Acceleration of an object to the speed of light.

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the impossibility of accelerating an object to the speed of light, as outlined in Pauling's General Chemistry. It emphasizes that matter, defined as mass-energy, cannot exceed light speed, and if it were to reach that speed, it would become radiant energy. However, the laws of physics dictate that objects with mass cannot attain light speed, reinforcing the conclusion that anything starting below that threshold remains below it. The conversation highlights the fundamental principles of relativity and the nature of mass-energy.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Einstein's Theory of Relativity
  • Familiarity with the concepts of mass-energy equivalence
  • Basic knowledge of the speed of light as a universal constant
  • Awareness of the definitions of matter and radiant energy
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity in detail
  • Explore the implications of mass-energy equivalence in physics
  • Research the properties of light and its role in physics
  • Investigate the concept of relativistic mass and its effects on acceleration
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators teaching relativity, and anyone interested in the fundamental laws governing the universe and the nature of energy and matter.

Hunus
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
I'm reading Pauling's General Chemistry and he starts off his first chapter with, "Matter may be defined as any kind of mass-energy that moves with velocities less that the velocity of light, and radiant energy as any kind of mass-energy that moves with the velocity of light."

I know that we can't accelerate an object to the speed of light, but the wording of this sentence seems to imply that, if we could, it would become radiant energy; as it would then be mass-energy moving with the velocity of light.

So my question is, if we could accelerate an object to the speed of light would it become radiant energy?
 
Science news on Phys.org
Hunus said:
...if we could accelerate an object to the speed of light...
The answer is, as you've already admitted, is we can't. (You are, in effect, asking, what would happen if the laws of physics were different? We can't use the laws of physics to answer that.)

That's why the definition makes sense. Anything that starts off slower than light will always be slower than light. Anything that starts off at the speed of light will always be at the speed of light.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
16K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K