Topic: The Speed Of Light May Soon Be Possible Through A New Thruster (Read 360 times)

You didn't read the thread, so you get an F. The subject is masses moving at close the speed of light and their increased mass due to speed. Maybe you'd like to revise your post taking into account relativist mass increase instead of having me explain it?

nope
just like asteroids/space debris 'burning up at re-entry' to earth, the faster you go the sooner you break apart
the even faster you go the faster those smaller parts break up into seperate molecules

the radius of a rocket breaking up into a fog of molecules is not even 0.00001% of the sun surface facing earth. this the 'damage' to the sun is insignificant.
infact the suns corona will obliterate the rocket before even touching the suns surface


all you might see is a small puff of a solar flare, at the very most
its why humans dont worry much about car sized asteroids.
and thats without earth having a massive heat corona

but anyway. point is. badecker would pass out before even leaving the earths atmosphere.. like instant knock out. and would die before passing the moon. and muscles and skin peal off his skin soon after, and then rocket breaks up after that
so i doubt he would even get passed mars in any 'single object'

Indeed. This was my point above.

Travelling at his normal everyday speed, the BADecker effectively obeys classical Newtonian laws... but as he increases speed, the relativistic nature of the universe becomes apparent. Let's visualise (please) a lean, muscular BADecker, a perfect physical specimen... but even then, his mass is high enough to cause a problem.
Basically due to mass-energy equivalence, any object with non-zero mass travelling sufficiently close to light-speed has inconceivably vast kinetic energy and can wreak untold destruction. To accelerate any object with mass to light-speed requires infinite energy... which is why it is impossible (image below: special relativity in red, the classical approximation in pink).


https://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/images/totalenergy2.gif

Light 'particles' (photons) aren't really particles at all, that's just an everyday convenience. Wave-particle duality does not mean that light is both a wave and a particle, rather light (and indeed everything) is a manifestation of the complex interplay of underlying quantum fields... in certain circumstances this appears as 'wave-like' behaviour, in others, 'particle-like'. Indeed mass itself, and its manifestation (the Higgs boson) is simply a field perturbation. Light is massless because photons do not interact with the Higgs field. The only way we can make you massless is to remove your interaction with it. If the Higgs field knocks on your door or calls you on the phone, my advice would be to not answer.

Close enough to light speed, a baseball could destroy our Sun.

"not like it would be a solid single object..."

Any object, split into pieces and impacting a large object such as the Earth or our Sun, will cause far more damage in pieces than if a single mass. The radius of destruction on impact is a function of the cube root of the impacting mass, so you can see what it takes to double the radius of destruction.

light particles hit the sun all the time. yes they emit light but they also have light from other starts aimed at it.

a vehicle like a rocket. containing an idiot that full of inert* gas. will just cause a at most a solar flare. not the complete destruction of the sun. thus not damage to earth.
* his brain does not react to fact

so dont cancel badeckers plan. send him.
the vehicle would rip apart before getting to the sun. so its not like it would be a solid single object to cause anything notable

However, at best that idea is only theory. But it might simply be ramblings of Cnut237. Are you the 237th clone? Or simply the 237th attempt?


That was your idea, not mine... right in the part of your own post you quoted.


Sorry, but no survival. Check out average life expectancies. If circumstances change, expectancies might change right along with them.



The movement of light particles shows us that there is a whole lot we don't know about quantum. We don't know FOR-A-FACT what is annihilated to get light particles to move at the speed they do.

---

You have finally discovered that I read science fiction.

---

You're young, yet. If you start to learn things, now, and really start to learn how to think, there is a good chance that you will come up with something worthwhile talking about... in the distant future sometime. If the theories in the OP are developed into reality, and you get on the rocket that goes to Alpha Centauri, Einstein's relativity will make it a far, far, far distant future for those remaining on Earth.

Well I see my buddy BADecker is staying busy posting and polluting the bitcoin forum with his
usual plethora of nonsensical posts and threads pushing pseudo-science, debunked myths, ridiculous conspiracy theories, sprinkled with the occasional godswill preaching garbage.
Pretty harmless for most sane folk around here I suppose. Albeit, always good for a laugh or two if not just a simple eye roll.
Just throwing that out there for any noobie lurkers who google bitcoin politics and possibly land here so they won’t think this place is a freaking loonybin.

