The Universe expanded at a far faster rate than the speed of light for a tiny part of the first second of the life of the universe.
Geoffrey Landis, NASA Engineer, who has had a great track record with solar sails and interstellar propulsion gave a talk on negative mass at the Interstellar Research Group. He explained how negative mass could be the basis of faster than light observations related to inflation. What we still need to discover is what is preventing the generation of negative mass. Physics indicates that negative mass should be generated all the time, but it is not. There needs to be some unknown physical conservation law that prevents negative mass now but permitted negative mass during the inflation epoch of the universe.
Negative Mass
Negative Mass is not excluded by General Relativity.
Negative Mass reacts in the opposite way to forces. If you push on Negative Mass it would move towards you.
Cosmic Inflation
Cosmic inflation is a theory of exponential expansion of space in the early universe. The inflationary epoch lasted from 10^−36 seconds after the conjectured Big Bang singularity to some time between 10^−33 and 10^−32 seconds after the singularity. Following the inflationary period, the universe continued to expand, but at a slower rate.
Electrostatic forces are 10^36 more powerful than gravity. This seems to be a clue that large amounts of negative mass existed and had an opposite and faster than light repulsion of electrostatic forces.
Inflation predicts that the observed perturbations should be in thermal equilibrium with each other. The structure and observations of the universe match what is expected by inflation. Inflation expectations are confirmed by the Planck spacecraft, WMAP spacecraft and other cosmic microwave background (CMB) experiments, and galaxy surveys, especially the ongoing Sloan Digital Sky Survey. These experiments have shown that the one part in 100,000 inhomogeneities observed have exactly the form predicted by theory.
The acceleration of this expansion due to dark energy began after the universe was already over 9 billion years old (~4 billion years ago).
SOURCES- Geoffrey Landis, Interstellar Research Workshop
Written By Brian Wang, Nextbigfuture.com
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
The other possibility is not "some conservation laws" preventing negative mass from being created, but some (not foresaw) consequences of the current theories causing negative mass to not be detected.
If negative mass move back in time, this would explain its presence and abundance at the beginning of the universe (as we perceive it) and its "scarcity" today.
Another possibility is, if matter was very energy charged (and compressed in a small space) at the beginning of time and the energy content of the particles was decreasing very fast and the space expanding fast, the mass of a particle could go negative: losing energy reduce mass and expanding the space reduce inertia ( Mach Principle).
Just throwing theories to the wall.
sounds like you've been watching the new star trek series
Ah, but you don't perceive it as slowing down, you just see the expansion increasing faster and faster, so you (and everything you measure time with) experiences less and less subjective time before the rip. Also, the rate of time would still continue to decrease after the rip, it just wouldn't matter much to anyone.
It's deceptive in that, at first glance, it looks a lot like Zeno's dichotomy paradox (where you keep having to travel half the distance to your goal and thus will never get there).
God is the programmer of this universe. Jesus is his avatar within his creation.
It's as logical as Matrix theology.
For those who've preserved their innocence until now:
Computers exist.
Computer models exist.
There are models that try to simulate living beings.
As computers get more and more advanced, the models of living beings, and living beings interacting with each-other, will become more and more complex and realistic until eventually the individual entities within the simulations would not be able to tell that they aren't real.
As any advanced technological society will run hundreds, thousands, millions of such simulations, the statistics are millions to one that we are in such a simulation, not a "real" universe at all.
Therefore, we are in a universe that was literally created by a super being that can do anything and know anything (within our universe at least).
Also, we can rest assured that in real life there would be no such thing as a "spider".
tl;dr: Computers exist, therefore God.
Speaking as an atheist, no one should buy into anything. One simply follows the evidence to its logical conclusion. There's no current evidence that god/gods exist, ergo I'm an atheist. If evidence of their existence surfaces I will reevaluate that conclusion. Of course, if there is a God, then he/she/it has a lot of explaining to do.
Pixie Dust would also make FTL travel possible, open wormholes and explain a lot of things. GR doesn't forbid it, neither do the mathematic equations.
So, just like with imaginary negative mass, it's just a matter of figuring out how to find or make some.
By your own argument you'll never get a big rip because time will slow down in equal proportion.
gravity is just the intrinsic geometry of curved space-time. if you can have negative mass, then you can also have negative time.
