybe instead of thousands of years the lag is like a day or an hour or a few minutes.

    A darker side of this could mean that the existence these focused particles could prove someone is communicating with their homeworld from Earth.

    The film Kpax used this kind of idea as his transportation method, which was a pretty awesome film.

    Makes for some awesome sci-fi even if it's far fetched!

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
  6. re:translating for the athiests by ed.han · · Score: 1

    thank you, because here i was thinking the naming of the OMG particle related to sex!

    ed

  7. Alien Spacecraft by tonywestonuk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Its aliens who have created an Ion drive capable of accelerating Hydrogen ions to near speed of light.. - Giving an almost limitless supply of thrust. What we are seeing is pollution from the thrusters!

    1. Re:Alien Spacecraft by sinij · · Score: 1

      This would imply that they are decelerating on the approaching trajectory.

    2. Re:Alien Spacecraft by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      This would imply that they are decelerating on the approaching trajectory.

      Or getting as far away from us as they can.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:Alien Spacecraft by cjestel · · Score: 1

      Its aliens who have created an Ion drive capable of accelerating Hydrogen ions to near speed of light.. - Giving an almost limitless supply of thrust. What we are seeing is pollution from the thrusters!

      And this is the real reason for global warming :-)

    4. Re:Alien Spacecraft by swillden · · Score: 1

      We need to make them stop polluting out galaxy!

      We must put an end to these dirty dirty aliens once and for all! Who's with me!

      Bring your pitchforks!

      I got my pitchfork right here. Let's go!

      How are we going to get there, again?

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    5. Re:Alien Spacecraft by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      that's an incredibly disturbing thought. thanks for that. not only can they throw beefed up protons at us, they're getting closer.

    6. Re:Alien Spacecraft by tippe · · Score: 1

      This post made me remember an old short-story (whose name I've now forgotten) written by Larry Niven. The gist of the story was that some time way in the future when humans had colonized space and things were so peaceful and hunky-dory that they no longer fought wars or weaponized their spaceships, a human spacecraft came upon an alien ship manned by an unknown aggressive and warlike species (the Kzin, maybe), which began to attack them without warning. Despite lacking any weapons with which to defend themselves, the humans were nonetheless able to win the battle and return home to warn the rest of humanity by basically turning their ship around and allowing their thrusters (based on some sort of ion drive like you described in your post) to slice completely through the enemy ship like a giant laser.

      Anyone else remember the name of the story or from what book it came from?

    7. Re:Alien Spacecraft by TomGreenhaw · · Score: 1

      LOL - if you think their fastballs are energetic wait until you see their bats.

      --
      Greed is the root of all evil.
    8. Re:Alien Spacecraft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      http://www.baenebooks.com/chapters/0671878794/0671878794___2.htm

    9. Re:Alien Spacecraft by tippe · · Score: 1

      Hey, that's it! Thanks man.

  8. Re:Signals by meta-monkey · · Score: 2

    Any form of faster-than-light communication naturally leads to the ability to communicate backwards in time via moving frames of reference. So FTL anything means the universe is non-causal and we haven't seen anything to suggest that.

    --
    We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  9. Re:WTFis "as much energy as well-thrown baseballs" by Idarubicin · · Score: 2

    WTF is "as much energy as well-thrown baseballs"?

    That should technically be something like "as much kinetic energy as a well-thrown baseball". In other words, about 50 joules: what you get from a baseball at about 60 miles per hour. So, not major-league fastball fast (90+ mph) but quite a respectable velocity.

    And we're not going to talk about assorted forms of chemical or nuclear potential energy in the baseball. If you set fire to a baseball, you could get quite a bit more thermal energy. And you could get a heck of a lot more energy out of a baseball if you fused all its component atoms down to iron.

    --
    ~Idarubicin
  10. Re:WTFis "as much energy as well-thrown baseballs" by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

    Take the energy of a baseball thrown at 90-something miles per hour. Now instead apply that energy to a single proton. That's an awful, awful lot of energy for one tiny particle.

    --
    We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  11. Re:Signals by weszz · · Score: 1

    Couple books/shows come to mind...

    Ender's Game using the ansible for instant communication across great distances (the idea that half of it is in one place, the other half somewhere else) and didn't they do that for very short distances already? like a few feet or so?

    but also Dr Who comes to mind... depending on what we send out, can they control us with it?

