• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Gamma and irrational numbers???

D

Darien

Platinum Member
Alright, all this stuff about going back in time when traveling faster than the speed of light.

I don't get it.

I mean, if you travel at the speed of light, what happens to time? And then, if you go beyond the speed of light, you have an irrational value for mass (and energy???) as well as time.

Can someone explain to me?

(I'm a newbie when it comes to modern physics. so if i'm insulting anyone for such a trivial question, sorry)

have a nice day 🙂

Darien
 
1. It's impossible for you to go beyond the speed of light.
2. Once you reach the speed of light, time, relative to you, stops. You would freeze up pretty much until the time when you drop to sublight speed. To you, not even a microsecond would've passed, but it may well have been 10 or a billion years since you started to go at the speed of light.
 
1. Speed is relative. You can't move in space faster than the speed of light relative to someone else.
2. If you went at just under the speed of light, you wouldn't notice time slowing down for you. You'd notice everything else slowing down relative to you.
3. What happens when you go beyond the speed of light is speculation.
4. Also, you are, technically, always moving at the speed of light, only your speed is split up amongst the dimensions x, y, z, and t. Light as we see it is moving through space only. That's why if you move at the speed of light through space, time essentially stops. It's sort of like tunneling through an energy barrier. One moment you're on one side, the next moment you're on the other side.
 
On a side note, I have no idea what happens when you're moving at relativistic speeds in the presence of gravity.
 


<< 4. Also, you are, technically, always moving at the speed of light, only your speed is split up amongst the dimensions x, y, z, and t. Light as we see it is moving through space only. That's why if you move at the speed of light through space, time essentially stops. >>



Interesting... i've never heard that before, but it makes sense.
 


<< Light as we see it is moving through space only. >>



How is this the case? Light propagates through time, doesn't it? I.e. light doesn't have an instantaneous existance?

Please explain.... I understand the moving through x,y,z, and t part. But since light does move in time (I'm hypothesizing), it would seem then that the 'speed of light' is SQRT(c^2+tau^2) where tau is light's speed in the direction of the time vector. Okay so maybe it's not a Pythagorean relationship, but you get what I mean... if light has a velocity in the space dimensions and a velocity in the time dimension, and time is orthogonal to the space dimensions, then the speed of light includes both time components and space components.

But wait: time is a necessary part of the definition of speed. What would speed be, if one could have a speed through time? Arggg head..... imploding

Also what does the title of this thread have to do with what we're talking about? When I read the title, I thought we were going to be talking about the gamma function.....
 


<< And then, if you go beyond the speed of light, you have an irrational value for mass (and energy???) as well as time. >>



Perhaps you mean imaginary?

Like a fine wine, a photon knows no time. As weird as is may seem according to Special Relativity, in a photon's frame of reference, both time and distance are contracted to nothing. So it is ok that it takes a photon no time to get anywhere in the universe, because it is already there. Kind'a hard to swallow, isn't it.
 
We are all "already there". "Reality" is just a mutually agreed upon set of rules we impose on our existence in order to communicate with each other. Notice that some of these rules are universal throughout time....................and some are not. Some cultures, and some ages, have different conceptions of what is "real". And might not "insanity" just be another valid, but less popular conception?
 


<< I mean, if you travel at the speed of light, what happens to time? And then, if you go beyond the speed of light, you have an irrational value for mass (and energy???) as well as time. >>


You are asking an impossible question.
I'll quote an explanation from one of my previous posts on a similar subject:


<<
Relativistic energy is defined as: (rest energy + kinetic energy)
E = m(c^2) + m(c^2)(gamma-1)
gamma = 1/sqrt(1-(v/c)^2)

so, the rest energy, we dont have to apply, just m(c^2)(gamma-1)
suppose you want to go .99c
then you have gamma = 1/sqrt(1-(.99)^2) = ~7
so youd have to put in 6 times the rest energy to get it to go .99c, which is a whole lot!
make it .999c and you have to put in 21 times the rest energy
make it .9999c and you have to put in 69 times the rest energy
make it .99999c and you have to put in 222 times the rest energy
make it .999999c and you have to put in 706 times the rest energy
make it .9999999c and you have to put in 2235 times the rest energy

