MacM said:
You have touched on the physics issue and don't even realize it.
1 - By what assumption can you conclude that a property (finite velocity limit) of EM waves applies to mass.?
2 - F = ma asserts a velocity limit assuming a relavistically increasing mass due to velocity becomes the limiting factor. There is no sound arguement for the concept of relavistic mass increase.
All such evidence is based on particle acceleration by a stationary propelling source where there becomes a relative velocity between the source and the accelerated particle. That is it is no surprise that one cannot cause the particle to achieve a velocity greater than the finite velocity of the propulsion force.
3 - Now theoretically assume the particle is a minature rocket where there is no relative velocity between the thrusting source and the load mass. The thrust does not dimenish nor does the mass load increase. Where now is your limit?
4 - It is quite likely that the concept of relativistic mass is actually the misinterpretation of an illusion of decreased energy transfer between the propelling source and the reactive load.
MacM, I agree that 'velocity' is miss used as a limiting physical parameter on the speed of matter. Accelerating mass in one direction from the moving frame induces a velocity creating force in the opposie direction. If this SRT limitation is perceived as limiting the velocity of mass, then we ain't gonna get there from here. Modernly the max designed speeds of rockets are much less than the SOL.
A partiicle velocity at or near the SOL expresses no phsical limitations, (other than physical saftey considerations) to either,1) a particile exceeding the SOL, nor 2) to the specific impulse forces of light being effective at V >> c.
Unconventional acceleration modes not directly related to the energy exchange process of the fields can be easily exploited. e.g. Achieve a frame velocity ~ C then systematically decouplie self-regulating, self-controlled angular momentum storage sytems along the path of the desired trajectory.
Assume the mass energy is composed of two, at least, modes of velocity 1) The linear motion through time space and 2), the vibration of the particle as increases in energy absorption. This process becomes less efficient in processing energy exchanges where the amount used for velocity increases declines as more and more energy is used just to get the stuff on board, stored
and then used for velocity inctreases.
Velocity, as SR wants us to believe, is everything, when uniform and no velocity affects can be felt by objects on the moving frame. Nothing observed can be related to huge changes in matter that are velocity related, supposedly. Velocity "slows processes down" yet acceleration activy, the forces of interaction, are considered, relatively speaking. insignificant events in the totality of it all.
What else is there to measure than acceleraion? SRT attempts to enslave the enquiring mind by denying the reality to one unambiguous activity of nature. That which is "measurably detected", I mean acceleration, is nothing, velocity id all.
Experiment: Take a 100,000 horse powered train engine moving on a railroad track at 88 feet/second. Suspend a ping pong ball on a light string at a height at the middle of the face plate of the oncoming traing.
- The ping pong balll and face plate, driven by 100,000 horse power diesel engines at 88 feet/sec meet at some sionce in time. Answer the following regarding the plate/ball motion immdeiately after contact.
Will the ping pong ball move move :
- in the direction of the train or
- with no change in motion or,
- opposite to the direction of the train?
- and will the ping pong ball move:
- faster or,
- the same or,
- slower or,
- other than the face plate of the train?
- Tiger hits a golf ball 300 yards, Barry bashes a baseball with a bat, a rocket ship launches from earth. Q:Were the physical recoil effects in each instance perturbed to,
- a greater or,
- the same or,
- a lesser extent than,
- the club, the bat or the earth?
Geistkiesel