    Could it be a very weak attack?

  12. Re:I lament the degeneration of the English langua by weszz · · Score: 1

    Idiocracy... it's not just a funny movie, it is the future.

  13. Re:WTFis "as much energy as well-thrown baseballs" by drainbramage · · Score: 1

    No kidding, it should have been in the internationally accepted furlongs per fortnight.

    --
    No brain, no pain.
  14. Re:I lament the degeneration of the English langua by MBGMorden · · Score: 1
    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  15. Re:Signals by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

    We should consider something like this instead of probes like Voyager.

    Voyager's purpose was not to communicate with aliens. The "message" on the spacecraft was a publicity stunt concocted by Carl Sagan, and no sane person expects that any alien will ever receive it.

  16. Re:Signals by CeasedCaring · · Score: 1

    Ansible - You're thinking of Quantum Entanglement. Dr Who - You've confused it with A for Andromeda

  17. Re:WTFis "as much energy as well-thrown baseballs" by Himmy32 · · Score: 2

    This what I come to Slashdot for.

    I use to be a baseball player, then I took a skateboard to the elbow.

  18. Their illustrations are worse by grimJester · · Score: 2

    I've been laughing at this (pdf) for days now. The lower right pic on the second page gets me every time.

  19. Re:I lament the degeneration of the English langua by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    It's only wage-slave click-baiting modern journalists who are responsible for this. It only takes one scientists to slip up and use a funny or sensational nickname for a particle (which will happen eventually), and then these media idiots run with it.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  20. Re:Signals by tonywestonuk · · Score: 1

    Maybe not communication..... ....but, maybe its part of a super ion-drive thruster, that can accelerate ions to near lightspeed before throwing them out the back of their spacecraft. This would give them very close to an actual impulse drive, without violating that annoying Newton's Third Law.

  21. Re:WTFis "as much energy as well-thrown baseballs" by PhilHibbs · · Score: 1

    The unit of energy is fff, the energy required to accelerate one firkin by one furlong-per-fortnight.

  22. Re:WTFis "as much energy as well-thrown baseballs" by Motard · · Score: 1

    Steerriikke!

  23. Re:Cygnus X-3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    From the link above:

    Ultra high energy (UHE) cosmic rays are particles reaching Earth that have energies
    greater than 10^14 eV

    From this paper:

    The origin of ultrahigh-energy cosmic rays (UHECRs), particles with energies greater
    than 10^18 eV, is one of the mysteries of astroparticle physics.

    So what is going on here with the definitions?

    http://arxiv.org/pdf/1404.5890v2.pdf

  24. Re:WTFis "as much energy as well-thrown baseballs" by gstoddart · · Score: 1

    That's purely a velocity measure, to include the energy you need to include the mass.

    So it's "hogs heads * (furlongs/fornight)^2"

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  25. Valhalla! by jsepeta · · Score: 3, Funny

    or perhaps it's from a stargate

    --
    Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
  26. Re:Signals by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    Aye. 'Tis the "Runcible" our lad is thinkin' of, Captain.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  27. Re:Signals by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    It's interstellar Unicorn vomit - ejected our way from the taping of "Mythological Beasts Gone Wild" during spring break, beyond Arcturus.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  28. Re:Signals by weszz · · Score: 1

    For the Dr Who it was this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...

    The probe is intercepted by a giant spaceship heading for Earth. When the broadcast is shown, an alien face appears and identifies itself as being a Sycorax. The alien demands Earth's surrender and causes a third of the world's population to go into a hypnotic state. The Sycorax threaten to make these people commit suicide unless they are given half of the world's population as slaves. One of the scientists discovers that all of the hypnotised people share the same blood type (A-positive), the same as contained in a sample on Guinevere One.

    They used blood control to control people.

    On the Ansible you are probably right.

  29. Nice Visualization by shrove · · Score: 1

    They have a nice graphic here of the OMG particle hitting the atmosphere.
    http://www.spaceanswers.com/deep-space/what-is-the-omg-particle/

  30. Re:Signals by PPH · · Score: 1

    Unless the particles aren't the message but the means of communication. Maybe they form some kind of field mechanic communications bridge to enable instantaneous communications?

