Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests
Re: Weber interview | |
---|---|
by SYED » Tue Sep 08, 2015 8:46 am | |
SYED
Posts: 1345
|
is there a transcript for the interview anywhere?
|
Top |
Re: Weber interview | |
---|---|
by Louis R » Fri Sep 18, 2015 10:16 am | |
Louis R
Posts: 1295
|
If c is infinite in vacuum, light propagating from a vacuum into matter will always propagate tangent to the surface - IOW, in won't penetrate into matter at all. What happens at the interface from one material to another, I'd have to play with, but at first glance the infinities should cancel and you'd still get refraction. [ratios of infinite quantities are tricky, and don't always behave the way they "should"] That would be a good thing: in the real universe, light never actually propagates at c. Even in intergalactic space there's enough matter around that the speed of light is always infinitesimally less than c.
E=mc^2 has nothing to do with the process of fusion - it just lets you calculate the output. Unfortunately, that doesn't mean that an infinite value for c doesn't bollix things up, because it's a factor in many of the equations that do describe what's going on, meaning that many physical quantities go either to zero or infinity. Again, I'd have to comb through piles of papers to even get a feel for the consequences, but reaction rates would probably go either to zero or infinity as well - either the stars wouldn't shine or they'd all go supernova immediately after they formed [down to and including brown dwarfs, in fact]. Either way, a very awkward universe to live in. Ummm... assuming it was there at all, that is. What would happen to the Big Bang is something I'm not competent to even guess at
|
Top |
Re: Weber interview | |
---|---|
by phillies » Wed Mar 23, 2016 10:54 am | |
phillies
Posts: 2077
|
The explanation for his books was very easy. The laws of nature did not change. There was a Maxwell's daemon that attached to each pole of each battery, etc., keeping voltage differences from being seen, a daemon attached to each nitrate group,... |
Top |
Re: Weber interview | |
---|---|
by brnicholas » Thu Mar 24, 2016 8:49 am | |
brnicholas
Posts: 254
|
I think the concerns being expressed about basic optics not working are misplaced and reflect a misunderstanding of what DW said.
He said that in Sharona physics was Newtonian and the speed of light was infinite. He is contrasting Newtonian physics with General Relativity. If he is using "speed of light" in the sense it usually has in General Relativity he does not mean that photons travel at infinite speed in vacuum, he means that there is no limit to relative velocity. This is because in General Relativity the "speed of light" is the maximum speed at which two objects can move in relationship to each other regardless of their movement in relationship to any third object. In other words, he is not saying that photons move at infinite speed. He is saying that you can do standard Newtonian relative velocity calculations with photons. I think on Sharona photons move at c when departing from a fixed point but two photons departing from the same point in opposite directions would each move away from the point at c and would move away from each other at 2c. This contrasts with the real world where those same two photons would move away from the fixed point at c and would also move away from each other at c. (Yes I know that doesn't make logical sense but that is what I understand General Relativity to say if someone here understands it better please feel free to correct me.) I don't think that would affect optics in an atmosphere. I certainly agree there would be all kinds of effects of this basic a change in physics and doubt even the experts can tell you what they would be so DW using "Newtonian Physics" as handwavium is fine with me. Nicholas |
Top |
Re: Weber interview | |
---|---|
by PeterZ » Thu Mar 24, 2016 11:16 am | |
PeterZ
Posts: 6432
|
Perhaps the reverse is truer in the multiverse? Aether and magic acts as Maxwell's daemons on General Relativity. General Relativity describes universal physics. Mental activity can shape aether to act in ways that modify the effects of physics locally. |
Top |
Re: Weber interview | |
---|---|
by Howard T. Map-addict » Thu Mar 24, 2016 1:58 pm | |
Howard T. Map-addict
Posts: 1392
|
Only if needed for a story.
If these Basic Theories for Sharonaverse and Arcanaverse are not needed in the plotline, then we will *never* be told! HTM
|
Top |
Re: Weber interview | |
---|---|
by PeterZ » Thu Mar 24, 2016 2:02 pm | |
PeterZ
Posts: 6432
|
Of course not, Howard. I would say, however, that the various theories of physics for the different multiverse societies would be a marketing ploy. Just look at the these threads. How many interesting and arcane discussion about so many topics tangentially associated with the stories have we had? We aren't the only ones that find those subjects engaging.
|
Top |
Re: Weber interview | |
---|---|
by Howard T. Map-addict » Thu Mar 24, 2016 2:31 pm | |
Howard T. Map-addict
Posts: 1392
|
Yeah. Peter.
Maybe Baen should advertise Multiverse books on "The Big Bang Theory." It has tens of millions of viewers, in America and in India! And Science Fiction is read there. HTM
|
Top |
Re: Weber interview | |
---|---|
by PeterZ » Thu Mar 24, 2016 2:36 pm | |
PeterZ
Posts: 6432
|
No need. Baen will just employ mavens on literary chat sites to spread the word. Heck, they will even use the authors' sites.
|
Top |
Re: Weber interview | |
---|---|
by tinfoil » Wed Mar 30, 2016 7:52 pm | |
tinfoil
Posts: 77
|
If the speed of light was truly infinite, the first time ANY particle experienced radioactive decay, the release of energy due to the tiny loss of mass would be AN INFINITE AMOUNT of energy.
Clearly, that cannot be happening billions of times a second all over the planet. This suggests no radioactivity. In turn, this suggests no big bang, no fusion-powered stars, and no changing of atoms from one element to another. No radiation means no mutation or evolution, or a new mechanism to cause it. There a WHOLE LOT of unintended consequences if the first premise is true. Therefore, I suspect it will be quietly dropped as non-canon. |
Top |