It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Why Can't we travel faster than the speed of light?

page: 10
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 05:29 PM
reply to post by citizen smith

Yes sir, that is the way it is done.

It is called the heliospheric current sheet (HCS).

We have been building ships for around a hundred years that run off this principle. The "quick and dirty", cheap method of space exploration. All the towers ever see is some data that checks out. Foxes.

But hey, this is after all a conspiracy site, and I could be just another nut, so who's to say?

posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 11:42 PM

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by Grock

The definition of acceleration is change in velocity, Newtonion model anyway. So you can't change velosity with out accelerating.


Again, this is based solely on the laws of physics as we currently understand them, we are still in our infancy in terms of trying to understand the fundamental workings of our universe. Hell, all of our most "reliable" equations and laws are dependent upon an observer.

Theoretically if we can master anti grav propulsion, or grav assist propulsion, and we are able to bend the "space-time fabric" then we could fold it, and jump from one point in space and time, across a huge gap in space and time, appearing to an "observer" along the bent path to travel at incredible, impossible speeds, whereas we may not have moved more than an inch, relative to our own starting position, from our own point of view.

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 12:23 AM
i think we CAN travel faster than the speed of light, however it isnt measured. we share thoughts, ideas, information faster than light. these things are not quantifiable. light is the fastest quantifiable means of travel. its not all there tis. our senses our limited.

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 12:47 AM
Tom Bearden and the O3 physics school belive that FTL travel is possible.
A lot of the answers given here may be true for conventional physics, but there is a growing school of respected physicists who belive that the current laws are not absolute. We have been lied to in every other field, why not physics?

Bearden says it's not so much a case of accelerating faster than light, more going "around or through three space" using scalar wormholes. I'm by no means an expert so I'll bow out here..............

Try a web search on Scalar Physics.

[edit on 29-10-2008 by HiAliens]

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 01:36 PM

Originally posted by HiAliens
We have been lied to in every other field, why not physics?

It isn't that anyone has lied to us about Physics, it more that we tend to fill in the blank spots with what we know or what we think we know. As we move along and our knowledge grows, we learn that certain laws do not apply where we once thought they did, simply because we misunderstood the properties of something or how it is to be applied. It is a matter of the correct interpretation of the applicable laws of physics.
At least that is how I came to understand some things.

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 10:11 PM

Originally posted by whiterabbit85
Theoretically if we can master anti grav propulsion, or grav assist propulsion, and we are able to bend the "space-time fabric"...

A current loop with a rapidly rotating standing waveform does the trick. I personally believe Aether flows with any current, and the answer is staring at you from the wall outlet. But for sake of argument, we can assume the former.

And the standard model must go, wherever old theories go. If there ever will be a UFT, there must be only one particle.

By my words I predict the LHC will fail to detect the Higgs boson. Sorry folks, but you should be puttin' the money here.

posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 12:33 PM
OK here is simple question (probably with simple answer?)

The photon is a particle, which obiviously has energy but no mass. Now this would mean that E=MC^2 wouldnt be true. Any sort of energy causes gravity (including heat). And light is bent by gravity (massless objects couldnt be bent by gravity, right?)

So could someone tell me how is it possible that photon has no mass?

other question, what does the frequency of light mean? alternations of what per second?


posted on Nov, 17 2008 @ 12:49 AM
I have recentley began to wonder what it's all about, us, the planet the solar system the galaxys anf finaly the universe. I don't believe that a being of something could have done this and if something did then why on such a monsteres scale. When it take's light from some distint galaxy hundred of millions of years for it to get here and at this point hundreds of millions to go back. I look at all the wonderful picures of the universe and thats all they will be, becuase like you say we as humans will never travel that fast. I want to travel to another galaxy and I will never I love what I see im the heavens I just would like to part of it. I'm nobody smart or stupid just somone who look's up at the sky and sigh's.

posted on Nov, 25 2008 @ 10:24 PM
reply to post by Warlon

Some scientist believe that we can travel faster than the speed of light using negative matter or negative energy(note:negative matter is not the same as antimatter) but negative energy iv very hard to get and negative matter may not exist in this universe.

