Can anything surpass the speed of light???

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by Popcorn8636, Aug 27, 2002.

  1. Rev Prez Registered Member

    Not if you actually choose inertial frames correctly. Look at it this way. Take two flashlights and place them end to end. The wavefronts of the beams will separate at a rate twice the speed of light if a third observer measures the change in separation and then just calculates the time. This, however, doesn't constitute an actual FTL event because no information is transmitted.

    Warp drives and wormholes are all hypothetical topologies that have one thing in common, all necessitate some calculated energy-momentum distribution with a negative energy density component.

    Rev Prez
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. MewSkitty sucks! Registered Senior Member

    I know I'm just 15 but I'm perty good in the feild of physics.

    I think it's possible using my following idea:

    If an object was to travle at the speed of light and if the thoery that mass gains mass at this speed than if something (just like antimatter) was to destroy the mass as it increases and use the mass to accelerate the object than it could surpass the speed of light, but that's just one of my ideas that only took my a few minutes to create so it wasn't thought through very much.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. bradguth Banned Banned

    Good grief folks,
    Rev Prez;
    "Not if you actually choose inertial frames correctly. Look at it this way. Take two flashlights and place them end to end. The wavefronts of the beams will separate at a rate twice the speed of light if a third observer measures the change in separation and then just calculates the time. This, however, doesn't constitute an actual FTL event because no information is transmitted."

    Perhaps the lack of information is the very essence of information.

    Since we have nothing capable of creating true LS, much less detecting beyond LS, as such of whatever is launching itself off the moving frame of a laser beam end-point or wavefront of a given photonic waveguide (somewhat like the NEC/Wang results, though not intentionally speed restricted), chances are that the information is there to being had, it just needs an equal LS demodulator situated ahead of the approaching wavefront, especially since that of the incoming quantum/FM packets should become easily differentiated from those of regular photon packets, where as regular photons might represent the binary "O" packet, whereas the other quantum/FM packets could yield those terabytes/ms at FTLS.

    Of course, our instruments of today would detect absolutely nothing, and even if they did, the results would be bashed to hell, and then some, before ever allowing the truth and nothing but the truth out in the open.

    Here's a little something other that's anti-SR from: eshal (un
    (the speed of light - since that is what is spinning to form the particle)

    Spin frequency of electron = 1.236e20/sec
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. kula (Memes enclosed) within Registered Senior Member

    faster than the speed of light

    Ive heard of this effect, new scientist i think, someone was postulating that the 'flash' from rotating pulsars was infact a light boom caused by the magnetic field of the pulsar travelling faster than light when it reached beyond 4000km above the surface of the spinning pulsar.

    Apparantly somene has made a device, like a ring of lights, where each light is timed to fire a fraction of a second after the preceeding one. This creates a circular motion of light travelling faster than a beam of light would be able too, around a circular course. This motion creates a light boom (rather than a sonic boom) and the very fast 'booms' create a super high frequency that can be used in communication (terrahertz ?)

    Last edited: Aug 17, 2004
  8. kula (Memes enclosed) within Registered Senior Member

    Another thought.

    We know that light is effected by gravity and any measurement we make is within the gravity well of our galaxy. Maybe the speed of light, and other physical properties we take as 'law' would be different in flat space.

  9. kula (Memes enclosed) within Registered Senior Member

    Good idea ! And maybe if we were carrying antimatter when we travelled, we would actually loose mass the faster we travelled.

  10. Knowledge Registered Member

    A physicist in New Brunswick says he's broken the cosmic speed limit by sending an electrical signal at three times the speed of light.

    Prof. Alain Haché's research mostly involves developing optical circuits using laser light. As a model for the speed of light experiment, Haché sent a radio frequency down simple and inexpensive coaxial cables.

    The wires showed different levels of resistance. Haché said the various resistances made most of the pulse bounce backwards, but a small portion went forward – very fast.

    this is an artical, or a prove if u like, that speed of light is been surpassed!!
  11. Knowledge Registered Member

    The scientific statement "nothing with mass can travel faster than the speed of light" is an entirely different belief, one that has yet to be proven wrong. The NEC experiment caused a pulse of light, a group of waves with no mass, to go faster than light.

    For the experiment, the researchers manipulated a vapour of laser-irradiated atoms that boost the speed of light waves causing a pulse that shoots through the vapour about 300 times faster than it would take the pulse to go the same distance in a vacuum.

    Light travels slower in any medium more dense than a vacuum, which has no density at all. For example, light travelling through glass slows to two-thirds its speed in a vacuum. If the glass is altered, the light can be slowed even further.

    The NEC team produced the opposite effect. Inside a chamber, they changed the state of a vapour in a way that light travelling through it would travel faster than normal.

    When the pulse of light travelled through the vapour, the pulse reconfigured as some component waves stretched and others compressed. As the waves approached the end of the chamber, they recombined, forming the original pulse.

    The key to the experiment was that the pulse reformed before it could have gotten there by simply travelling through empty space. This means that, when the waves of the light distorted, the pulse traveled forward in time.

    once again, another prove of a non mass body, travel faster then the speed of light!! how ever, the mystery of weather a body with mass can travel in a speed of light remains!!
  12. eburacum45 Valued Senior Member

    This is beginning to take on the status of an internet myth.

    Take a look at this link about the NEC experiments;
    This phenomenon seems to be useful in speeding up information transfer; but the useful information carried by such a wave train will not exceed the speed of light.
    Last edited: Aug 18, 2004
  13. RawThinkTank Banned Banned

    I keep hearing same bullshit year after year, Dam U humans.

    The information of gravity and the existence of blackhole escapes all the time. any ways G does escapes BH and hence its faster than light
  14. kula (Memes enclosed) within Registered Senior Member

    Speed of gravity was measured last year by Kopeikin and Fomalot using the VLBA telescope when Jupiter passed infront of a radio quasar. The speed of gravity was found to be the same as light.