After all, the FE thread went bye bye, so there is progress.
(I will admit to missing the battyshit crazy posts however....)

Well, you've just discovered orbital mechanics.

When he reaches the sun, we all die:


BADecker - I understand how much you want to fire yourself at light speed into the sun, but the downside is that in doing so you wipe out all life on Earth. I'm afraid we are going to have to abandon the plan.


... which suggests an alternative in which we can all survive, and you can travel at light speed, and the sun doesn't explode. You simply need to lose all of your rest mass m_restBADecker ... not most, all. I believe there are slimming shakes that can do this. If you can become massless, then you will travel at light speed. The downside for you is that due to relativistic time dilation, you will no longer experience the passage of time at all - the entire history of the universe from beginning to end will become a single eternal present. A bit like lockdown.

---

Permit me another shameless plug for the best thread on the forum ^{[CITATION NEEDED]}.

Not in a bath with a pressurize helium-oxygen mix as used in deep-sea diving.

What does accelerating to the speed of light have to do with it? Are you talking about the velocity being the speed of light when the Sun is reached, from a zero start on Earth? If that's what you mean, you'll never hit the Sun if you shoot directly at it that way. It will have moved by the time you reach spead-of-light-velocity.

You can't shoot at the Sun this way, and expect to hit it, even if it is overhead. You need to shoot at the place where it will have moved to by the time you get there. Accelerating to light-speed from zero, in a 93 million mile distance, takes way longer than 8.6 minutes. And the vectoring and distance changes as you shoot at the place where the Sun will be when you reach light-speed.

That's just 10k meters/sec/sec, and your speed target is 300M m/sec.

Not 499 seconds but 8.3 hours at a thousand g.

Light actually is pretty speedy.

badecker has problems locating the sun..
heres a tip. during the day. point towards that bright thing in the sky.

but atleast he is now recognising that accelerating to the speed of light will cause him to pas out well before the 499 seconds (before hitting the sun due to the force involved)

yep speed of light is like 1021g to have achieved such speed within 499 seconds
however at 9g your blood cant circulate and you pass out. this means you pass out and die before you reach the sun
but atleast your body is then cremated within 8 minutes of death
enjoy the ride for about 1-2 seconds

and thats just normal physics

As usual. Oh, well. We're getting used to it, right?

Accelerating at the speed of light is talking about accelerating TO velocities way beyond the speed of light. Both, the speed of the Solar System through space, and the reversal in time have something to do with things.

The Solar System is moving through space about a 143 miles a second. If you sent BADecker towards the sun at the simple velocity of the speed of light - assuming you were sending him from Earth towards - it would take about 8.6 minutes for him to get to the Sun. And depending on the point of the sun you had aimed him at, he might even miss it altogether... depending on how far the sun moved.

If you want BADecker to get to the Sun, you have to send him toward the spot the Sun will be at when he gets there. This isn't so easy to calculate. Scientists and astronomers have a difficult time calculating this stuff for rockets and satellites. Lots of things come into play, including Earth rotation speed at the place on Earth you launch him from.

Then, when you throw in the speed of light acceleration rather than just velocity, you have BADecker going backwards in time, and possibly at a terrific rate of backwards time movement (See Einstein's Relativity Theory.). This means that you have to calculate how far back in time he will go so you can aim him at the place the sun was when he would get back there.

You better take a course in simple celestial mechanics before you start blabbing about something that you don't seem to know anything about.





Well, actually, if you are running away from BADecker, this might actually send him further into the past with regard to you... if you are running the exact opposite of the direction he is accelerating towards. If you are running laterally from BADecker, there could be all kinds of time vectors (as well as space vectors) that might come into play... at least concerning your past relationship to BADecker. But it might not be substantial regarding BADecker'srelationship with a past position of the Sun.

However, in all of this, we don't have any practical measurements outside of atomic clocks on jets to suggest what might happen. When considering an acceleration at the speed of light, quantum mechanics might introduce all kinds of interesting phenomenon.

Ah, the General Theory.

May I suggest, that the entire theory breaks down when considering the measured speeds of objects/people running away from The Badecker?

This is a "Runaway speed phenomena."

how about just accelerate badecker to the speed of light towards our own sun.

in short. badecker burns up in 499seconds.