    So that would be like needing to make a phone call immediately. And then standing in line for the next version of iPhone.

    I'm certain that advanced civilizations have evolved beyond this kind of behavior.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  31. Re:What's next in the headlines? by PPH · · Score: 1

    The "OOOOOOOOHOHHHHH Particle?"

    It has been discovered. Unfortunately, with a very fast decay rate.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  32. Re:I lament the degeneration of the English langua by Minwee · · Score: 2

    Actual scientists... people with PhDs... are creating names like "Oh-My-God".

    You need to meet more people with doctorates.

    Many of them are actual people with senses of whimsy and humour. It's not like they joined some sort of academic cult and were turned into mindless zombies.

    Not that that doesn't happen, but it's not part of the PhD process. Many people are able to survive academic life and still think that thagomizer is a perfectly fine name for the spikes on the end of a Stegosaurus's tail.

  33. Re:WTFis "as much energy as well-thrown baseballs" by Minwee · · Score: 1

    The particle's energy is equivalent to an American baseball travelling fifty-five miles an hour

    How much is that in Volkswagens? And how fast is it travelling relative to imperial standard sheep? Can you measure the kinetic energy in terms of double-decker busses?

  34. That's just the particle beam by silvermorph · · Score: 1

    ... in the "tiny universe" experimenter's particle accelerator.

  35. Re:Buy the book BANNED by Costco! by DahGhostfacedFiddlah · · Score: 1

    If you want the book to reach people, maybe you should apply the same persuasive techniques to Costco stores that we've seen in this very thread.

    For instance, you might find yourself in a Costco and see a small group of people gathered around telescopes, discussing the many wonders of the universe they hope to see. You could shove your way to the center of their attention and shout about how Costco censors a completely unrelated book! I can think of no finer way to win the respect and admiration of the scientific community.

  36. Re:Buy the book BANNED by Costco! by Triklyn · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Dinesh D’Souza has always been a hack. it'd be different if it were a good writer, but i might as well be outraged at them pulling twilight from their shelves. some things really aren't worth the ink they're printed with :)

  37. Contact by markroth8 · · Score: 1

    Hmm... Energetic particles hitting Earth, originating from a single location in the sky... Someone is obviously trying to throw a rock through our window.

    1. Re:Contact by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

      Nope, it's a targeting laser. We are being painted. The rock will only move at 0.999 C but will be 5 km in diameter.

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
  38. Re:I lament the degeneration of the English langua by Triklyn · · Score: 2

    fuck off kid.

    someone saw something moving at nearly the speed of light packing the energy of a fast moving baseball at 20 odd something orders of magnitude it's mass... and you don't think OMG is an appropriate declaration?

  39. Re:WTFis "as much energy as well-thrown baseballs" by Triklyn · · Score: 1

    this comment deserves recognition. please mod parent up :)

  40. Re:Signals by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

    lmgtfy.

    http://physics.stackexchange.c...

    If you have two frames of reference that are not at rest with respect to each other (which is most all of them) and you move from one to the other faster than light and back, you arrive before you left. Any type of faster than light anything (communications or travel) regardless of method (ansible, warp drive, stargate, wormhole, whatever) violates causality because general relativity.

    --
    We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  41. Re:Signals by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

    The question is: does it matter if causality is violated? The models do not preclude such a violation IIRC. And the fact that we haven't yet observed such a thing happening certainly doesn't mean that it can't.

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  42. No... by slew · · Score: 2

    That's kindof BS...

    Mass doesn't expand infinitely nor is there a speed threshold of energy as far as our current understanding of physics goes... This is a simplistic bookkeeping trick that attempts to account for limited acceleration near the speed of light (since F=ma, for a given force, you get less "a" if you somehow fudge 'm' to increase as you approach the speed of light). General relativity explains this much better by having any mass or energy actually distort space time so that you don't ever need this overly simplistic bookkeeping trick (which has unfortunate anomalies like rest-mass and photons having no rest mass, but momentum).