And this is assuming 100% efficency and no friction!
This is why its only practical to make a single molecule travel at .99c or so, and those particle accelerators use a whole lot of power to do it.
 >>


One can never reach the speed of light because in all equations, as v approaches c, you encounter a vertical asymptote.

you can, however, talk about what happens when v gets very large.

Regardless of your reference frame, a beam of light will always be moving at speed c.
If your friend stands with a flashlight and turns it on, he will see the beam of light moving at speed c
if you are moving along the same direction as the beam of light at speed 0.75c, you will see the beam of light moving past you at speed c, not .25c.

suppose your friend is on a rocketship and you are on yours. you begin to accelerate faster and faster away from him. as your speed relative to him approaches c, this is what will happen:
time dilation: he will see you moving more and more slowly (assuming he has taken proper correcions for doppler effect - it is not an optical illision, you really will be moving slower)
length contraction: according to you, you will see the universe around you contract, but only in the direction of your motion.

this will become more severe as your v becomes very close to c, but you can never reach c because it would take an infinite amount of energy.
 
Quoting Shalmanese from the other thread:



<< Sighj, We need a "deep thoughts about the fundamental questions of our exisitance and a whole bunch of theoretical physics" forums >>



Darn tootin'. "Theoretical Physics, Logic, Probability, Math, and The Nature of Time, Matter, and the Universe" or something. HT seems to be the best fit out of the available forums for this sort of thing, but it's really kind of a mix between OT and HT.
 
OK, an object with non-zero rest mass cannot go faster than the speed of light. However, that does not mean that particles can't exist which go faster than the speed of light AS THEIR NATURE.

However, for those of us in the tardyon universe, tt takes an infinite amount of energy to go as fast as the speed of light. As you approach the speed of light, you observe time around you as slowing down. The people around you at rest observe your clocks as being slower than yours too. So, who is right? Well, as long as you maintain your velocity relative to the observers, you both are. 😕 However, if you turned around (say, to come back to earth), some "bending" occurs, because your clocks will be behind those of the people on earth.

Now, get this... How do you fit a 20 ft poll into a 10 foot car port (open at both ends)? You accelerate it to like .866c. At this velocity, a guy on top of the car port will see the poll that is normally 20 feet long as being 10 feet long. OK, fine... Well, what does the guy on the poll see? He sees a car port coming at him with velocity .866c. This car port is normal 10 feet deep, but the guy on the poll sees it as 5 ft deep. So, the guy on top of the car port sees the poll fit inside perfectly for an instant, but at that same instant, the guy on the poll cannot observe the same event. What the heck happens?

I personally think God would cry foul and end the universe at that point, but thats just my opinion.

Ryan
 


<< OK, an object with non-zero rest mass cannot go faster than the speed of light. However, that does not mean that particles can't exist which go faster than the speed of light AS THEIR NATURE. >>


um.. ever hear of the universal speed limit? nothing moves faster than light relative to an observer. there has yet to be any indication of a particle of any type that can move faster than c. piles of evidence showing slower, but never faster, and very few at.



<< Now, get this... How do you fit a 20 ft poll into a 10 foot car port (open at both ends)? You accelerate it to like .866c. At this velocity, a guy on top of the car port will see the poll that is normally 20 feet long as being 10 feet long. OK, fine... Well, what does the guy on the poll see? He sees a car port coming at him with velocity .866c. This car port is normal 10 feet deep, but the guy on the poll sees it as 5 ft deep. So, the guy on top of the car port sees the poll fit inside perfectly for an instant, but at that same instant, the guy on the poll cannot observe the same event. What the heck happens?