I think, from the previous posts, we have to take the relativistic infinite mass BADecker as that reference point. If we can accelerate it to light-speed (such that we are travelling at light speed relative to the BADecker), the expanding universe takes care of the rest and moves it beyond our frame of reference. Essentially by creating a large separation quickly, we are exposing the local nature of special relativity. Unless you're talking about the links in the original post? I didn't read them because I'm lazy and - in neat counterpoint to my own posts - they're probably nonsense.
One day I'll be good enough for ChipMixer.

Most of the universe is moving away from us faster than the speed of light.. It’s relative..
We are moving faster than the speed of light away from most of the universe..

Faster than the speed of light as compared to what arbitrary stationary reference point in space?

NOW YOU KNOW why we desperately need the multiverse.

Technically we need to consider a couple of additional points. One, the universe is expanding. Two, space is not a perfect vacuum.

In order to propel our BADecker such that it moves beyond our light cone, the first point (space is expanding everywhere, all the time) means that a slightly sub-luminal velocity would be sufficient. However the second point works against us: the BADecker would not achieve light-speed-in-vacuum due to its interaction with cosmic detritus. So whilst with a huge amount of energy we could propel the BADecker at sufficient velocity, it may be, if the first point does not outweigh the second, that at times when the BADecker is traversing a particularly thinly populated region of the interstellar medium, we still catch a tantalising glimpse.

The other option is that we somehow fold space around the BADecker, such that we can move it beyond our light cone.

--

Edit: Also, be careful where you point that thing. If we fire a BADecker at near light speed away from us but directly towards the sun, then its huge relativistic mass m_relBADecker would mean the kinetic energy it/he possesses could conceivably be sufficient to blow up the star, and atomise everything out to the orbit of Mars. Frankly I'm starting to think the whole plan is a bit irresponsible.

Wouldn't this speed lead to deformation of materials?

Still great news though. Hope one day space travel will go past the speed of light limit with some amazing new technologies.

It's impossible for an object with mass to travel at the speed of light. This is basic physics.

If anyone is interested, there's some discussion of light speed in the quantum physics thread here.

But if that BADecker was traveling significantly and sufficiently faster than the speed of light, he just might travel into the distant past before he can hit the Earth. Maybe the dinosaurs weren't killed off by a meteor after all. Maybe BADecker did it.

 

You can say that, but even as we talk, there could be a near infinite size mass Badecker hurling toward us at 99.9999999% of light speed, and we wouldn't know.

There we go again, another one of mumbo-jumbo science, dude seriously are you trolling on a mass level or are you sincere in your efforts to probe these unscientific or pseudoscientific nonsense.

On a very serious note, traveling at or even close to speed of light can have huge implications and I won't believe for a second that any organisation or nation capable of doing it would have not tried it.

No. He would achieve infinite mass and absorb all things.

If BADecker travels at the speed of light away from us (one can only hope) will he be invisible? Sounds like good deal.

2 problems with light speed
1. you better have quick reaction speeds to avoid the asteroids. its not gonna be like fly on the windshield. but more like rocketlauncher through the entire car.

2. you know about centrifugal force(your obsessed with centrifuges recently) so you must know about g force.. so accelerating to light speed will either take a while to get to that speed. or.. rip the muscles from your bones. yep even in space


now. get out the sci-fi section. i know you love it. by try to learn some facts now an again

No.

We (the USA) have had the ability to fly anywhere in the solar system in a short period of time, since the 1960s. We have decided against doing so for obscure reasons. Any of the hurdles regarding the actual "rocket" and its acceleration could be overcome rather easily. Things that might not be overcome so easily, are high-speed impacts with objects (even tiny pebbles) in space. Further development of our old science (which was abandoned in the '60s), could have made the stars available to us back then. See To the stars by atom bomb: The incredible tale of the top secret Orion Project - https://newatlas.com/orion-project-atom-bomb-spaceship/49454/.

Combining the above with the below discoveries, we could surely reach the stars rather easily. Faster than light could be achieved, thereby sending us back into time as well as reaching the stars faster. With regard to the time distortions experienced by high-speed (Einstein's relativity), faster than light could bring us back to previous times so that we would not outlive the people we left behind on Earth.


The Speed Of Light May Soon Be Possible Through A New Thruster