Re: speed of light versus c, again
- From: "Josef Matz" <josefmatz@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 11:43:57 +0100
"Tom Roberts" <tjroberts@xxxxxxxxxx> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:NGGsf.41206$q%.6282@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> argon wrote:
> > it seams that the most selfestablished around here
> > still consider c the speed of light in vacuum as the max
> > speed in anywhere
>
> Certainly not -- you got it wrong. But c is the _local_ limiting speed
> for any material, energy, or information transfer. And my "c" is not
> necessarily the speed of light, but rather is the invariant speed of the
> Lorentz group.
>
let away information transfer. We know that it can be double the speed of
light. And it can be
near infinite on short distances.
>
> > but they know they are wrong becus group velocity can
> > reach infinity
>
> Sure. So can phase velocity. So what? -- the front velocity of any EM
> wave never exceeds c, and both energy and information transfer travel at
> the front velocity.
That statement is simply not true. A signal travels with group velocity.
Inclusive front if it has
the same frequency.
Joe
>
>
> Tom Roberts tjroberts@xxxxxxxxxx
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: speed of light versus c, again
- From: Tom Roberts
- Re: speed of light versus c, again
- From: Bill Hobba
- Re: speed of light versus c, again
- References:
- speed of light versus c, again
- From: argon
- Re: speed of light versus c, again
- From: Tom Roberts
- speed of light versus c, again
- Prev by Date: Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
- Next by Date: Re: speed of light versus c, again
- Previous by thread: Re: speed of light versus c, again
- Next by thread: Re: speed of light versus c, again
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|