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

reply to post by Warlon


I think they did get particles to near C , however they started to give off electrons as they got faster. meaning that the resulting energy that would get the particle past C was lost to the electron shedding...

I may have misunderstood the result of the experiment review that I had read however

Think about it.

1. As you get closer to the speed of light your mass grows towards infinite.
2. you use mass to fuel your engines
3. as mass grows towards infinite would not your mass of fuel do so also?
4. would not infinite mass/fuel = infinite power?

E=MC^2 and M=M0/(Sq Rt (1-(V^2/C^2)))

SO:

E= (M0(Sq Rt (1-(V^2/C^2)))C^2

Know items:
C = 300,000 Km/sec
C^2= 90,000,000,000 Km/sec
M0= 1,000 Kg (Mass at rest) (Picked a mass to use)

Unknown:
V – Velocity (keep it as KM/sec so has not to mess with numbers)
E – Energy

E= (1,000/(Sq Rt (1-(V^2/90,000,000,000))) x 90,000,000,000

V= 1 Km/Sec
E= 90,000,000,000,500.00 (Don’t remember the units)
M= 1,000 Kg

V=10 Km/Sec
E= 90,000,000,050,000.00
M= 1000.0000005 Kg

V= 100 Km/Sec
E= 90,000,005,000,000.42
M= 1000.00005 Kg

V= 299,999 Km/Sec
E= 34,856,879,163,278,157.79
M= 387,298.66 Kg


The question is how much energy is needed to accelerate the mass?
Also we need to look at mass is used to get to what speed and subtract that from the M0.

Any one know the amount of energy needed to accelerate 1000 Kg 1 Km/Sec?

Lots of spitballin' and throwing around buzzwords on this thread. Here's a thought:


SoL Limits - It's The Math
What makes theoretical travel by particles or people with mass to the speed of light is the math. As 'amitheone' points out, the equations require the mass to approach infinity as the velocity approaches the SoL. Since our current appreciation for the concepts require math, it's self-limiting.


No, It's The Paradigm
But the 'real' truth is that we are wrapped too tightly in our paradigm as three dimensional beings.

Just as a two-dimensional being can't go through a wall in his dimension, to a three dimensional being that line he sees as a wall is no obstacle at all.

Similarly, when we understand the fifth and sixth dimensions, we will find that physical travel will not require 'movement' or at least not the type that we understand in our limited three dimensional world. Until then, not even the smartest minds can describe it, or even understand the terminology. Just as a two dimensional being has no word or concept for 'up' or 'down'.


The SoL is Much Too Slow
However, in terms of exploration and sensation and experience, the breakthrough will come when we can move throughout the Galaxy at the 'speed of thought', because the speed of light is much too slow.

Note that to even move about our solar system at SoL speeds takes hours.

In the distant future, here's how it will be done, at least in our Galaxy.


It's The Information, Not The Physical Travel
Using a type of rate-limited Von Neumann probe, the galaxy, (then, possibly the Universe) would be mapped. This would take about 1 million years to map the Galaxy.

Using super-computers this mapping would be entered into a massive database, with ever-increasing detail, including planetary data and information about the flora and fauna, if any exists.


The Speed of Thought
Humans, or our ancestors would just strap on a Virtual interface, helmet or suit or whatever the advanced prototype would be and using this exquisite database, travel to any star system at the speed of thought, or millions of times the 'speed of light'.

There will be no need to physically travel the distance, no need to waste time speeding up or decelerating, then messing around orbiting and landing. We will do all that in a greatly accelerated manner.

It will contain such detail and precision and be without danger to the point where everyone will find it infinitely preferable to traveling at such slow-poke speeds as 300,000km/sec.

After all, it's not the 'travel' that intrigues us, it's the information acquired.


Can We Map the Universe?
Once scenario would be that in each Galaxy where there is a Type I, or near Type II civilization, they'd also map their own galaxies, nearly simultaneously, so that a complete virtual database of the Universe would be possible. If, at some point, information could be shared, and the transmission could be propagated through extra-dimensional means, at some point we would all have a copy of the Virtual Universe. As each civilization's data came in the Virtual Universe would become more complete and detailed.


Information versus Propulsion?
One possible outcome of this 'sharing' of information may possibly be new ways to view 'Space-Time' and methods of propulsion, but I would argue that physically traveling to distant points will always be too slow. Even at many times the speed of light velocities, we couldn't "visit" within the predicted lifespan of the Universe, let alone the lifespan of a typical carbon-based lifeform. Thus a new paradigm is required.

With virtual travel, one could conceivably 'travel' extensively and gain the experience and knowledge desired without being burdened with long periods fof confinement in 'ships' in microgravity, and suffering the effects of radiation and other dangers of space flight.

2 cents.