Traveling faster than the speed of light does not make sense. At the speed of light, objects have infinite mass and are condensed to nothing, so what would happen after the speed of light?

posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 06:03 PM
reply to post by ALLis0NE

Aren't you overlooking the importance of amplitude? I've thought about this question just recently, and I'm not that knowledgeable, but using logic it seems that they could both be traveling at the same speed if higher frequencies have much smaller amplitudes, while lower frequencies have higher amplitudes.

posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 06:21 PM
If we travel at 99% the speed of light, we weigh ten times as much, our time travels ten times more slowly and we're caning it across the universe. As a result in a year of wear and tear on our bodies, we will have .99*10 = 9.9 light years of travel out of the way, so it would seem as though we were passing faster than the speed of light, but our loved ones at home would be ten years older.

Anyways.... Quantum entanglement if it hasn't been mentioned communicates information over finite distances instantaneously. It's just getting the mass through. Worm Holes may be an answer, but rotating two black holes round each other near the Earth may be a bit dangerous. I heard a story that if you get two capacitor plates with enough charge and pull them apart that you can create a worm hole, but we're going to have to do something pretty mental to bounce around the universe safely.......

posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 06:59 PM
Actually Einsteins theory of General Relativity allows for the possibility of spacecraft being constructed that can transport itself to any place in the universe in a short amount of time, while keep it's velocity near zero.

The ship of course has to warp space and time to do it, but it is allowed by the theory:

posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 07:05 PM
yah to travel vast distances across the universe mean not travelling at all,propulsion and speed are the worst ways to travel these sorts of distances...bending space time,teleportation and more credible and useful ways.Travelling the speed of light is impossible for us,but when you can appear instantinously anywhere in the universe using other methods who cares...

posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 07:25 PM
reply to post by SevenThunders

To the best of my knowledge a way was called wormholes.

posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 07:27 PM
reply to post by Warlon

Without reading everyone else's post I would like to offer my 2 cents...

I think you are right. In an esoteric way.

The current belief was based on 4 dimensions (4th meaning time, not spatial dimension).

But, if we simply fold space and time as many have spoken of, theoretically you could get from point A to point B quicker than a photon could travel (it would travel the full 100 million light years let's say and if space/ time is folded, theoretically you could travel that in seconds). And that's without taking interdimensional travel in to account that's been discussed.

Thanks for the thought provoking topic!

So refreshing after the idiots who post "where can I find a hunk vampire like in twilight"? threads!

[edit on 30-11-2008 by ArcAngel]

posted on Dec, 29 2008 @ 06:23 AM
The speed of light and time travel are totally unrelated - light is just light and sound is just sound - they have no magical qualities...

Personally I think Einstein was a fraud and a quack and his therories pure publicity bunk. Why is the speed of light "the fastest speed" possible? Because no one has yet detected anything traveling at higher speeds, but that should not mean that there is nothing in existence that cannot travel at speeds faster than light, and light is only picked on as an example because we can see it - gets kinda hard measuring speeds of something you can even see. Whats more, the speed of light is variable (not finite) it all depends on what medium the light is traveling through - that fact alone, that light has variable speeds kicks at least half of Einsteins theories right up the butt...

Light that travels through transparent matter does so at a lower speed than c, the speed of light in a vacuum. For example, photons suffer so many collisions on the way from the core of the sun that radiant energy can take about a million years to reach the surface, however, once in open space, a photon takes only 8.3 minutes to reach Earth. Light of different frequencies may travel through matter at different speeds; this is called dispersion. In some cases, it can result in extremely slow speeds of light in matter.

We are all already travelling at 370 miles per second (1 million 332 thousand miles an hour) as our galaxy moves through space relative to other galaxies, and all that bunk about things becoming heavier or shorter or clocks going backward as speed increases hasn't started being noticable yet....

