Please save your personal Avatar and your personal mails you have here in this forum as we will change the forum software in the next few days or at least next week. Thanks. Regards, Stefan Hartmann ( Admin)
Who here can give me one good reason that you cannot travel faster than the speed of light?.Apparently travelling faster than the speed of light goes against Albert Einstein's theory of special relativity. If the speed of light is 299 792 458 m/s,why can this speed not be exceeded. Why cant we travel at 300 000 000 m/s?.
This is what I understand of the topic, Tinman.Einstein has claimed that an object will gain mass as it accelerates - how this occurs I have no idea. As the object continues to accelerate, it continues to gain mass. The more massive the object, the more force is required to accelerate it. It gets to the point whereby the mass gained by the object approaches infinity. This implies that the force required to accelerate it further approaches infinity.
Light has mass,as gravity act's on any mass,and any mass has gravity. We know gravity can bend light,and in the case of extreem gravity such as black hole's,light cannot escape gravity. This means light has mass.
You would require approximately 9 exa Joules of energy to accelerate a 100 {kg} mass to the speed of light. That is 9x10^18 {J}. According to wikipedia the total world energy consumption in 2006 was 8.3 exa Joules.I think I will defer to Einstein's standpoint and assume that reaching the speed of light is not possible. If it is possible, it will be a long long time before we are able to generate and store that amount of energy to be used in a space craft. Probably never.
As I understand it, Tinman, photons are massless particles.I think that the theory says that massive objects bend and distort spacetime. It is this distorted spacetime that light follows, like a train on a rail, down into a black hole. This implies that gravity can affect the path that light follows, but affects it indirectly.Going back to your original question however. I posted this in a different thread earlier:I suppose that the extreme economical expenditure required is a pretty good reason.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnMIhxWRGNw
Nice video broli,but it telling me that the mass decreases as it aproaches the speed of light,where as Einstein say's the mass will increase??? Thats the problem with theories,we just dont know until we get there.A theory only becomes reality once proof is presented.
The problem is that the formula is the result of a particle accelerator curve. If you supply energy that's moving at the speed of light to a particle with mass, it becomes impossible to move the mass faster than the speed of light. The triangular equation matches the result perfectly.This however does not indicate that it's impossible to travel faster than the speed of light, only that it's impossible to push something faster than the object pushing it.If a spaceship contained enough fuel or energy to travel faster than light speed, then the spaceship surely would otherwise it would violate another law of physics in that for every action there is an opposite reaction.As the spaceship moves through space at any speed, applying additional thrust will increase the speed regardless of the spaceships speed or the speed of the thrust.
Then the same must apply for all mass,in that the fuel propelling the space craft must also gain in mass relative to that of the space craft. This would also mean the particles being ejected to provide thrust must also gain in mass,thus creating more thrust. If the space craft were to gain infinite mass,then so would the fuel and thrust particles.From this,we can eliminate the requirement for large amounts of fuel,as the fuel would gain in mass the closer we get to the speed of light. But dose this mean that with infinite mass,all of space is filled up with a space ship???.It is said that energy can be neither created or destroyed,but Einestein's theory says mass increases as we approach the speed of light. This means the energy created from the engine pushing the space craft would increase. This increase in energy was then created out of nothing.
That's why I suspect the formula is only correct from an observer viewpoint and would not apply from the perspective of the spaceship.