Thread: Faster than the speed of light travel key to universal expansion

Originally Posted by astromark

I am sorry... but I think you should lay down and rest a while... " What particle of mass moves at a rate faster than a photon ?''

Put the dots on that elastic band... and come back at me with more logic than this... Please.

FTL particles are not restricted by SR ( or GR ).
Although they maybe very hard to detect. You can look at tachyons for theorized examples ...

The only limitation from SR ... is that you can not accelerate a particle to the speed of light. The same would hold true that anything that is travelling faster than light could not slow down to the speed of light.

All I am saying here is that if there are FTL particles ... then wouldnt entropy tend towards the speeding up of these particles rather than the slowing down of the particles?

The idea here is that it would take work to slow down an FTL particle. So over time the FTL particle would tend to stay the same or speed up.

I was reading up a little more and from wikipedia I found:

So for the Gibbs Free energy to make a FTL object do work on the universe you would need to speed it up, the faster it speeds up the more work you can get out of it. The more you slow it down the more energy from the universe it would absorb.

In a simple manner, with respect to STP reacting systems, a general rule of thumb is:
“Every system seeks to achieve a minimum of free energy.”
Hence, out of this general natural tendency, a quantitative measure as to how near or far a potential reaction is from this minimum is when the calculated energetics of the process indicate that the change in Gibbs free energy ΔG is negative. In essence, this means that such a reaction will be favoured and will release energy. The energy released equals the maximum amount of work that can be performed as a result of the chemical reaction. In contrast, if conditions indicated a positive ΔG, then energy—in the form of work—would have to be added to the reacting system to make the reaction go.
The equation can also be seen from the perspective of both the system and its surroundings (the universe). For the purposes of calculation, we assume the reaction is the only reaction going on in the universe. Thus the entropy released or absorbed by the system is actually the entropy that the environment must absorb or release respectively. Thus the reaction will only be allowed if the total entropy change of the universe is equal to zero (an equilibrium process) or positive. The input of heat into an "endothermic" chemical reaction (e.g. the elimination of cyclohexanol to cyclohexene) can be seen as coupling an inherently unfavourable reaction (elimination) to a favourable one (burning of coal or the energy source of a heat source) such that the total entropy change of the universe is more than or equal to zero, making the Gibbs free energy of the coupled reaction negative.

Certainly fascinating! So..the way I understand SR, coupled with what you are suggesting, if an "object" (for lack of a better definition) could be observed travelling FTL, it's clock(or any observable physical entropic phenomena) would appear to be running backward.

While physical behaviour within the inertial frame of the object would appear normal, to us as observers, it's clock would appear to wind up.

If this is the case, could the Universe be imploding at FTL speeds? Wouldn't we observe this as an accelerating expansion?

Actually I think time does not run backwards ... but rather imaginary time is predicted by SR. But someone else would need to confirm this.

Originally Posted by Azure Infinity

Certainly fascinating! So..the way I understand SR, coupled with what you are suggesting, if an "object" (for lack of a better definition) could be observed travelling FTL, it's clock(or any observable physical entropic phenomena) would appear to be running backward.

While physical behaviour within the inertial frame of the object would appear normal, to us as observers, it's clock would appear to wind up.

If this is the case, could the Universe be imploding at FTL speeds? Wouldn't we observe this as an accelerating expansion?

I understand.
It's not that I was suggesting that time could run backward. Though, Hawking, many moons ago, suggested something of the sort...that if the Universe were to suddenly stop expanding and begin to contract, that maybe the arrow of time would change direction(?) He suggested that we would never be able to tell the difference. Hokey to say the least, and I laughed when I read it, but nonetheless, we're speaking of hypothetical situations aren't we?

I want to witness something travelling FTL, just to see what it would look like. Ain't gonna happen.

All good descriptions of physical phenomena are reversible time-wise. What you are suggesting is a solution to physics in regards to our interaction with 'something' in an FTL state. An object in an FTL state would appear to gain energy as we attempt to take energy away. Is this not the same as time reversal? I'm probably not understanding you, that's all. Let me sleep on it.

Originally Posted by Azure Infinity

I want to witness something travelling FTL, just to see what it would look like. Ain't gonna happen.

heh, yeah. if a particle was traveling faster than the speed of light.. then well.. there'd be no light to see.

and if we could see them, the things would be tricky catch. kinda like a fly that takes off before you can swat it.

another thing is, ive heard the "standard model" for dark matter and/or energy (im not sure if both or just one of them are specifically explained as this) is said to be the result of particles who's energy levels became so great that it sorta pulled them into a state of metaphysical being. perhaps this means the speed/energy became greater than light..

dark matter entropy anyone?

Originally Posted by Dylan Mojica

dark matter entropy anyone?

Actually Dark Energy Entropy right ?

Tangent: Could zero point energy/ virtual particles be the effects of FTL particles colliding?

Originally Posted by tom

Actually Dark Energy Entropy right ?

What's the difference between the two? DM entropy vis-a-vis DE entropy.....

Originally Posted by David E. Eaton Sr.

What's the difference between the two? DM entropy vis-a-vis DE entropy.....

I dont know really ... but my understanding was that DM is the stuff that creates gravity that holds galaxies together while DE is the stuff that fuels the accelerating expansion of the universe.

My point was that what if FTL particles was Dark Energy ( I guess that is what I was hinting at ). Or maybe it was that the natural Entropy of FTL particles is Dark Energy.

I think the DM entropy would just react normally since it is just an invisible gravitational source.