Well you can, it is called Astral Projection.
Your spirit has no mass and doesn't obey the laws of this universe.

[edit on 25-3-2008 by TheOracle]

reply to post by TheOracle


If you're claiming Astral Projection, I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter.

In fact..., I believe I just said that above (Virtual travel)?






[edit on 25-3-2008 by Badge01]

Einstein was not right about everything and i dont know why people cannot separate fact from theory. Human understanding of the universe and sub atomic particles is in early stages and developing. A lot of people in the science community treat einstein like GOD and take every thoery as gospel, instead of investigating things from a fresh point of view, they are busy trying to proof einstein right.

A photon has no rest mass, it is important to understant quantum mechanics and the fundamental fabric of the universe, before reaching such conclusion

ok this is what i got so far. light is part partical and part wave. the "speed limit" is the SoL. what is it in reference to? also a blackhole can "pull" light so it doesnt reach us so the hole itself does travel more than light. black holes can be made in a lab(though only breifly),which i dont believe they launch particals at SoL and they have pretty much infinite mass/energy (doesnt matter at these state real). what if two particals and/or waves were to pass by each other in space (if the partical was only a little denser than light)? would enough "intersections" cause an in balance or a blackhole. just some thoughts

also i dont think humans will ever travel at the speed of light. i think the closes would be mapping our body to the sub atomic level then sending a "signal" or a wave to another location and they remake "you" out of loose particals. just hope there is no interference .

i been wanting to make a thread on this but i get lazy.i have given this some thought though

[edit on 25-3-2008 by drflux]

Originally posted by thesun
Einstein was not right about everything and i dont know why people cannot separate fact from theory.

Please explain. Links and jpgs, if you'd be so kind.

...treat einstein like GOD and take every thoery as gospel, instead of investigating things from a fresh point of view, they are busy trying to proof einstein right.

Please post your investigations. I presume [you've got] proof Einstein [was not] right? What is your 'theory'?

... it is important to understant quantum mechanics and the fundamental fabric of the universe...

Please discuss your take on QM and the fabric of the Universe. It's only fair for you to level the playing field for us, no?

'Kay, thanks.


[edit on 25-3-2008 by Badge01]

reply to post by Badge01


There are a number of people who have questioned Einsteins credibility. myself included. I dont want to derail this great thread, but I dont want to repeat myself either, so pleae have a look at Was Einstein a fake?

Here's a nice bit of info about mass and the speed of light.

Deciding that masses of objects must depend on speed like this seems a heavy price to pay to rescue conservation of momentum! However, it is a prediction that is not difficult to check by experiment. The first confirmation came in 1908, measuring the mass of fast electrons in a vacuum tube. In fact, the electrons in an old style color TV tube are about half a percent heavier than electrons at rest, and this must be allowed for in calculating the magnetic fields used to guide them to the screen.

Much more dramatically, in modern particle accelerators very powerful electric fields are used to accelerate electrons, protons and other particles. It is found in practice that these particles become heavier and heavier as the speed of light is approached, and hence need greater and greater forces for further acceleration. Consequently, the speed of light is a natural absolute speed limit. Particles are accelerated to speeds where their mass is thousands of times greater than their mass measured at rest, usually called the “rest mass”.

galileoandeinstein.physics.virginia.edu...

So basically brute force won't do it. However, there are a few ways around it. Wormholes or warping space locally will shorten the length between 2 points which means you can travel faster then light could between those same 2 points.

Originally posted by thesun
Einstein was not right about everything and i dont know why people cannot separate fact from theory. Human understanding of the universe and sub atomic particles is in early stages and developing. A lot of people in the science community treat einstein like GOD and take every thoery as gospel, instead of investigating things from a fresh point of view, they are busy trying to proof einstein right.

A photon has no rest mass, it is important to understant quantum mechanics and the fundamental fabric of the universe, before reaching such conclusion

Actually many of Einsteins predictions have been verified in lab.

Want to know what's sad with today's modern scientists?

They're coming up with so much bull#, they aren't really understanding the universe the way it is. I hate these small clicks of scientists who are afraid of their theories being wrong and losing funding etc, so they have to make up more B.S. theories so that this can keep going.

Do I believe we can travel faster than the speed of light? Yeah.
Just because we're not there yet doesn't mean we have to bat down the idea.

Science said we couldn't fly.

Science said we couldn't go past the speed of sound.

Science says a lot of things.

We will travel faster than the speed of light.

How? Who knows.

To everyone quoting the theory of relativity by Einstein he fully expected it to be a dis proven and let me remind you its just a theory.

reply to post by Masisoar


Why not hate the small cliques of people on ATS who can't be bothered to study the requisite math and physics or be bothered to post their own theories before declaring that scientists are declaring things without proof?