  15. eburacum45 Valued Senior Member

    Gravity, angular momentum, magnetism and charge can all escape a black hole; gravity is transmitted by virtual particles, so is magnetic force. Virtual particles can escape a black hole. Angular momentum can escape because of frame dragging.

    Light cannot escape a black hole except as Hawking radiation; in a tiny black hole it is very bright.
    Information apparently is conserved according to Hawking, but I don't know how yet;
  16. apolo Registered Senior Member

    Some writers on this thead has sugested, that by traveling close to the speed of light, it should be possible to reach the Andromeda calaxy in 250 years ?
    But they forget that reaching the speed speed of light requires accelleration of the rocket with the humans on board from zero to 180000 mileles pr second within a reasonable time after takeof. And given the fact that humans cannot tollerate more than 6 g's at a sustainable level, it would take more than 200 years (if my math is corect) to even come up to 7/8 of the speed of light. Never mind traveling the rest of the way, and decellerating before we land. To go to even annother star in our Milky Way. Given the fraialty of the human body, I think the farthest we will ever get from earth is Mars, and even that is doubtfull

    Regards APOLO
  17. eburacum45 Valued Senior Member

    Nope; accelerating at one gee allows you to reach a sizeable fraction of the speed of light in just a few months;

    once time dilation kicks in, you will easily be able to reach the Andromeda galaxy in a few years, and the apparent edge of the observable universe in a human lifetime

    (of course you can never get there, as you are always in the centre of your observable universe wherever you are)
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2004
  18. kula (Memes enclosed) within Registered Senior Member

    Ive never quite got my head around this notion, how does it work ? What happens when your speed exceeds the speed of expansion of the universe ?

  19. apolo Registered Senior Member

    Please Aburakum45.

    Can you show me the math for your statement aboe ?

    Regards APOLO
  20. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    3*10^8 m/s (the speed of light) / 9.8 m/s (one G acceleration) = about 30 million seconds to reach the speed of light. That means you could reach the speed of light in about 355 days under one G acceleration.
  21. eburacum45 Valued Senior Member

    Here are the times it takes to get to various destinations;
    it is a bit longer than I thought, but not much-
    (from here)
    At 1 gee (constant acceleration) (please note you do not exceed the speed of light)

    4.3 ly nearest star 3.6 years
    27 ly Vega 6.6 years
    30,000 ly Center of our galaxy 20 years
    2,000,000 ly Andromeda galaxy 28 years

    As you continue to accelerate in time and in space you should be many billions of light years away after 50 years of travelling in this fashion...

    but the most distant galaxies you are travelling towards are forever beyond your reach, as they are expanding away much faster than light. So you will never get there.
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2004
  22. Norman Atta Boy Registered Senior Member


    We'll be lucky just to get to the nearest stars in the next 200 years or so unless we get lucky and find a crashed alien spacecraft (Area 51?) that still has it's gravity drive intact...........

    Yob Atta

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  23. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    “Cerenkov radiation” is a light shock waves, but it is NOT caused by light traveling faster than the speed of light. That is nonsense. Or by carefully timed light flashes as another post here suggested. Cerenkov radiation occurs when a charged particle is passing through some medium, like water, at faster than the speed of light IN THAT MEDIUM. I am nearly sure it would be created even inside a non transparent medium, like inside a copper block, but of course you could not see it and the cerenkov cone would only be a few light wavelengths long as the electrons of the metal quickly dissipate the energy. I suspect that this dissipation mechanism may be more important than the interaction with the nucleus and may be why high atomic number elements, like lead, uranium etc. (which pack a lot of electrons in roughly the same volume as low atomic number atoms, both of which have only one nucleus that occupies a very small part of the unit cube of the crystal) make better shielding. Anyone out there who really knows, please correct me if I am guessing wrong.

    Just as the sound shock wave from a supersonic jet is a conical pressure wave hooked to the plane’s nose tip with smaller cone angle the faster the plane goes, so it is with cerenkov radiation. – a cone of light “hooked” (constantly generated is more accurate in both cases than “hooked”) to the moving particle and the cone angle is again a measure of how much the particle is exceeding the speed of light, IN THAT MEDIUM. Typically when you see cerenkov radiation (with your unaided eye) it looks bluish and no cone is seen as many particles are making a soft glow. I saw it, about 45 years ago, in the water of a small research nuclear fusion reactor, while still a graduate student working at LASL one summer. It is a very pretty, soft blue, glow and to me was calming to look at, deep below meters of shielding water. (I could see that the radius of the glow was much less than the thickness of the water separating the reaction from me. I was already confident that the uncharged neutrons, which on the average lose half their energy with each collision with a hydrogen nucleus or proton, in the H2O were being stopped.)

    Tachyons – There has been a lot of speculation here about going faster than light. No particle will ever go be accelerated to light speed or even appear to be traveling faster than light speed IN A VACUUM even if you are moving towards its accelerator at near light speed. This, however, does not prevent (in theory) things going faster than light IN A VACUUM !!! That is permitted, in theory. Such fast particles are called “tachyons.” Forces applied to tachyons can slow them down, but as the slow down towards the speed of light IN A VACUUM they gain mass and can never be reduced in speed below (or even to) the speed of light. I think is well established that we can not detect tachyons, but am not sure of this (all this from memories at least 25 years old - Where I live it cost me to search the net, so you do it if you are interested, now that you know terms “tachyon” and “cerenkov.” I would be curious if any Tachyon detection experiments have been seriously (journal article) suggested. As I recall the theory of them, they might as well be in some other universe that can not interact with us, if they exist at all.

Share This Page