Why can't anything go faster than the speed of light?

Page 9 of 11 [ 162 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Edenthiel
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Sep 2014
Age: 58
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,820
Location: S.F Bay Area

18 Dec 2015, 1:26 pm

Fnord wrote:

eric76 wrote:

naturalplastic wrote:

I dont wanna go infinite speed like a tachyon. All I ask is to just be able to go a few times the speed of light

A tachyon would be be any particle traveling faster than the speed of light even if only the most minute fraction faster. Of course, there is no evidence that tachyons exist.

The only 'evidence' for the existence of tachyons is in the mathematical predictions, which also predict that it would take an infinite amount of energy for a tachyon to slow down to the speed of light.

I think that the maths need to be refined.

Ah, so the "hitch a few tachyons to my car" idea isn't so far fetched after all...assuming you can catch up with them to get the harnesses on. Which closes out that specific sub-thread and brings us right back to the original topic. :-)

_________________
“For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love.”
―Carl Sagan

eric76
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

18 Dec 2015, 1:31 pm

Fnord wrote:

The mathematics does not predict tachyons -- it only predicts how tachyons would behave if they exist. As such, that is not evidence of tachyons.

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,952
Location:

18 Dec 2015, 7:27 pm

eric76 wrote:

Fnord wrote:

The mathematics does not predict tachyons -- it only predicts how tachyons would behave if they exist. As such, that is not evidence of tachyons.

That's why I put the word 'evidence' inside single quotes.

Tachyons were the quantum particle of the week on more than one episode of Star Trek.

_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.

naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

19 Dec 2015, 7:21 am

eric76 wrote:

naturalplastic wrote:

I dont wanna go infinite speed like a tachyon.

All I ask is to just be able to go a few times the speed of light

A tachyon would be be any particle traveling faster than the speed of light even if only the most minute fraction faster.

Yes, but- tachyons are supposed to be our mirror image.

It would take as much energy to slow them down to only the speed of light as it would take to bring us up to the speed of light.

Its just as hard for them to go as slow as infinitesimally over the speed of light as it is for us to go as fast as infinitesimally less than the speed of light. And they are supposed to "want" to travel at infinite speed (like we "prefer" to be at rest, or at zero mph).

eric76
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

19 Dec 2015, 10:14 am

naturalplastic wrote:

ts just as hard for them to go as slow as infinitesimally over the speed of light as it is for us to go as fast as infinitesimally less than the speed of light. And they are supposed to "want" to travel at infinite speed (like we "prefer" to be at rest, or at zero mph).

My point was that they go faster than the speed of light, not just infinitely fast.

As far as being at rest, if one is in an inertial reference frame, than one is at rest with respect to that frame, but not necessarily in any other reference frame.

If tachyons do happen to exist, then they would be traveling faster than light as observed from every innertial reference frame that is traveling slower than light in reference to ours.

eric76
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

19 Dec 2015, 10:14 am

eric76 wrote:

naturalplastic wrote:

My point was that they go faster than the speed of light, not just infinitely fast.

As far as being at rest, if one is in an inertial reference frame, than one is at rest with respect to that frame, but not necessarily in any other reference frame. There is no absolute rest.

If tachyons do happen to exist, then they would be traveling faster than light as observed from every innertial reference frame that is traveling slower than light in reference to ours.

naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

20 Dec 2015, 11:10 am

eric76 wrote:

naturalplastic wrote:

My point was that they go faster than the speed of light, not just infinitely fast.

As far as being at rest, if one is in an inertial reference frame, than one is at rest with respect to that frame, but not necessarily in any other reference frame. There is no absolute rest.

If tachyons do happen to exist, then they would be traveling faster than light as observed from every innertial reference frame that is traveling slower than light in reference to ours.

So...your point was that you were not making ANY point other than to repeat the very points I was making. Lol!

I didnt say tachyons only move at infinite speed. But if they do exist and are actually ever observed they would commonly be seen to be moving at billions of times the SOL, and only rarely seen moving as slow as only slightly more than the SOL.