    In your own frame of reference, you can accelerate as long as you have the energy to do so. The problem is that from an external observer's frame of reference despite your apparent acceleration from your frame of reference (you think you are going faster and faster), your time dilation factor relative to the observer means it doesn't observer you exceeding the speed of light, The observer thinks your acceleration (dv/dt) is asymptotically approaching zero as you approach the speed of light. Even though you have been accelerating all the time, you don't teleport relative to the observer (although the observer will think you were moving very, very fast, but not faster than light), but if you were to get back to the same frame of reference as the observer, you will have noticed your observer has experience quite a bit more time than you have (this is the origin of the twin paradox of special relativity).

    From your special relatively frame of reference, you moved very fast (because you experienced less time for the distance you appeared to travel), but from the observers point of view, more time was experienced, so the velocity never exceed the speed of light. The way this is book-kept for is usually lorenzian length contraction. As you approach the speed of light the distance you observer to traverse over a unit of your time is shorter, so when you divide the distance by your time, you also don't observe that you went faster than the speed of light.

    Of course if you could somehow create say a warp drive (or some other FTL transport), to a third party observer, you might appear to be in two places at once, and/or it would appear like time transport, but many folks thinks it is really possible to do this. Creating such a warp disturbance (actually warping space time around you) would likely require a very, very large, but not infinite amount of energy to maintain a negative energy-density around you. It is hypothesized you could not do this w/o some sort of pervasive zero-point energy source or creation of a type of exotic matter to sustain the required region of negative energy-density.

    1. Re:No... by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      Not forgetting that the observer couldn't observe for very long

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
  43. Re:Buy the book BANNED by Costco! by DahGhostfacedFiddlah · · Score: 1

    Okay, I've read through a number of your replies, and one question keeps coming up. Who the Hell are you? What skin do you have in this game?

    Companies pull books all the time for all kinds of reasons. Why is this one worth disrupting the site over? Are you Dinesh himself, trying desperately to get more income (or mindshare, whatever). Or has he hired you to spread the word on whatever sites you can? Are you simply a Concerned Citizen for whom this one book is the final straw?

    Or are you a crazy lib who hates Dinesh D'Souza, and intends to delegitimize him by being a dick on websites in his name?

    Or are you just trying out a new trolling technique? In which case, full marks for creativity, full marks for getting the bites. But 0/10 for pulling at the emotions like a traditional troll does. You're stirring up more confusion than anger.

  44. Re:WTFis "as much energy as well-thrown baseballs" by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

    No dumber than measuring energy in baseballs.

    --
    XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
  45. Re:Signals by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    and you move from one to the other faster than light and back, you arrive before you left.

    I'm not sure that's true. If you consider the one-way trip from A to B then, yes, there will be some frames of reference in which you will be calculated to have arrived at B before you left A.

    But I don't think heading back to your starting point will mean getting home before you left. In any frame of reference in which you were calculated to have arrived at B before having left A, you will take correspondingly longer to return to A, leaving you always at least slightly in the future of your launch event.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  46. Re:Signals by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    They used blood control to control people.

    I haven't seen blood control in years!

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  47. Re:WTFis "as much energy as well-thrown baseballs" by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    What's that in European baseballs?

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  48. Re:What's next in the headlines? by mythosaz · · Score: 1

    The "Oh, Yes!" particle was faked :(

  49. Re:Signals by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    the sort of spectacular, over-the-top attraction Dubai is known for.

    Carefully chosen words. It's not insane to conceive of future humans deliberately tracking the Voyagers down. Then selling them on eBay. It's not very likely, but it's not impossible.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  50. Re:Signals by Bengie · · Score: 1

    They have already broken causality a bit at the quantum level. They've entangled photons, sent one photon through a polarization filter, making sure that photon was a specific polarization, then sent the other through a slit, such that it they knew it was still quantum, then sent the other photon that already had a know polarization through the opposite polarization filter, and it passed through.

    Or something along these lines. The conclusion was the photon had its past changed because it is impossible to change its polarization once it's set. Changing the polarization would mean changing the information, which means you no longer have the same photon, yet they knew it was the same photon because the entanglement was still valid.

    The crazy part is the past didn't change relative to us, only the photon. Yay, interweaving timelines of different multi-verses. I have no idea. The scientists were kind of shocked also and were not entirely sure how to interpret it. I guess future experiments will help isolate what's going on.

  51. 20 degree radius? by herbierobinson · · Score: 1

    What exactly is a 20 degree radius? One wonders about that article.

    --
    An engineer who ran for Congress. http://herbrobinson.us