It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Let's say a person could withstand the serious pressures at that type of speed.
Let's also say there was the technology to get to those speeds without ripping the ship apart.
originally posted by: SharonGlass
a reply to: TerryDon79
Let's say a person could withstand the serious pressures at that type of speed.
Let's also say there was the technology to get to those speeds without ripping the ship apart.
I assumed that if it was a gradual acceleration up to and past the speed of light, there would be reasonably comfortable pressures for both man and device?
I know time and speed are relative, and that time stops at light speed (theoretically?) but what happens when you break that barrier? Is Einsteins' relativity wrong in that nothing can go faster than light? Or what?
Thanks for sharing your though experiment with me.
Your own source says what would happen, that the disc would fly apart when transverse velocity exceeds about the speed of sound in the disc material. Even assuming a non-existent material with no such limitations, the below posters are right in agreeing with Einstein that achieving a transverse velocity of light would require infinite energy, even if they disagree with Einstein on a minor interpretation point. Applying an infinite amount of energy is equally impossible as making the disc out of a non-existent material. So how far you can go in the thought experiment depends on how much reality you want to discard. If you keep discarding more and more reality I suppose you can keep going but I'm not sure how that's useful.
originally posted by: SharonGlass
What happens here? Should I brush up on the Ehrenfest Paradox even though it assumes there is absolute rigidity ?
Not according to Einstein, but Richard Feynman was a respected physicist who popularized that idea even though Einstein said it's not mass that increases with velocity, but momentum. I think Einstein would say Feynman mis-applied the E=mc² equation as that's not really the correct equation for objects with momentum.
originally posted by: Phage
Mass also increases with velocity.
The rest of this is still true either way, since it requires increasing amounts of energy to give the object increasing amounts of energy.
This prevents acceleration to the speed of light. It would require increasing amounts of energy, to the point of an effective infinite level.
Again, not according to Einstein, but according to people who apparently mis-applied a simpler equation, instead of using the full equation with momentum term, as explained in the linked thread.
originally posted by: TerryDon79
Plus, the faster you go, the higher your mass would be.
That depends on whether you believe Albert Einstein or Richard Feynman. While I have great respect for Richard Feynman's work, I have even more respect for Einstein's ideas on relativity, so I would tend to agree with Einstein on this point.
originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: Arbitrageur
So mass doesn't increase with speed? I thought that was a commonly accepted thing? I'll have to look into that later so I get my facts straight.
Damn you making me do research
The correct equation roughly says in English that the total energy of an object is a function of its mass and a function of its momentum, added together. The mass doesn't increase with velocity, but the momentum does.
originally posted by: TerryDon79
One question. Is it actually energy that increases and not mass?
originally posted by: aethertek
What was is no longer there, so you can't go back to it.
Reverse time travel is a cosmological constraint that can't happen.
Regardless of whatever velocity you obtain in any direction, how would that undo all that is & was.
K~