Recent content by vansrv8

Ok I oversimplified to make the maths quick and easy to understand ( especially after a very nice wine I had with dinner) without using the Einstein velocity relationship to transforms a measured velocity as seen in one inertial frame of reference (u) to the velocity as measured in a frame...

I think I was saying that, so with so many frames of reference won't that make spatial navigation a nightmare?

Ok what I've been trying to get to is perhaps the speed of light is just that, the maximum speed light can travel and that it has no reference to mass at all even if something was traveling faster than the speed of light we would only detect it as traveling at the speed of light...... Ugg gasp...

That's what I said "No reference"

OK let's imagine that a ship leaves Earth and accelerates to near light speed than cuts the engine so is in free fall. then most of the crew enter a ship on the nose of the fist ship which is at rest in relationship to the second ship which now accelerated away from the first ship and reaches...

Hmm didn't consider solar winds, But it is still an outside force like gravity. Ok when I mentioned constant momentum I meant the increase in momentum is constant. Energy, the kinetic energy is increasing. and rocket motors. The plasma drive is in its infancy Sort of like telling the wright...

Thank you for replying I agree that relativistic mass is really only good to use for station closed systems. But we don't have a stationary closed system.. No were in the natural world is there objects in space that accelerate by internal means. Gravity is the only way something natural can have...

Hi, Simple question. if a ship is getting close to the speed of light its momentum (mass) will continue to increase requiring more energy to propel faster. The fuel in the ship will also gain energy and mass as it accelerates. at C it will require infinite energy because it will have infinite...