June 5, 2000

12:35 PM

Can the speed of light be broken?It's not 1 April, so this actually might be true. It'll be interesting to see the paper in Nature, if and when.
posted by aurelian (5 comments total)

Well, it certainly wasn't an April fools joke when I posted about it last week.

The article referenced in that post also has a lot more in-depth information on the theory behind accelerating light beyond the speed of light.

(hrm. my first criticism of a fellow MeFi. I feel so... entrenched! :-)
posted by cCranium at 3:37 PM on June 5, 2000

And I feel so, so.... used. How can you respect me in the morni---

Whaddaya mean you don't respect me now? :)

Anyways, most base and humble appy-olly-loggys for having spaced on your own link last week. What can I say, someone sent an e-mail to me and it looked interesting...

posted by aurelian at 10:40 PM on June 5, 2000

Heh.

Let alone it means the NY Times is doing better detail than The Times.

(Insert cluck about British journalism, freeways to hell, and Rupert Murdoch here)

posted by aurelian at 10:42 PM on June 5, 2000

heh. Not a problem, especially when you make me chuckle afterwards. :-)

And yeah, I thought it was weird that the NY Times had a better write up also. British news sources (well, the reliable ones :-) are generally pretty good for detail.
posted by cCranium at 9:58 AM on June 6, 2000

Wow! I've been transported back in time! Neat!

For posterity:

LAGADO TRAVELLED BACK IN TIME TO VISIT THIS THREAD ON GMT+10 14:39 June 6th 2001
posted by lagado at 9:39 PM on June 5, 2001