Can mass go faster than the speed of light?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the question of whether matter can exceed the speed of light (c) and the implications of such a possibility. Participants explore concepts from Einstein's Theory of Relativity, the nature of massless particles, and the relativistic effects on time and distance during travel at high speeds.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that according to Einstein's Theory of Relativity, massive bodies cannot travel at or faster than c, but can approach it arbitrarily closely.
  • There is a discussion about massless particles, with some noting that photons are not the only examples, as gluons and theorized gravitons are also massless.
  • One participant suggests that while no two objects of mass can travel at a relative speed of c, a traveler could reach a destination 10 light years away in less than 10 years from their own perspective, depending on their acceleration.
  • Another participant clarifies that the perceived distance and time can vary between the traveler and an inertial observer, leading to confusion about the nature of speed and distance in relativity.
  • There is a challenge regarding the emission of photons from a moving source, with a participant questioning whether photons would travel at a speed greater than c from the perspective of the emitter.
  • Some participants emphasize the relativity of time and distance, noting that while the traveler's experience may differ, the time elapsed on Earth would still exceed the travel time perceived by the traveler.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that massive bodies cannot reach or exceed the speed of light, but there are multiple competing views regarding the implications of relativistic travel and the nature of speed and distance. The discussion remains unresolved on some technical points, particularly regarding the behavior of light emitted from a moving source.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include varying interpretations of relativistic effects, the dependence on the observer's frame of reference, and unresolved questions about the nature of speed in relation to light emission from moving objects.

  • #61
matheinste said:
Hello all

To clarify a point for myself I have paraphrased the original question in an attempt to remove the necessity of some of the additional and interesting material in the answers.

Given two separate points in space, if a massive object and a photon start from the first point at the same time as each other, is there any condition under which the massive object could arrive at the second point before the photon arrives. I am of course assuming that they can follow the same path. If the same path is not possible in GR then can we restrict the answer to SR in which I believe the same path can be followed.

Matheinste.

In GR a massive particle can not always follow the path taken by a photon. In the example of a photon orbiting a black hole as mentioned by JesseM it is not possible for a massive particle to follow the photon orbit path. What can be fairly safely stated is that if you find the fastest possible path for a photon between two given points then the minimum time for a massive particle to move between those two points by any path will always be longer. Stated in the logical reverse the minimum time for a massive particle to move from one point to another will always be longer than the minimum time taken by a photon when the massive particle and the photon taken the shortest route available to them. This is always true in a vacuum but an important exception is that in some mediums, photons can be slowed down sufficiently that they actually move slower than some massive massive particles in the same medium.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
Count Iblis said:
It is interesting to consider tunneling. Suppose a clock on the North Pole tunnels to the South Pole. What will be the proper time that will have elapsed?

Here's a https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=1543402&postcount=8" that compares a clock on the surface at the equator to a clock at the centre of the Earth. The rotation of the clock at the equator with the Earth and the differing gravitational potentials are both taken into account.

I also have done the calculation for the scenario you propose, as well as for one complete cycle, i.e., the clock falls from the north pole to the south pole, stops, turns around, and falls back to the north pole. I have compared the elapsed time on the falling clock to the elapsed time on a clock that stays at the north pole, and to elapse time on a clock at the centre between meetings. This requires some somewhat subtle numerical integration. I would have to dig to find these results, and I don't think I've posted any of the results.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #63
Thanks kev and JesseM you have fully answered my question. The SR question i was sure of but some of the other answers in this thread seemed to complicate matters. The GR case is along the lines i thought it would be because of a photon and a massive particle not being able to follow the same path in the presence of gravity.

Matheinste.
 
  • #64
kev said:
In GR a massive particle can not always follow the path taken by a photon. In the example of a photon orbiting a black hole as mentioned by JesseM it is not possible for a massive particle to follow the photon orbit path.
By "path", I assume you mean the spatial path rather than the path through spacetime? In this case, a massive object moving on a freefall geodesic may not be able to follow the photon orbit path, but a rocket that's not in freefall could in principle (just as a rocket can maintain a constant radius from a black hole at any distance above the horizon).
kev said:
What can be fairly safely stated is that if you find the fastest possible path for a photon between two given points then the minimum time for a massive particle to move between those two points by any path will always be longer.
Yeah, that's what I was saying, it's always possible to find a photon that reaches the destination faster than the massive object, even though there may be other examples of photon paths that take longer to get to the destination (like taking the long way around a black hole vs. taking the shortest path).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 64 ·
3
Replies
64
Views
12K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
3K