At any rate, please give an example of these scientists that you hate.

I would suggest that the solution to 'travel' is not found in either circumventing the laws of physics nor in building chemical rockets, or even atomic or solar sail craft.

The reason is that one is still stuck with the problem of accelerating and decelerating, which can take enormous amounts of time no matter the craft. In fact a large amount of the energy required is not in maintaining near SoL but in stopping and turning around for the journey home.

But before you get mad at me for putting up a barrier to your popular science fiction idea of FTL travel by mentioning laws of physics, let me hasten to add that the solution for fast travel through out the Galaxy is probably not within these discussions, because, for that purpose, the SoL is MUCH TOO slow.

If there is to be 'fast travel' over 'vast distances' it will be through 'turning the corner' in, or into a dimension, changing the paradigm. Thus, the distances will not be a factor. (I'm not specifically talking about Einstein-Rosen Bridges - those are completely theoretical and derived only because of certain peculiarities of the math involved)

Here's a vid. HTH.

I agree...just because we know nothing about it on EARTH doesnt mean that somewhere, some other intelligence hasn't accomplished it already...

actually we do... the galactic masses themselves move faster than light and we are of course carried along with them.

Have you guys heard of the "Hutchinson effect"?
He was this cazy Canadian inventor dude, anyway he was playing around with electro magnatism and started to notice weird effects happening to various items around this feild he was creating, metal was turning to liquid without heat being involved, levitation of objects, stuff like that.
There is still video of his experiments just google search him.
Anyway this guy takes off on a vacation and when he came back he finds all of his stuff has been confisacated by the Canadian govererment, with an American attachment, he took the goverment to court and won his case, but to this day they have not honoured the courts findings and have not returned the confiscated items
What does this have to do with faster than light travel???
The atom has a shell of electrons orbiting the nulei at about 75% the speed of light, this is wht gives things "mass" the denser the atom lets say lead (pb82) lots of electrons gives you really good sheilding thats why they use it for protection against radiation, as oppoed to hydrogen which has one electron and basically offers no resistence.
So the speculation starts there that if you could stall the orbit of electrons using a method similar to that of Hutchison would you negate its mass?
this tottally reminds me of all those reports on abductions and how the aliens go through walls and windows and such, makes sense to me, esepecially when the U.S goverment gets involved, makes a lot of sense to me

[edit on 25-3-2008 by foremanator]

reply to post by Warlon


Hi there

I read lots on ats but this is my first post.

In answer to your question most things can go faster than the speed of light, a simple search on google shows you this. Check this link out- What's the speed of light?

Hope this helps

Found this article too -Slowing light with Biology

[edit on 25-3-2008 by mosh_er]

[edit on 25-3-2008 by mosh_er]

reply to post by Warlon


There is a real easy answer to this. Light speed is relative. Thats why it is the only constant. Because what exists as "light" only does so because of our velocity. If you were moving at the speed of light (and you probably are, relative to some point in the universe), then any energy which is moving your speed + 186,000 MPS is light, relative to you. Some of that is visible and some is not.

There are lots of people who claim to understand Einstein who miss this piece entirely. People will tell you that this is hogwash, but it is exactly how Einstein meant it to be.

Here is an easier, albeit oversimplified, way of looking at it. Imagine that for any state of knowledge you have 3 items. That which exists, that which is becoming aware of the existence and the medium by which it occurs. The medium will ALWAYS be intangible to either that which exists or that which is becoming aware of the existence.

Take a chair, you don't see the chair. You see light reflecting off of a chair. But the light itself is intangible to you, because you never see light, you just see the chair.

Now algebraicly switch the equation around and put light, as a photon, on the end of that which exists or that which is being impacted, either way you have another medium, which is also intangible to the photon. This is a higher order light which is moving exactly 186,000 MPS relative to the photon.

Of course all of this comes to us through the process of "measuring" which allows us to draw a map. But we should be careful not to confuse the map with the territory, which is exactly what people do who believe that light speed is a finite speed of 186,000 MPS. An easy way to through them off is to ask "Relative to what?"

[edit on 25-3-2008 by Quazga]

Originally posted by grover
actually we do... the galactic masses themselves move faster than light and we are of course carried along with them.

I think you're mistaken in this assertion.

There is some thought that the rate of expansion of the Universe seems to -imply- that some of the farthest galaxies are moving apart at near or FTL speeds, but I'm not aware of any proof of super luminary travel of whole galaxies, or even of evidence (beyond what I mention) that it's possible.

Can you post a cite for this? Thanks.

You're aware of the 'apparent' FTL motion, say, of something like the rate of closure of a giant pair of scissors? That is an apparent motion, not actual acceleration at LS.







[edit on 25-3-2008 by Badge01]