Call me crazy but, I think there might a speed faster than C

  • Thread starter suckstobeyou
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Speed
In summary: But you've got that incorrect. This black whole has mass, and therefore something to 'stop' the light. When you shine light at a brick wall does it keep going? Nope. It's merely stopping and being refracted into -blackness- (black is simply the absence of color).But you're right, in a sense. Although the black whole does have mass, it doesn't have the same kind of mass as the object that's shining the light into it. So when the light hits the black whole, it's stopped and refracted. However, this doesn't mean that the light is changed in any way. It's still just light.
  • #1
suckstobeyou
19
0
if you have one train inside another train both traveling close to C in the same direction what would be the speed of the second train inside of the first one for an observer standing on the ground?

lets extend this to a billion embedded trains what's the speed of the inner-most train to an obserevr on the ground?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I don't know the math, but you're not going to get that inside train to light speed. You'll still run into the 'infinite energy required' problem, regardless of whether it's strictly under its own power or is in part parasitical upon the outer train.
 
  • #3
relativistic addition of velocities

suckstobeyou said:
if you have one train inside another train both traveling close to C in the same direction what would be the speed of the second train inside of the first one for an observer standing on the ground?
The speed would be close to but less than C.

The speed would be given by the relativistic addition of velocities formula:
[tex]U' = \frac{U + V}{1 + \frac{U V}{c^2}}[/tex]

V is the speed of the first train with respect to the ground, U is the speed of the second train with respect to the first, U' is the speed of the second train with respect to the ground. You can see that the relative speed of the second train will never exceed the speed of light.
 
  • #4
Thanks for the formula, Doc. I never figured there'd be one simple enough for me to work out by myself. :smile:
 
  • #5
that sux:grumpy:
 
  • #6
Danger said:
Thanks for the formula, Doc. I never figured there'd be one simple enough for me to work out by myself. :smile:

*slaps danger*

What kinda physisist are you :tongue2:
 
  • #7
I'm not a physicist (although I know how to spell it :tongue: ), or an engineer, or anything else of the sort. As I've stated in other areas, I never finished high-school and have a grade 9 math education.
 
  • #8
suckstobeyou said:
that sux:grumpy:

Actually I think it's quite wonderful, although I think I understand how you feel about it. The ideas behind Special Relativity are extremely disconcerting at first, you have to adjust your entire perspective of space and time in order to come to terms with the ideas. However, once you have done so the theory is extremely simple and beautiful, it's really quite amazing.
 
  • #10
Not me... for the above-mentioned reason. :frown:
 
  • #11
hey guys. new here.

I remember reading that a group of scientists managed to slow down light? also, if at the point a start becomes a black whole, the light it was giving off should now begin to be pulled into the black hole by gravity correct? thus the light must slow down and change direction. or in any case, a black hole must be slowing light down at some point? thus, if light can be slowed down then it is not constant and there is little reason to believe it can't be sped up as well? that ideas been on my mind for a while. been lookin for some answers.
 
  • #12
x2468 said:
hey guys. new here.
I remember reading that a group of scientists managed to slow down light? also, if at the point a start becomes a black whole, the light it was giving off should now begin to be pulled into the black hole by gravity correct? thus the light must slow down and change direction. or in any case, a black hole must be slowing light down at some point? thus, if light can be slowed down then it is not constant and there is little reason to believe it can't be sped up as well? that ideas been on my mind for a while. been lookin for some answers.

But you've got that incorrect. This black whole has mass, and therefore something to 'stop' the light. When you shine light at a brick wall does it keep going? Nope. It's merely stopping and being refracted into -blackness- (black is simply the absence of color).
 
  • #13
umm, I don't think mass is something which 'stops' light, a sheet of glass had mass the last time I checked.
 

1. Is it possible for there to be a speed faster than the speed of light (C)?

Many scientists believe that the speed of light is the fastest possible speed in the universe. However, some theories suggest that there could be other particles or phenomena that travel faster than the speed of light. This is still a topic of ongoing research and debate.

2. How can we measure a speed faster than C if nothing can travel faster than light?

Currently, there is no way to directly measure speeds faster than the speed of light. However, scientists can indirectly measure these speeds through observations and experiments involving other particles and phenomena.

3. What implications would a speed faster than C have on our understanding of physics?

If there is indeed a speed faster than the speed of light, it would challenge many of our current theories and models of physics. It could potentially lead to a new understanding of how the universe works and allow us to make new discoveries and advancements.

4. Has there been any evidence or experiments that suggest a speed faster than C exists?

There have been some experiments and observations that have hinted at the possibility of speeds faster than the speed of light. However, these results are still inconclusive and require further investigation to confirm their validity.

5. Is it possible that our current understanding of the speed of light is incorrect?

While it is always possible that our current understanding of the speed of light is incorrect, it is highly unlikely. The speed of light has been extensively studied and tested, and all evidence points to it being the fastest speed in the universe. However, as science and technology continue to advance, our understanding of the speed of light may evolve as well.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
9
Views
237
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
21
Views
600
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
732
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
3K
Back
Top