Is the barrier to faster than light travel correct?

[Uclock]

Einstein’s theory of relativity postulates a barrier to faster than light space travel by the increase in energy which translates as increasing in mass as the velocity increases. Is that correct or have I got it wrong?

Tony

[darksidZz]

Yes, as far as I know einstein postulated that in order to continue increasing speed the mass of the object would also increase, and eventually both would reach a point at which niether would be coherent anymore, they'd turn from physical objects into energy only, thus unable to exist. The more mass the more energy needed to move the object, and so this will eventually mean the entire object must become energy in order to continue moving or you need an infinite amount of energy, but even then you can't use it all at the same time.

So there is a limit to how fast an object might travel in space, but only because space has limits on what can be done. There are other ways of moving through or around space that will give the illusion of traveling faster than light, when merely you'd be going around it.

[Pete]

Hi Uclock,
Einstein's theory essentially says that no matter how fast you go, the speed of a light beam doesn't seem to change. So if you whip past me at half a billion kph just as I flash my torch, both of us will see the light beam escaping at a billion kph.

So no matter how fast you go, you're always standing still compared to a light beam.

There's a number of unexpected things that happen as a consequence of this peculiar fact.

Say, for example, that as you pass me at half a billion kph, you throw a ball ahead, really hard. So hard that you clock it at half a billion kph. The odd thing is that I don't clock it at a billion kph - I clock it at about 800 million kph. To me, the ball is only going 300 million kph faster than you, even though you see it whipping ahead at 500 million kph.

Othe consequences include time dilation, length contraction, nonlinear changes in momentum (this is the increasing mass part), and ambiguous simultaneity.

[EndLightEnd]

Scientists actually have been able to get light to travel faster than the universal speed of light, using some advanced methods. Dont have the link, sorry!

[Uclock]

Hello Pete

Congrats on the newborn, I hope you are not getting too many sleepless nights.

Hi Uclock,
Einstein's theory essentially says that no matter how fast you go, the speed of a light beam doesn't seem to change. So if you whip past me at half a billion kph just as I flash my torch, both of us will see the light beam escaping at a billion kph.
So no matter how fast you go, you're always standing still compared to a light beam.
There's a number of unexpected things that happen as a consequence of this peculiar fact.
Say, for example, that as you pass me at half a billion kph, you throw a ball ahead, really hard. So hard that you clock it at half a billion kph. The odd thing is that I don't clock it at a billion kph - I clock it at about 800 million kph. To me, the ball is only going 300 million kph faster than you, even though you see it whipping ahead at 500 million kph.
Othe consequences include time dilation, length contraction, nonlinear changes in momentum (this is the increasing mass part), and ambiguous simultaneity.

Yes that seems to be accepted view if you look at spacetime as a metric like Einstein. Viewing spacetime in this way does seem to make faster than light space travel impossible unless you can warp the space you are travelling through. But maybe Einstein’s view of spacetime is not quite right. For a start he never included the arrow of time because he considered it a psychological phenomenon and maybe there is a real physical explanation for times arrow and this may also be the key to making faster than light travel a real posibility.

Tony

[Uclock]

EndLightEnd

Scientists actually have been able to get light to travel faster than the universal speed of light, using some advanced methods. Dont have the link, sorry!

Yes I read that somewhere but I think that was in a medium of some sort and not in a vacuum.

Tony

[kwhilborn]

They have separated particles. They spin opposite to each other and and communicate instantly. This upset Einstein because with ZERO communication time it was communicating faster than the speed of light. He never got to see the experiment, but we have now separated these particles by a distance of ten miles, and they do communicate faster than light speed. So either they are still connected somehow, or somethinmg is going faster than light.

Will find a link for you later

[Mosheh Thezion]

it has been proven.... in particle accelorators...

we cant push the speed beyond that max.

if we add energy.. too try and speed the object up.. it gains mass.


that is very important.

somehow, mass is being added in layers...

layers... which are clearly made up of the two kinds of forces which are being applied... electrostatic and electromagnetic.. with photons..
and in some cases... an electric current.

i dont have the details, ... but...

that...

i think is phenomenially important... its a big clue.

but i dont hear any talk or theory about it.

any one want to help?
-MT

[Pete]

Yes that seems to be accepted view if you look at spacetime as a metric like Einstein. Viewing spacetime in this way does seem to make faster than light space travel impossible unless you can warp the space you are travelling through. But maybe Einstein’s view of spacetime is not quite right. For a start he never included the arrow of time because he considered it a psychological phenomenon and maybe there is a real physical explanation for times arrow and this may also be the key to making faster than light travel a real posibility.

Actually, spacetime was Minkowski's idea. Einstein developed SR without it, and resisted the notion for some time. If I recall correctly, he felt that it confused SR unnecessarily.

He was eventually won over when he found that the idea of spacetime was very useful in formulating GR.

Anyway, whether you view spacetime as a metric or not is irrelevant. The reality is as I've said - in a nutshell, no matter how fast you go, you're no closer to lightspeed than anything else.

[Uclock]

Kwhilborn

They have separated particles. They spin opposite to each other and and communicate instantly. This upset Einstein because with ZERO communication time it was communicating faster than the speed of light. He never got to see the experiment, but we have now separated these particles by a distance of ten miles, and they do communicate faster than light speed. So either they are still connected somehow, or somethinmg is going faster than light.

Will find a link for you later

Yes, I think you are talking about quantum entanglement what Einstein thought of as ‘spooky at a distance’. It does have a macro explanation in TR which also means I might be on the right track. Only time will tell.

Tony

[Uclock]

Mosheh Thezion

it has been proven.... in particle accelorators...

we cant push the speed beyond that max.

But you are accelerating these particles from outside their frame. They are also undergoing extreme centripetal acceleration.

if we add energy.. too try and speed the object up.. it gains mass.
that is very important.
somehow, mass is being added in layers...
layers... which are clearly made up of the two kinds of forces which are being applied... electrostatic and electromagnetic.. with photons..
and in some cases... an electric current.
i dont have the details, ... but...
that...
i think is phenomenially important... its a big clue.
but i dont hear any talk or theory about it.
any one want to help?

Yes you right it gains mass according to known physics but if TR is correct then this gain in energy is not in the form of mass but in the form of potential displacement within its own spacetime field. If this is true then faster than light travel becomes a distinct possibility.

Tony

[Uclock]

Pete

Actually, spacetime was Minkowski's idea. Einstein developed SR without it, and resisted the notion for some time. If I recall correctly, he felt that it confused SR unnecessarily.

You are quite correct four dimensional spacetime was Minkowski’s idea.

He was eventually won over when he found that the idea of spacetime was very useful in formulating GR.

He could not formulate GR without it but that does not mean his view of spacetime is the correct one. It has always niggled me that dark matter had to be bolted onto GR to account for the fixed rotation of stars in spiral galaxies and galaxy clusters. It is quite possible that physics is viewing spacetime incorrectly and that gravity is not a force that works over an infinite distance.

Anyway, whether you view spacetime as a metric or not is irrelevant. The reality is as I've said - in a nutshell, no matter how fast you go, you're no closer to lightspeed than anything else.

It is far from irrelevant but you are right, no matter how fast you are moving you will always see light reach you at 299792458m s^-1 but light itself is not a barrier to faster that light space travel if you view spacetime as individual fields instead as a metric.

Tony