I personally think God would cry foul and end the universe at that point, but thats just my opinion. >>



You're starting your analogy by looking at both the car and the pole in YOUR frame of reference. As if they stood still relative to you and let you break out the tape measure. All three would be in the same frame of reference.
However, in order to get the car and pole to move .886c relative to each other, you must accelerate one or both. When you undergo acceleration, you feel a force which indicates you violated the frame of refererence definition necessary for Lorentz contraction calculations.
At that point, you can no longer say your original measurements are correct. You can stay still relative to the car and still say it's a 10 foot opening, or you can stay still relative to the pole and say it's 20 ft long. You cannot, however, use the basic Lorentz contractions equations and resize the other object. The other object, the reference object, or both accelerated, which screws up the frame of reference viewpoints during that time and results in different sizes than originally measured when you return to completely zero-forces frames of reference.
I don't know the exact calculations (far too lazy to dig out books), but I can assure you there is no paradox. God (if He exists) would not cry foul and end the universe.
Now, if the pole is already headed towards the car at .886c relative to the car and from the car's frame of reference, the pole is measured as 10 feet, then that's a different story.
 


<<

<< OK, an object with non-zero rest mass cannot go faster than the speed of light. However, that does not mean that particles can't exist which go faster than the speed of light AS THEIR NATURE. >>


um.. ever hear of the universal speed limit? nothing moves faster than light relative to an observer. there has yet to be any indication of a particle of any type that can move faster than c. piles of evidence showing slower, but never faster, and very few at.



<< Now, get this... How do you fit a 20 ft poll into a 10 foot car port (open at both ends)? You accelerate it to like .866c. At this velocity, a guy on top of the car port will see the poll that is normally 20 feet long as being 10 feet long. OK, fine... Well, what does the guy on the poll see? He sees a car port coming at him with velocity .866c. This car port is normal 10 feet deep, but the guy on the poll sees it as 5 ft deep. So, the guy on top of the car port sees the poll fit inside perfectly for an instant, but at that same instant, the guy on the poll cannot observe the same event. What the heck happens?

I personally think God would cry foul and end the universe at that point, but thats just my opinion. >>



You're starting your analogy by looking at both the car and the pole in YOUR frame of reference. As if they stood still relative to you and let you break out the tape measure. All three would be in the same frame of reference.
However, in order to get the car and pole to move .886c relative to each other, you must accelerate one or both. When you undergo acceleration, you feel a force which indicates you violated the frame of refererence definition necessary for Lorentz contraction calculations.
At that point, you can no longer say your original measurements are correct. You can stay still relative to the car and still say it's a 10 foot opening, or you can stay still relative to the pole and say it's 20 ft long. You cannot, however, use the basic Lorentz contractions equations and resize the other object. The other object, the reference object, or both accelerated, which screws up the frame of reference viewpoints during that time and results in different sizes than originally measured when you return to completely zero-forces frames of reference.
I don't know the exact calculations (far too lazy to dig out books), but I can assure you there is no paradox. God (if He exists) would not cry foul and end the universe.
Now, if the pole is already headed towards the car at .886c relative to the car and from the car's frame of reference, the pole is measured as 10 feet, then that's a different story. >>



First off, there is no scientific proof or disproof saying that particles can't go faster than c if they were created that way at the beginning of time. If that is how these particles exist, then there is no foul.

Second, the car port and poll paradox is just that... a paradox. Just because you accelerate the poll does not mean that you've changed its physical nature beyond that of a length contraction. One could theorize that a poll already exists traveling at .866c. The observer riding on the poll measures it as 20 feet long. The guy on the car port observes a 10 ft long poll and a 10 ft deep car port. The guy on the poll observes a 5 ft deep car port. It doesn't matter whether or not the poll has been accelerated. I took a short course in special relativity, and this is one of the topics our prof discussed. I'm not saying that is absolute proof that I'm right, but I'm not pulling this out of my arse either.

Ryan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top