this is where most of these theories including Einstiens fall apart.
Perception has no place in science. "relativity" is a concept that doesn't hold water.
the speed of light *is*
time *is* it doesn't matter if the human perception of it has changed, time itself has not.

Does this mean I can download porn faster?

Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (published in 1927) ?

Eventually yes, as soon as "sculpted light" is commercialized. It will take a while. Then again, given how fast semiconductor speed ramps up and if there's a huge enough market, the timeframe will probably be sooner rather than later.

Just? Says she did it in 1998.

as I said, the perception is not the reality. Man's ability to measure may improve his perception but it does not alter or change that which is.

Actually that's demonstrabally false :) :2 cents: Or more accuratly the biggest disconnect between Newtonian and Quantum physics.

And whoever posted this really needs to re-read what einstein actually wrote before slamming it, as what this lady demonstrated has nothing to do with Einstein's claims. In any event parts of einstein's theories have been proven wrong\incomplete before.

Shit all you need to prove you can change the speed of light is a glass lense.

that's really great nice posture.....:)

yes, dick, over icecream. I did it. :winkwink:

And like Mason posted - this is where your "theory" falls apart - the speed of light *is not* :) - it is only based on mans' ability to measure using the best instruments (and the most accurate) that he has at that particular time in history - using the tools that are available today (pulse lasers and atomic clocks) we still see the effect of the slowing down of the rotation of the earth (an effect of the tides/oceans movements) causing the measurement of a second changing slightly - therefore it IS all relative

If you want to go to the philosophical side of things and say that time is a constant but mans ability to measure it changes daily - then I would say you have a good argument - but that has nothing to do with his perception - just his limitations :)

12stein? :) Naw to jewish heheheh

pronounce it "stine" and not "steen" and I'll be ok.

This reminds me of that early segment in "Young Frankenstein."

It's pronounced "FrankenSTEEN"...

"EYEgore" please.. not "EEgor"

:1orglaugh :thumbsup

dude, it makes all the difference

Never say never ?

Just in case you're actually interested ;)

Stanford Confirms it with particle accelerators.
http://www2.slac.stanford.edu/vvc/th...elativity.html

In particle accelerators, particles are moving very close to the speed of light where the length and time effects are large. This has allowed us to clearly verify that length contraction and time dilation do occur.

GPS Satellites operation also confirms it:
http://www.physicscentral.com/writers/2000/will.html

But at 38 microseconds per day, the relativistic offset in the rates of the satellite clocks is so large that, if left uncompensated, it would cause navigational errors that accumulate faster than 10 km per day! GPS accounts for relativity by electronically adjusting the rates of the satellite clocks, and by building mathematical corrections into the computer chips which solve for the user's location. Without the proper application of relativity, GPS would fail in its navigational functions within about 2 minutes.

Hafele and Keating Experiment with atomic clocks on airplanes:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...iv/airtim.html

These results provide an unambiguous empirical resolution of the famous clock "paradox" with macroscopic clocks."

Nice find, Mason!:thumbsup