Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

itsrobert

(14,157 posts)

14. Locking

Reply to alp227 (Original post)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 06:15 PM

Mar 2012

Because the separation between past, present, and future is only an illusion, although a convincing one the 12 hour rule was violated. On the other hand, maybe the 12 hour rule is never violated because past, present, and future is an illusion.

I'm confused.

Sorry, I need to rethink this.

Not locking.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

31 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Einstein Proved Right in Retest of Neutrinos’ Speed [View all] alp227 Mar 2012 OP

Still gonna get 67,000,000 points on their drivers licenses. tclambert Mar 2012 #1

DUzy of a post longship Mar 2012 #2

Sooner or later he was bound to get a lucky guess right. bluedigger Mar 2012 #3

More accurately "Einstein Not Proved Wrong in Retest of Neutrinos' Speed" FarCenter Mar 2012 #4

I was just going to post the same thing. n/t Gore1FL Mar 2012 #8

Hardware problem slackmaster Mar 2012 #5

It really christx30 Mar 2012 #6

He had some deficiencies in math. girl gone mad Mar 2012 #13

Einstein = Most over-hyped scientist in history. harun Mar 2012 #7

Are you saying that to elevate others or to bash Einstein? n/t Gore1FL Mar 2012 #9

I think Issac Newton makes the top of that list Exultant Democracy Mar 2012 #20

Nah; "particles" can't travel faster than light. But impulses can. Brettongarcia Mar 2012 #10

But what if your 3 foot pencil were... Ferretherder Mar 2012 #11

Yes it would Brettongarcia Mar 2012 #18

No it wouldn't. harun Mar 2012 #24

Nope. Wrong. The impulse is traveling at the speed of the pencil, no faster. saras Mar 2012 #12

Think again Brettongarcia Mar 2012 #17

Assume (hypothetically) a perfectly rigid pole; as soon as you push one end, the other moves Brettongarcia Mar 2012 #27

Locking itsrobert Mar 2012 #14

"...neutrinos, do not travel faster than light." unkachuck Mar 2012 #15

If entangled particles are mad at you for going out with the guys and getting drunk, tclambert Mar 2012 #16

Entangled particles might communicate by FTL impulses similar to those noted by Woodbridge Goodman Brettongarcia Mar 2012 #19

Think again FiveGoodMen Mar 2012 #21

Can you give an example of an entirely solid object? Or does it only exist in theory? In such a vanbean Mar 2012 #25

How to communicate 100,000 times faster than light; Dr. W. Goodman PhD Brettongarcia Mar 2012 #26

Now, I'm not a fancy pants theoretical physicist (crowd gasps) gratuitous Mar 2012 #22

Easy Silent3 Mar 2012 #28

Though? Light, photons, might be considered "particles," and/or objects. Travelling at speed Brettongarcia Mar 2012 #29

I'm not sure what point you're making Silent3 Mar 2012 #30

No substantive objection to your protocol; thanks for your excellent clarification Brettongarcia Mar 2012 #31

CERN davidhaslanded Mar 2012 #23