The speed of light as an absolute max

In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of acceleration and its effects on mass and energy. The participants consider the possibility of continuous acceleration with no speed limit and the idea of traveling to other stars in less than light speed time. They also discuss the relationship between acceleration and mass, and question whether the energy yielded by annihilation would increase from an external frame of reference. The conclusion is that while acceleration can affect the measurement of mass, it does not actually increase mass or energy.
  • #1
todosony
1
0
I realize that this has been experimentally confirmed in any number of ways, based on the external application of energy to a particle. I have read articles on this subject, ranging from the magazine variety to texts by famous physicists, over the last 40 years.

My question relates to the possible acceleration of an object using energy supplied by the accelerated object. Say you are in a spaceship or the famous elevator car with, for lack of a better example, a drive based on the total annihilation of mater. As speed increases, mass increases, but the particles being ejected by the rocket motor would also have increased in mass equally. From the view of the pilot, in relative space, is his acceleration that of the ship starting from rest. In short, he is moving or not, it is only relative to other reference points. If he were in deep space, essentially out of any significant gravitation effect of another body, wouldn’t he be able to accelerate continuously, with no speed limit.

I guess I keep thinking of that example of an elevator car in space with the person inside only aware of acceleration not speed. If the accelerating medium is entirely contained within the elevator, what would limit his speed assuming he was feeling a continuous acceleration?

As an astronomy buff, I have a hard time believing that there is not a way of visiting other stars in less than light speed time, which is not to say that when we get back, anyone will be alive that we knew when we departed. Said another way, I do not believe that God plays dice with us.

Thank you:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
todosony said:
As speed increases, mass increases, but the particles being ejected by the rocket motor would also have increased in mass equally.
That is incorrect.

Acceleration does not cause an increase in mass. It is true that measuring the mass of an object in relative motion is higher than the mass of an identical object at rest but this is due to relativistic effects. However the proper mass of an object does not increase when it accelerates.
 
  • #3
and even if your ship were to burn all its mass down to where there was only one electron left, it would still require an infinite amount of energy to finally accelerate it to C. and yes, you could essentially accellerate for an infnite amount of time and still never quite get to C.

however, your question seems to be really more along the lines of "how can we travel to other places in the universe in less time than it (apparently) takes light to travel that same distance?"

there is an answer to that question, and it relates back to first order relativity. for example, if you want to travel to a star that is 10 LY distant - if you were able to devise a ship which could go 0.9999999C, you would find that you could get to the star in about 1 year according to your ship's clock (while about 11 years would have passed on earth). the closer you get to C in your ship, the less time it takes to arrive at the star, and as V approaches C, time to destination approaches 0. we do not need FTL speeds to travel across the universe. of course, this begs the question - just exactly how far away is that star, really?
 
  • #4
That same idea crossed my mind when I was much younger. I merely assumed that the increased yield is never enough to supply the increased requirement, but only enough to reduce the difference between the two.

But then I saw this;
MeJennifer said:
That is incorrect.

Acceleration does not cause an increase in mass. It is true that measuring the mass of an object in relative motion is higher than the mass of an identical object at rest but this is due to relativistic effects. However the proper mass of an object does not increase when it accelerates.

Does this mean that the energy yielded by the annihilation of this matter would not increase? I can certainly see that would be a case from the vehicles frame of reference (in which the mass has also not increased). But, from an external frame of reference (in which the measured mass does increase), does the energy that can be extracted from that matter also increase?
 

What is the speed of light and why is it considered an absolute maximum?

The speed of light is a physical constant that represents the maximum speed at which energy, information, or matter can travel through space. It is defined as approximately 299,792,458 meters per second in a vacuum. It is considered an absolute maximum because according to Einstein's theory of relativity, nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.

How was the speed of light first measured?

The first accurate measurement of the speed of light was done in 1676 by Danish astronomer Ole Rømer. He observed the eclipses of Jupiter's moon, Io, and noticed that the timing of the eclipses varied depending on the distance between Earth and Jupiter. From this, he calculated the time it took for light to travel from Jupiter to Earth and estimated the speed of light to be about 220,000 km/s.

Is the speed of light constant in all mediums?

In a vacuum, the speed of light is constant and is represented by the letter "c." However, in other mediums such as air, water, and glass, light travels at a slower speed due to interactions with the atoms and molecules in those substances. This is known as the refractive index and can be calculated using Snell's law.

Why is the speed of light used as a universal constant in physics?

The speed of light is used as a universal constant in physics because it is the only physical quantity that is the same for all observers, regardless of their relative motion. This means that the laws of physics remain the same for all observers, regardless of their speed or position, as long as the speed of light is used as a reference point.

Can anything travel faster than the speed of light?

According to Einstein's theory of relativity, nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. As an object approaches the speed of light, its mass increases infinitely and it would require an infinite amount of energy to accelerate it further. This is why the speed of light is considered an absolute maximum and cannot be exceeded.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
6
Views
849
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
74
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
20
Views
1K
Replies
130
Views
8K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
1K
Back
Top