• 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.

Traveling faster then the speed of light?

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
there was a discovery somewhere in the galaxy that some sort of gas partical blasted out of the black hole at twice the speed of light.....about 4-5 years ago, someone wanna google it up?
 
The reasons why an objsects relativistic mass increases with velocity, is becasue the propulsion method, or 'energy transfer system' used isn't very efficient. The porblem here, is that NO propulsion system we have is efficient enough to get anywhere near 100% - (even things like the paticle accelerators arn't good enough for what we need, since the masses they deal with (rest, not relativistic) are not large enough) - and it's the 'leakage' (energy going where we don't want it, or building up in the wrong place), that causes all the problems.

If wee could transfer energy to an object in an efficient as possible manner - i.e. at a consistent direction and rate to the whole of the object, then it's reletavistic mass shouldn't be a problem - (until it hits something...). Unfortuantely the ONE force we know of which even comes close to this is one we have yet to fully figure out...

Gravity... It may or may not be able to accelerate objects beyond the speed of light - but it remains our best hope for doing so...
 
Just to debunk the train/plane at c-5, and the person who starts jogging at 5mph.

Given currently accepted math/laws of physics, your mass would be so great at that point that I seriously doubt you'd be jogging anywhere.

Just food for thought.

🙂

IMHO, traveling past the speed of light is easy, once you add a few more dimensions to the universe, or pop into one that already has them.
 
Originally posted by: eastvillager
Just to debunk the train/plane at c-5, and the person who starts jogging at 5mph.

Given currently accepted math/laws of physics, your mass would be so great at that point that I seriously doubt you'd be jogging anywhere.

Just food for thought.

🙂

IMHO, traveling past the speed of light is easy, once you add a few more dimensions to the universe, or pop into one that already has them.
Click to expand...


LOL!
Sorry, it simply does not work that way. To the traveler there is no increase in mass, there is no change in how your clock works or the length of your ruler. Further, there is no speed limit, you can accelerate to your hearts content as long as you wish. What you will notice is that the signal you are using to communicate with your home base will change to longer and longer wave lengths and your distance from home base will not increase in a manner predicted by the laws of Newton. One other thing you will notice is that no matter how long or how hard you accelerate you will always measure the speed of light to be c and your flashlight will always work. So you simply cannot travel at the speed of light, because light always propagates at c, without regard to any motion you may have with respect to some other body.
 
Originally posted by: Mercurien
To state it in simpler words, vector addition isn't exact, it's an approximation.

If you have a train going .9 * the speed of light and you throw a baseball at .9 * the speed of light, you can't directly add the two speeds to get 1.8 * the speed of light. This is where the Lorentz transform mentioned before comes in to play.

Simply put, a train going .9 * the speed of light that has a man that throws a baseball at .9 * the speed of light that has a flea on it that throws a pebble at .9 * the speed of light, that pebble still isn't going the speed of light. It will instead be .99999999999999999 * the speed of light because you can't simply use vector addition to find the final velocity.
Click to expand...

yup, for velocities close to c you can't use simple addition of lengths of velocity vectors, you need to use:

u' = (u + v)/(1 + (u*v)/c^2)

so if you have train moving 0.9c and you throw something off the train in the direction of movement that also has relative speed of 0.9c (in the train "space"... yes i k now, my english sucks) you have:

u' = (0.9c + 0.9c)/(1 + (0.81c^2)/c^2) = 1.8c/(1 + 0.81) = 1.8c/1.81 ~ 0.995c
 
Everything in this thread has been said at least once, just let it die already.

If you have a question or a comment, there is a high possibility that someone else has already said it.

</subscription to thread that should have died ages ago>
 
Originally posted by: Idleuser
and god created the universe but we can't prove that 😉
Click to expand...


depends on your interpretation of God. all i know is, He will always leave something hidden, i.e. molecule > atom > proton > quark > ?.. ? .., ? = God.
 
Ok, So If I was on a space ship in a geosynchronous orbit around the earth which I know to be 11,070 Km/hour (6,880 Miles/hour) = 3075 meters/second. If I point a torch in the direction of motion around the earth then is the light leaving the torch traveling faster than the speed of light. Furthermore if I turn around 180 degrees is the light leaving the torch at less than the speed of light to compensate? I think not, light travels at the speed of light (sorry for the recursion) So I believe that the speed of light can be broken. Another idea is that if you are at the speed of light for less than planck time (5.391 * 10 to the power -43 seconds) then molecules will not break down as the electrons will not at any time stop. This was part of an interesting debate I had with my physics teacher.

What are your views?
 
Originally posted by: MetalStorm
Everything in this thread has been said at least once, just let it die already.

Hold on a sec now. What if you shrunk down to the size of a flea, and then hitched a ride on a bullet and then shined your flashlight from that. Then you get the speed of light plus the speed of the bullet. This is a lot different than travelling the speed of light and then trying to shoot a bullet from that. Or some nutty stuff involving trains.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by: AbsoluteParadigm
Not sure about matter, but quantum states have been transmitted faster than light. Actually it's "teleported", as in traveling distance in zero time. I would assume that's faster than the speed of light. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
But that's not actually traveling, is it? It is teleportation, which has no speed and travels no distance.

 
I remember my 6th grade science teacher telling us that we could not travel the speed of light because the time is slower in space so you can never hit the speed of light
 
I know how.. if you're running, and you turn on a flashlight... then that light would be going faster than the speed of light by however fast you're running. I'm so smart.
 
Wow, I see someone else uploaded this picture as well... I just deleted it the other day too...

According to CNN, it's possible to travel almost 18 times the speed of light... It's already been done too...

 
OK i get how it takes infinite energy to reach the speed of light... It sort of reminds me of calculus and limits... But I was thinking that it only takes infinite energy to reach the exact speed of light, but does that mean it takes infinite energy to go faster than the speed of light ? Or is it possible that FTL is less than infinite energy ?
 
Originally posted by: TuxDave
If you were on a train that travelled the speed of light, the train would appear to have a length of 0 to a standing person. If you were on that 0 length train and you took a step forward (which looks like 0 distance), the standing person would still think you were all moving at the speed of light.
Click to expand...

Excellent explanation - there's no way to measure, but it IS likely that faster-than-light speeds are possible.
 
light travels slower in certain mediums, in those mediums you can exceed the speed of light, the speed of light in a vacuum is unattainable
 
If you are going the speed of light, which cant be done, you must have 0 mass, then you can go anywhere in the universe in 0 time at all. We had a unit in special relativity in physics. fun stuff. Sorry if this has already been posted.
 
Originally posted by: flawlssdistortn
Actually, math is the only absolute we have, as decendents from western thought. It's like an extension of human logic.
Click to expand...


Although even it is not an absolute because of the incompleteness theorem.
 
Originally posted by: carloboy
you can travel faster then thee speed of light if you fold time/space.

whats the fastest way from point a to point b on a 2D plane?
straight line? no, of course you fold the distance between and A and B. i think its possible!
Click to expand...

If you want to move 1 meter to your right you can start walking to the left and walk around the earth until you reach that point. You can also step one meter to your right. That does not mean you suddenly moved 40,000 km in that one step, it just means you moved one meter. By folding time/space you do not increase your speed, you just shorten the distance.
 
Originally posted by: jhu
you're referring to quantum entanglement. however, i don't think we can pass information this way.
Click to expand...

Because of the Heisenberg's uncertainty principle?
There must be a way round that...
We need Star Trek's Heisenberg compensator
lol no seriously... there might be a way we haven't discovered yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top