Is Faster Than Light Travel Possible?

In summary: No, I'm not referring to that example. I was just wondering if anyone here could provide me with some proof that nothing can ever travel faster than the speed of light.In summary, the speed of light has been proved to be around 300.000Km per second. Nothing can travels faster than that. But in a medium, glass for instance, the speed of light is decreased by a factor 1.3, and particles can travel faster than light in that perticular media. But not in vacuum.
  • #1
x2thay
14
0
The Light Speed has been proved to be around 300.000Km per second.
So, Before continuing to expose my real thread, i need to know if it is really impossible to an object to travel faster than Light Speed.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
This is one of the most asked questions.

The speed of light in VACUUM is around 300.000Km per second. Nothing can travels faster than that.

But in a medium, glass for instance, the speed of light is decreased by a factor 1.3, and particles can travel faster than light in that perticular media. But not in vacuum.
 
  • #3
Ok then.

So now what I wanted to say in the first place.


Picture a Giant Circle in vacuum, which radius is aproximately 47600Km. This would make its perimeter to be around 300 000 km if I am not mistaken.
What if the Giant Circle would take exactly 1 second to make a complete spin? Then the speed of rotation in the Circle edge would be equivalent to the light speed.

Now, what if our circle had a bigger radius? Then the speed in the edge would be greater than the light speed, now wouldn't it?
 
  • #4
If your "Giant Circle" is a material body, you won't be able to get it spinning fast enough.
 
  • #5
Rotating reference frame

x2thay's post reminds me of an issue I still heve not resolved. I hope I am not diverting the focus of this thread, but perhaps someone here knows the answer.

What's the relativistic transformation from inertial reference frame to rotating reference frame?

For instance:
Suppose I stand in the middle of x2thay's giant circle with me and the circle at rest in an inertial reference frame. Then I transform to a reference frame rotating at 2 revolutions per second. According to classical physics, I would declare that an object on the rim of the circle had a tangential velocity with magnitude twice the speed of light with respect to me.
 
  • #6
Yeah, when you're standing on the Earth, it looks like the stars are rotating around you at many thousands of times the speed of light doesn't it!

Well, they're not. :) You're the one that's rotating, and the reason you know that is because rotation involves acceleration, and all observers do agree on who is accelerating and who is not.
 
  • #7
Rotating Reference Frame

So there is no Relativistic revsion of the transformation of reference frames from inertial to rotating. And its OK to have relative velocities greater than 'c' when the velocities are with respect to a rotating reference frame.
 
  • #8
Doc Al said:
If your "Giant Circle" is a material body, you won't be able to get it spinning fast enough.

It was all hypotherical but, why wouldn't one be able to move it at 1 spin per second?

Anyway, is it right that an object approaching the speed of light, becomes heavier and heavier and turns into pure energy when hitting light speed itself?? If so, my Giant Circle, would transform in energy the ring beyond the 47 600Km radius.
 
  • #9
x2thay said:
It was all hypotherical but, why wouldn't one be able to move it at 1 spin per second?
Because such a spin rate implies that the material would be moving at light speed. Not going to happen.

Anyway, is it right that an object approaching the speed of light, becomes heavier and heavier and turns into pure energy when hitting light speed itself??
No. But as an object's speed approaches the speed of light it does become harder and harder to increase its speed, requiring more and more energy.
 
  • #10
Doc Al said:
Because such a spin rate implies that the material would be moving at light speed. Not going to happen.

I realize it is known that nothing can ever travel faster than the speed of light, but that's just so confusing to me. Can i be given some proof? ^^
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
it would require infinite energy to make something move at the speed of light in vacuum.

Making the atoms, at the outer position of the wheel of yours, move at the speed of light with respect to an arbitrary reference will require an infinite amount of energy.

[tex] E = \sqrt{(pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2} [/tex]

[tex] p = \gamma mv [/tex]

[tex] \gamma = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-(v/c)^2}} [/tex]

If one spaceship moves against a point x from the left at speed 0.75c, and another spaceship moves against the same point from the right with speed 0.75c, their relative speed with respect to the point x is NOT NOT NOT 1.5c, it is less, always less. Always.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/einvel2.html#c2
 
  • #12
It's normal that, in certain cases, the apparent speed be faster than light c, in example the speed of the nodes of a electromagnetic wave passing through a surface with n>1, but it's always apparent and we can always verify that, in reality, the effective speed of light is again c.
 
  • #13
Rotation Observer

Chatman, I hope you are not referring to the example I extended off x2thay’s post. For that example, peter0302 agreed that the velocity of an object relative to a rotating observer may be greater than c.
 
  • #14
But absolutely not, is an apparent effect only!
However it's not real at all!
I'd like to see one of you that show me an object that runs "effectively" faster than light.

Beyond that it seems to be by our perception or impression.
 
Last edited:
  • #15
Well, wonder a spaceship which moves around at 250.000km per second. On it, someone flashes a light beam, which speed is c. Wonder the ship is long enough to the beam to travel for a few seconds (sure is a big ship). Wonder the spaceship disappears suddenly and the beam goes free into the vacuum where the ship were. Then its speed, rises up to 550.000km per sec, I would think...Or maybe it wont...at least according to malawi's demonstration over there...

Is there any physics experiment in these matters or is everything just theoretical?
 
  • #16
x2thay said:
Well, wonder a spaceship which moves around at 250.000km per second. On it, someone flashes a light beam, which speed is c. Wonder the ship is long enough to the beam to travel for a few seconds (sure is a big ship). Wonder the spaceship disappears suddenly and the beam goes free into the vacuum where the ship were. Then its speed, rises up to 550.000km per sec, I would think...Or maybe it wont...at least according to malawi's demonstration over there...
Every observer will measure the speed of the light beam to be c in his frame. That includes observers in the spaceship that flashes the beam and observers on Earth or anywhere else. I have no idea why you think the spaceship's disappearance would affect the speed of the light beam.
Is there any physics experiment in these matters or is everything just theoretical?
This is just one of several consequences of relativity, which has oodles of experimental support. Look here: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=229034"
 
Last edited by a moderator:

1. Is faster than light (FTL) travel possible?

As of now, according to our current understanding of physics, FTL travel is not possible. The theory of relativity states that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, which is approximately 299,792,458 meters per second. Therefore, at this point in time, it is not possible for any object or information to exceed this speed.

2. What is the theory behind FTL travel?

The most commonly known theory for FTL travel is the concept of wormholes. These are hypothetical tunnels or shortcuts through space-time that would allow for faster travel. However, the existence of wormholes has not yet been proven, and even if they do exist, the technology to create and use them is far beyond our current capabilities.

3. Are there any exceptions to the speed of light limit?

According to the theory of relativity, there are no exceptions to the speed of light limit. However, there have been some experiments that seem to suggest particles called neutrinos may have exceeded the speed of light. However, these results were later found to be due to experimental errors and have not been replicated.

4. Could technology advancements make FTL travel possible in the future?

It is currently unknown if technology advancements could make FTL travel possible in the future. While it is always possible that new discoveries and breakthroughs could change our understanding of physics, it is important to note that the speed of light is not just a limitation of technology, but a fundamental principle of the universe.

5. Are there any potential dangers associated with FTL travel?

There are many potential dangers associated with FTL travel. The immense speeds and energies involved could have catastrophic effects on the human body, as well as on any spacecraft. Additionally, the potential for collisions with objects in space would also pose a significant risk. These are just a few of the many challenges that would need to be overcome in order for FTL travel to become a reality.

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
304
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
644
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
20
Views
451
Replies
2
Views
415
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
98
Views
2K
Back
Top