Much of the speed of light discussion focuses on something known as Zero-Point Energy. Here is an article that explains what Zero-Point Energy is and how it might solve the world’s energy problems and take humans to the stars. It was featured in the premeire areospace journal, Aviation Week and Space Technology. Enjoy!
PS
Setterfield references the work of one of the scientists, Hal Putoff, at www.Setterfield.org
Well, I’m certainly no expert on ZPE technology. But I do think the AW&ST article is pretty one-sided (no quotes from the “critics” who classify it as “near-science fiction”). Actually, I suspect the vast majority of physicists would be in this camp. And the “Kondratieff interval” discussion on p. 51 is just silly. For a more skeptical perspective and background information on Puthoff and the ZPE efforts, see Martin Gardner’s article http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-20615406.html.
It also seems to me that the “Kondratieff interval” is far too subjective to produce useful, specific predictions. Obviously it works well using 20/20 hindsight.
Regarding the AW&ST main ZPE article, in a similar way the Higgs field/boson may also be considered speculation beyond the pale for many scientists. In fact in correspondence with John Hauptman (one of the Iowa State professors who voted against giving tenure to Dr. Gonzales and at least had the guts to admit that ID was the cause for his decision) Hauptman told me that he does not believe the Higgs field/boson exists, though three of his PhD students spent time at Fermilab looking for it. The Casimir effect mentioned in AW&ST seems to indicate that ZPE has at least as much supporting evidence as does the Higgs mechanism, yet despite doubts lots of cash is going into trying to confirm or disconfirm Higgs.
BBC-Horizon-The Six Billion Dollar Experiment (briefly tells what is not known about the Standard Model, which appears to require the Higgs mechanism)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6553030919624041877&q=BBC+horizon&total=141&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=9
One of the physicists in the video, Brian Cox, says the Higgs field is “almost like treacle” i.e. molasses. (In a lecture by another physicist the Higgs field is speculated to have a density of a trillion tons per cc.) Moreover, Cox also has an unorthodox background for a physicist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Cox_%28physicist%29
It seems that curious ideas and personal quirks of scientists are part of the fabric of science. Newton, in addition to being a creationist, was an alchemist. The idea of innumerable parallel universes may seem preposterous but there are physicists who hold to such views.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2001/parallelunitrans.shtml
While the LHC at CERN will look for more than Higgs phenomena it still is a huge investment for information that may have little direct application in the short term. According to what I’ve read there is also some trepidation that a black hole may be created wreaking who-knows-what havoc. In any case if substantial funds go into ZPE research by aerospace firms then doubtless there will also be discoveries even if ZPE cannot be tapped.
Is searching for Higgs or studying ZPE worth it? I personally am pessimistic for philosophical reasons.
Best Regards
“Star Gate” (The television series) has already made use of this theory in its story line, with “ZPM” (zero-point modules) being used to power the advanced technology of “the Ancients”.
Maybe we should start looking for one buried under the Antarctic ice to shorten the research time!
Please Note:
ATTENTION! YOUNG COSMOS HAS MOVED!
Salvador