The thing is, light is just photons radiated off, and reflected off surfaces that illuminate and allow organisms/animals/etc. to see - it has no other magic qualities about it other than just that. Attributing time travel, shape changing, arriving before you left, and all that other bunk that Einstein and others proposed is simply just the stuff of childrens fairy stories.

Whether you sit still and do not move, or move around frantically at any speed, time continues its course just like it always has done, the lives of insects are measured in months, the lives of humans are measured in decades, the lives of galaxies are measured in eons.... from our point of view of course... and it will always be measured from our point of view, because we are the ones doing the traveling.

Yes I firmly believe travel at and beyond the speed of light is perfectly possible and achievable, although it will require a propulsion system that we currently do not have.

As for the fact that the galaxies at the edge of the known universe can be observed, we are only seeing the light emitted from them, nothing more - no need for time travel expanations - it is just their light - those galaxies probably ceased to exist eons ago - the fact that we can still see the light emanating from them is just a curious quirk of nature which works to our benefit with astronomy - there is nothing in that which is mystical or magical or worth basing a whole theory upon.

As for needing huge amounts of energy (such as boat loads of jupiters) to power your spacecraft that also is untrue - a spaceship will keep accelerating for as long it has fuel and until it reaches the velocity of it's thrust...

Our own spaceship, Voyager 1, is continuing to accelerate as it moves out of the solar system - its terminal velocity is unknown, but it is on a hyperbolic trajectory and has achieved escape velocity, meaning that its orbit will not return to the inner solar system. It's current speed is 38,016 mph, and subject to the gravitational pull of other interstellar objects its speed will slowly increase over the decades to come.

Perhaps with the discovery and harnessing of more exotic particles, exceptionally powerful thrusters will be possible.

Star Trek might well have touched on the possibe future... Plasma drives, controlled release anti-matter drives, etc... seems the way to go... just keep an eye on hull friction... space is not empty at those speeds.

Just my 1 cents worth... but yeah, damned interesting subject...

posted on Dec, 29 2008 @ 03:34 PM
The only thing known to travel faster than light is light itself, I.E. through different mediums such as cesium atoms.

Personally, I think attempting literal faster than light is pointless because it would requires massive amounts of energy to travel in a linear direction. The key is to invent a way to arrive at the point in space and time without traveling in a straight line. Minimal energy would be required for such a trip, if the technology can exist. I think this is only possible through wormholes or the existence of some type of hyperspace or traveling through other dimensional planes.

Alan Holt from the NASA Johnson Space Center proposed an idea in the 90's of using resonance between coherent, pulsed electromagnetic wave forms and gravitational wave forms. With this kind of propulsion, you could simply resonate to a distant space-time coordinate and arrive there nearly instantaneously. Not only would this allow interstellar travel, but also intergalactic and beyond. This is called field resonance propulsion.

The paper can be found here.

I haven't heard any news about this since it was proposed. I guess either the physics didn't check out or it didn't receive enough attention.

posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 05:04 PM
reply to post by Warlon

Well, Not to say it is IMPOSSIBLE. They know as a theory, there is a way but that way that is impossible. Now the theory is, that an object with no mass CAN go faster than light. And in order to do that, they need to remove the theorized, god particle. A particle that is theoratically supposed to give mass to all particles. ANd there is also no molecule for light, so thats eliminated too. So its prabably ganna be a while b4 anyone can figure beyond light speed.

By the way, Im a 12 yr old kid. Crazy isnt it?

posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 05:48 AM
The only thing we will ever get to move NEAR the speed of light is a signal (maybe) without altering space its self like a worm hole (where all known physics don't apply) we will never put a human from A to B even close to the speed of light.

posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 08:51 PM
reply to post by Warlon

Anyone who tells you that there is no way to travel faster than the speed of light is stupid. We weren't even flying airplanes 110 years ago and a blanket statement like that flies in the face of scientific history. I'm sure there is a way to pull it off, we just haven't figured it out....yet.

new topics

top topics

<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in