The trouble with you being Captain Obvious and informing us that "all motion is relative" is...that according to Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity thats actually wrong. The SOL is absolute, and is an absolute speed limit.

You dont get to break Einstein's speed limit as easily as you seem to think. You apparently think this: If I drive more the half of the SOL in one direction, and you drive more the half of the SOL the opposite way that relative to you I would be moving faster than the SOL.

WRONG (if you're going by Einstein). In special relativity there is a bunch of equations called the Lorentz Transformation that maps out how space and time would get warped in such way that it would keep our speeds relative to each other at less than the SOL even if both of us are moving 99 percent the SOL in opposite directions.

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,952
Location:

20 Dec 2015, 11:14 am

There's nothing really wrong with being "Captain Obvious". Sometimes it takes pointing out the obvious to get some people's thinking back on the right track.

eric76
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

20 Dec 2015, 12:01 pm

naturalplastic wrote:

You dont get to break Einstein's speed limit as easily as you seem to think. You apparently think this: If I drive more the half of the SOL in one direction, and you drive more the half of the SOL the opposite way that relative to you I would be moving faster than the SOL.

Where do you get this notion? I've never claimed such a thing outside of the case where it is due to the expansion of space in an inflationary universe. That that does not violate relativity because it is not the result of applying force to accelerate a particle.

slenkar
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Apr 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,146
Location: here

20 Dec 2015, 5:06 pm

Empty space is probably made of something
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_foam

It's like how Mario is made of pixels but doesn't know it.

Empty space has to made of something because otherwise light would not be able to expand in a perfect sphere, observable from every possible direction.

If empty space was just empty space there would be infinite directions for light to expand in so it would not be possible to see a light source from all angles.

If light is travelling through a foam it would explain why it has a speed limit.

eric76
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

20 Dec 2015, 5:10 pm

slenkar wrote:

does not compute

slenkar
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Apr 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,146
Location: here

20 Dec 2015, 5:20 pm

eric76 wrote:

slenkar wrote:

does not compute

The universe is like a Computer monitor or TV screen,
it looks normal from a distance but if you get close you realise it's made up of pixels.

It takes light a small amount of time to move from one pixel to another so that explains why there is a speed limit on light.

If empty space is truely empty there is no medium for light to travel on when it is in a vacuum,
its difficult to accept that a wave can exist on nothing
A wave is a distortion of a material, like an ocean wave is just a distortion of water.
When light passes through empty space what is being distorted?

eric76
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

20 Dec 2015, 7:18 pm

slenkar wrote:

Still does not compute.

Have you ever read up on the Michelson-Morley experiment? Please explain how they got it wrong.

eric76
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

20 Dec 2015, 7:20 pm

You're essentially saying that since it takes time for light to move from one point to another, that speed must be a speed limit.

Edenthiel
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Sep 2014
Age: 58
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,820
Location: S.F Bay Area

20 Dec 2015, 7:44 pm

slenkar wrote:

How's that work with photons from a laser, please?

_________________
“For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love.”
―Carl Sagan

slenkar
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Apr 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,146
Location: here

20 Dec 2015, 9:18 pm

A laser doesn't emit light in all possible directions, it is even easier to explain, the photons or waves just all travel in a straight line and don't expand in all directions like light from a light bulb.

The Michelson Morley experiment assumed that earth would be pushing against the ether as it moves.
The ether or "quantum foam" is just empty space that is split into tiny compartments, or pixels, whatever you want to call them.

As the earth passes through the foam, the foam offers no Resistance. Just think how when Mario moves on the screen the pixels don't offer reisitance they simply become Mario as he moves across the screen.

It is explained here https://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/ ... Space.html

But it uses some obscure scientific terms, I use video game analogies instead.

Page 9 of 11 [ 162 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 Next

Jump to:

Why can't anything go faster than the speed of light? Post Reply New Topic

Why can't anything go faster than the speed of light?