My suspicion is that the rate of cosmic expansion does not change at all. Just the rate at which everything else perceives time. Thus, as the universe gets larger, the rate of time for everything else in it (us, grass, penguins, icebergs, radioactive elements, stars, etc.) slows. This makes it seem like the cosmic expansion is accelerating when it is actually continuing at precisely the same rate it always has.
So far as I can tell, the rate of time hit its maximum possible value about 7.8 billion years after the Big Bang event. Until that occurred, the rate of time, which had started very slow, was increasing, and the acceleration of the cosmic expansion (especially after the inflationary period) was decreasing. Then the rate of time began decreasing again, and the cosmic expansion began to accelerate, meaning we are already on the downhill slope.
Given that we were only on the uphill slope for 7.8 billion years, and we've been on the downhill slope for 6 billion already, that's not the least bit creepy.
Can anyone say "Big Rip?"
Actually, traveling faster than light, under relativity, does imply that you could be traveling backwards in time in at least some reference frames. Something that, IIRC, can't happen as long as you're traveling no faster than light.
Follow up work showed that causality was still preserved. No information traveled faster than light, even though the wavefront of certain frequencies appeared to.
https://today.duke.edu/2003/10/lightspeed1016.html
In Princeton, N.J., physicists sent a pulse of laser light through cesium vapor so quickly that it left the chamber before it had even finished entering.
The pulse traveled 310 times the distance it would have covered if the chamber had contained a vacuum.
Researchers say it is the most convincing demonstration yet that the speed of light — supposedly an ironclad rule of nature — can be pushed beyond known boundaries, at least under certain laboratory circumstances.
Time and space could be infinite. So there could be lot of time wars. Many versions of the Time Lords fighting the Daleks.
No. According to special relativity, if you go to Alpha Centauri just under the speed of light, you’ll age 1 day. If you go at the speed of light, you’ll age 0 days. If you go faster than the speed of light, you’ll age sqrt(-1) days. That’s an imaginary number. Not a negative number. I don’t know what it means to age by an imaginary amount. But I wouldn’t call it going back in time.
Though I should also point out that if you go there at the speed of light, you’ll have infinite relativistic mass, and require infinite fuel. So the equations break down there, too. So relativity doesn’t really say what happens when matter travels through space faster than light. It really just says it’s impossible.
You never bought into atheism because you think that stargates exist, and therefore gods must too?
Legit.
Wouldn't traveling faster than light mean traveling backwards in time?
Once a sentient race figures out how to move through time/space – they've won. They now have infinite space and time to figure out even higher dimensions (alternate realities, timelines, etc…). Thus God(s) becomes inevitable. Why I never bought into the atheist POV.
First! No not first comment, but this negative mass is plagiarizing the Bible. It was first to state the heavens were stretched out. Pesky red shifted light and cosmic background microwaves, has to be dealt with.
Seems related to the question: what is still driving the accelerating cosmic expansion?
The cosmos itself seems to be friendly and conductive to the existence of negative pressure and negative mass. Albeit we haven't seen it in significant amounts down here on Earth yet, just the tiny Casimir forces.
The knowledge of the accelerated expansion brought a seismic change to our sense of what can be real, one that can still be felt across physics and which makes somewhat funny (at least to me) that there is so much resistance to any ideas that assume the universe (and systems at our scale) can be non mass/energy conservative.
Such non conservative systems at our scale may or may not actually exist, but the universe at large doesn't care about such classical mechanistic notions.
This definitely explains most of the anomalies I have experienced every time I tried to play bowling.
Buoyancy would also explain the apparent movement of the stars during inflation because less dense objects (such as virtually hollow spheres, which atoms and molecules are, and planets and stars probably too) pushing on a dense plasma. No negative energy / required.
Tesla the cosmic seer was right, Both Einstein and quantum theories will be fundamentally fixed one day.
Of course, if you just assume that the laws of physics operate on the absolute value of mass, the whole question goes away.
Well, we just have to figure out how to do the wormhole stargate thingy, along with radical life extension (SENS) and we can make Hamilton's Commonwealth a reality!
The Higgs knocked on the parish church door. The priest said "Are you a Higgs Boson?" The H said "yes". The priest said "we don't allow particles in here!" The H said "But without me, you can't have mass."