Exceeding speed of light idea.

[apeZ]

For a while now, I have been toying with the idea of travelling at, or faster than the speed of light...

Every single physics teacher I have spoken to has said it is impossible, but I wondered whether OCUK think this idea would work.

Ok.

For the sake of simplicity, I am using smaller measurements for the length, i.e. 100 metres in the diagram would be something like 10,000 miles or so in reality.

The idea works like this: put an object that is travelling at 1/3 the speed of light, which in turn is upon another object travelling at 1/3 the speed of light. (These speeds can be reached with a lot of force).

The combination of the speeds mean that the object on top is travelling at the speed of light (1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3). I have provided a simple paint diagram to show this.




I realise that a lot of force would be required to reach something like 1/3 the speed of light, but there is no reason we cannot do it in increments of 1/10 or even 1/100.

What do you guys think?

 

[Sinque]

If you have three things travelling at 1/3 the speed of light then they are still only travelling at a 1/3 the speed of light, just together.

 

[Tefal]

no

 

[Ceryndrion]

Nope, all 3 objects would be travelling at 1/3 the speed of light

 

[neodude]

As above. Also...

The top object would never reach the speed of light as by then it would have infinite mass and would require an infinite force to accelerate it further.

 

[Azagoth]

What do you guys think?

That they'll be doing no more than 0.3333333c

 

[apeZ]

But surely the item on the top is travelling at the speed of light proportional to the ground (which is immobile). It is only travelling at 1/3 the speed of light to the object underneath it (which is also moving at 1/3 the speed of light).

 

[Greenlizard0]

For a while now, I have been toying with the idea of travelling at, or faster than the speed of light...

Every single physics teacher I have spoken to has said it is impossible, but I wondered whether OCUK think this idea would work.

Isn't it a case it's impossible to travel at the speed of light, or it'd require an unfeasible amount of energy, but faster is probably er, an ok idea.

 

[Repta]

This might be slightly wrong still groogy from hospital.

As an object gains speed its weight (might be mass cant remember) tends to infinity. Basically you will never be able to travel at the speed of light only get very close to it because the object will just get heavier and heavier.

 

[apeZ]

That they'll be doing no more than 0.3333333c

Then look at it like 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4

= 0.25 + 0.25 + 0.25 + 0.25 = 1.0

 

[apeZ]

Isn't it a case it's impossible to travel at the speed of light, or it'd require an unfeasible amount of energy, but faster is probably er, an ok idea.

Yes, that is why you accelerate the objects individually, at speeds that can be reached.

 

[scorza]

What do you guys think?

I think you need to read a Brief History of Time mate Hawking addresses this very point in there.

 

[Tefal]

But surely the item on the top is travelling at the speed of light proportional to the ground (which is immobile). It is only travelling at 1/3 the speed of light to the object underneath it (which is also moving at 1/3 the speed of light).

remember though if the second one is accelerating by pushing on the one below it will be accelerating it backwards at 1/3 the speed of light.

so in your example the bottom two would stay still and the top one would fly off at 1/3 the speed of light.

 

[Tefal]

Nope, all 3 objects would be travelling at 1/3 the speed of light

no they won't only one will

 

[Art]

If you mean that Object 2 claws it's way along Ob1 until it reaches 1/3 lightspeed, it'll not work. Ob2 would put friction on Ob1 and slow it down, so you'd never actually hit lightspeed.

Besides, even if you could accelerate something to 1/3 lightspeed without the friction it wouldn't work because it would take a hell of a lot of time, so long that it'd have come off the end of Ob1 long before it got anywhere near it. Unless you have stupendously long objects.

 

[Raumarik]

I think I see where apeZ is coming from and yes to my mind it would work - if you completely ignore most of the rules of physics In a very, very basic theory yes but that's kinda pointless.

 

[Dolph]

This is a failure to correctly identify the frame of reference, similar to claiming that the speed of the earth rotating is relevant when calculating your speed on a motorway.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_reference_frame

 

[Dano]

Back to physics 101 for you

 

[apeZ]

remember though if the second one is accelerating by pushing on the one below it will be accelerating it backwards at 1/3 the speed of light.

so in your example the bottom two would stay still and the top one would fly off at 1/3 the speed of light.

Hm, I see your point :/

Art, I'm assuming zero friction and 'stupendously long objects'.

 

[apeZ]

Back to physics 101 for you

Would now be a good time to mention that I'm doing A-level physics?