I know how to travel faster than light :\

In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of traveling at speeds close to the speed of light and the effects it would have on time and distance. It is pointed out that while it may seem like one is traveling faster than the speed of light, their actual speed is still just 0.9c. It is also mentioned that it is possible to traverse great distances in a short amount of time by moving at high speeds. The idea of using machines to push against each other to achieve greater speeds is also brought up, but it is noted that the resources needed for such a method would be complex.
  • #1
eNathan
352
2
I travel at .9c for 1 second. From a stationary frame of reference, only 0.316 seconds has passed for me. So from there frame of reference, I traveled 269813212 meters in only 0.316 seconds or 2.8c or 280% the speed of light. I know that you cannot literally travel faster than light itself, because these same effects would apply to light itself or anything else traveling near c, I just wanted to point this out. I typed this quickly so if there are any mathematical errors in it please tell me and I will edit it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
yeah i always wondered the same thing if you were traveling to a star 10 light years away, if you were almost going the speed of light only a few months or days might pass to you, but to the rest of us it took you 10 years to get there.

Guess you woudlnt need cryogenics like in the alian movies, you just need to go really realy fast :)
 
  • #3
NewImage said:
yeah i always wondered the same thing if you were traveling to a star 10 light years away, if you were almost going the speed of light only a few months or days might pass to you, but to the rest of us it took you 10 years to get there.
That's true that the time to get there would be shorter from your point of view, but you have to remember that the distance from the Earth to the star would also be shrunk down to a lot less than 10 light years from your point of view, so in your frame the star doesn't approach you faster than light.
 
  • #4
Nice...but I think you should maybe use Lorentz transformations : let v=.9c, then we have to events in the moving frame (for simplicity, you stay at the origin of the frame) the second event is just 1 second (in that frame), after the first one :

A) (x',t')=(0,0)
B) (x',t')=(0,1),

This gives in the rest frame :

A) (x,t)=(0,0)
B) (x,t)=(gamma*v,gamma)

where gamma=1/Sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

hence, in the rest frame, the measured speed is x/t=v=.9c ??

(I always get mixed when it concerns relativity, sorry)
 
  • #5
eNathan said:
I travel at .9c for 1 second.
I assume you mean that according to some observer's frame of reference, you traveled at 0.9c for 1 second. In other words, they measure you as moving from point A to point B at .9c for 1 second of their time, thus traveling a distance of .9 light-seconds according to them.
From a stationary frame of reference, only 0.316 seconds has passed for me.
I assume you mean from a frame in which you are stationary (your rest frame). According to your clock only .44 seconds have passed. But according to your measurements, the distance from A to B is only about 0.39 light-seconds.
So from there frame of reference, I traveled 269813212 meters in only 0.316 seconds or 2.8c or 280% the speed of light.
Huh? Where do you get this? In the other frame, you are measured to travel at 0.9c. In your frame, your speed is zero of course; but you measure the speed at which point B approaches you to be 0.9c.
 
  • #6
eNathan said:
So from there frame of reference, I traveled 269813212 meters in only 0.316 seconds or 2.8c or 280% the speed of light.
I finally see what you are saying (after JesseM pointed it out to me in another thread). Say another planet is X light years away from Earth (as measured in our Earth frame). You jump into a rocket traveling at .9c relative to earth. Yes, you can reach that planet in only .44 X years (according to your clock). So, yes, effectively you can travel greater than the speed of light (in a sense). But as others have pointed out, your actual speed is still just .9c relative to earth. But your point is valid: If you can somehow get moving fast enough, you can traverse any distance (measured from the original "stationary" frame) in a reasonable amount of (your) time.

(Sorry if I was being overly pedantic.)
 
  • #7
Receding machines maybe?

shuttle}==[]=={}==[]=={}==[]=={}==[]=={}==[]=={}==[]=={earth

Each machine is }==[]=={ which } and { are pushing against each other causing the receding.

When the signal to each machine is sent it is sent when the machines are close to each other and each machine recedes to the set amount of time to fit the set amount of total distance. Each machine recedes slower then c but when pushing away from each other after the signal was sent the total receding with respect to the Earth is faster than c. But the receding from each machine to the next is less than the speed of c. But of course the resources of such a machine is the complicated part.
 

What is faster than light travel?

Faster than light travel, also known as FTL travel, is the concept of traveling at speeds faster than the speed of light, which is 299,792,458 meters per second. This is currently considered impossible according to Einstein's theory of relativity.

Is faster than light travel possible?

According to our current understanding of physics, faster than light travel is not possible. The theory of relativity states that as an object approaches the speed of light, its mass and energy become infinite, making it impossible to accelerate to or beyond the speed of light.

What are some proposed methods for faster than light travel?

There have been several proposed methods for faster than light travel, such as warp drive, wormholes, and Alcubierre drive. However, these methods are purely theoretical and have not been proven to be possible or feasible.

Has faster than light travel been achieved?

No, faster than light travel has not been achieved. While there have been some experiments that have shown particles traveling faster than light, these have been proven to be errors or misinterpretations of data. No object or information has been observed to travel faster than light.

Why is faster than light travel important?

Faster than light travel is important in science fiction as a means of exploring the universe and reaching distant planets. It also has potential applications in space exploration and communication. However, it is still a topic of ongoing research and debate in the scientific community.

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
180
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
505
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
65
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
956
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
28
Views
1K
Back
Top