Re: Discussion on tachyons

On 03/30/2024 07:57 PM, gharnagel wrote:

mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>

On Sunday, October 29, 2023 at 7:20:14 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:

>
On Sunday, October 29, 2023 at 5:21:11 PM UTC-6, mitchr...@gmail.com

wrote: > > > > Would traveling at c not give infinite kinetic energy?

>
That's what theory says and what experiment confirms.

>
Then why does it not  happen?
Every photon would have it.
But clearly they do not.
Only a finite energy manifests as real gary...
How does an atom absorb infinite energy?

>

Mitchell Raemsch

>
There's an example of a question from a great physicist:  assume infinite
energy in a photon and then ask why an atom can have infinite energy.
>
I'm amazed at the lack of interest in the subject of this thread (see
the o.p.)
I've been reading some papers by Charles Schwartz:
>
"A Consistent Theory of Tachyons with Interesting Physics for Neutrinos,"
(2022). doi.org/10.3390/sym14061172
>
"Tachyon Interactions," Symmetry 2023, 15, 209. doi.org/10.3390/sym15010209
>
"Two Proposed Experiments for the Tachyon-Neutrino Theory of Dark Matter,"
doi: 10.20944/preprints202312.0775.v1.
>
I was thinking about coming up with a Dirac equation for tachyons and
Schwartz
has done it!  He's also done significant work on the causality problem.
>
https://physics.berkeley.edu/people/faculty/charles-schwartz

Neutrino physics is mostly supersymmetric partnerinos,
as particles and low energy particles, they mostly reflect
that they mostly reflect, when the space flexes, it's just
all the fleeting potentials bending the other way.
I.e., because it's a particle model, these things exist
somewhere in the field number formalism of all space in
the usual quantum field idea, and the potentials are as
of super-classical models in the of usual fluid models
with a default superfluidity on the outside (or inside,
where it is) the lower-energy higher-order.
So, first is to appreciate that neutrino physics
as a model of particles is in a field theory with
particle/wave duality, and, space/frame symmetry,
then light has its own special case in that the
light-like, then that photinos and these kinds of
things, still only reflect continuous completions
of superclassical models that after equipping the
mathematical model of the fluid model with superclassical
components, very naturally arrives at neutrino physics,
including both low-energy particles that are tachyonic,
and as well, the linear and Galilean and space-contraction,
the apparently super-luminal, globally, vis-a-vis the
constant propagation of light, locally.
Or, SR is local, and the great apparatus of electron
physics after the ultraviolet catastrophe, really
does have a great apparatus of neutrino physics,
an infrared perestroika, and tachyons as particles
vis-a-vis the tachyonic of waves, besides Brehmsstrahlung
and Cerenkov and such and besides photinos and besides
superluminal jets, mostly requires a superclassical
model so that natural units result having a coherent
superfluidity in the mathematical models, that
mathematics _owes_ physics.
Mathematics _owes_ physics this because mathematics _owns_ physics.
It's a continuum mechanics, ....