Can We Travel Close to the Speed of Light?

In summary, this conversation is discussing the highest theoretical speed and it is impossible to travel faster than the speed of light in a vacuum.
  • #1
Mederman
4
3
Hello!
My kid asks if this is theoretical idea is correct and I just don't know this stuff very well:
It is impossible to travel at light speed but not impossible to travel just below. So the highest theoretical speed should be:
"The distance light has traveled in one second" minus "One Planck length"

I ask: How about "The distance light has traveled in on hour" minus "One Planck length", isn't that closer to the speed of light?

He didn't like that because he think that a Planck length is the smallest thing and cannot be divided. How should we think about this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Or how about the distance light traveled in one year minus a Planck length? Or the distance light traveled over 13.8 billion years minus a Planck length, etc ad nauseum...

What exactly is the point in all this?

Zz.
 
  • #3
The highest possible speed is the speed of light in a vacuum (c). However, this is only achievable for particles without mass. For everything that has a mass, c can theoretically be approached as close as one has energy to accelerate the mass. But that gets soon in ranges where the total energy of the universe isn't sufficient anymore. So there is a practical limit below c, depending on the mass. The difference between any actual speed and c has nothing to do with the Planck length. The value is c, regardless whether measured in km/h, mph, lightseconds/second, lighthours/hour or whatever. This difference is a difference of speeds, hence measured in the same units. If it is close to c, then it is something like 0.999999999999999991c and the difference will be 1c-0.999999999999999991c=0.000000000000000009c and thus has the same unit as c has. There is no Planck length ansywhere.
 
  • #4
Mederman said:
speed should be:
"The distance light has traveled in one second" minus "One Planck length"

Presumably also divided by one second :wink:
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman
  • #5
I asked him again what he meant. He says that speed cannot change less than one Planck-length per second.
I think this is the question I should have asked to begin with.
 
  • #6
This doesn't make sense. Second is an arbitrary unit. Why should it have any physical relevance? If you say Planck-length per Planck-time you end up exactly with c.
 
  • #7
Ok, I'll try this: Can something travel less than one Planck length.
 
  • #8
Mederman said:
I asked him again what he meant. He says that speed cannot change less than one Planck-length per second.
I think this is the question I should have asked to begin with.
The Planck length and Planck time are irrelevant. It's a common misconception that you have picked up that they have some significance in this respect. Time and space are not quantised like that.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters and etotheipi
  • #10
PeroK said:
The Planck length and Planck time are irrelevant. It's a common misconception that you have picked up that they have some significance in this respect. Time and space are not quantised like that.
I'll use this answer and tell him that Planck length may be a smallest unit, but distances aren't a fixed number of Planck units and speeds can change less than one Planck length per second.

Thanks for helping me out, you guys are great!
 
  • Like
Likes etotheipi and PeroK
  • #11
Mederman said:
I'll use this answer and tell him that Planck length may be a smallest unit

It may. Or the smallest length could be something else. Or there may be no smallest length.
 
  • Like
Likes DennisN
  • #12
Mederman said:
Summary:: The maximum speed in therory

It is impossible to travel at light speed but not impossible to travel just below. So the highest theoretical speed should be:
It might be helpful for your child to understand the energies required to accelerate an object to near light speed. That might help to end the "how super close" type questions. Calculate the energy it takes to accelerate even a small particle close to light speed, and you start to get an appreciation for how hard it is. Even for "theoretical" questions, you cannot exceed reasonable amounts of energy input.
 
  • #14
Mederman said:
I'll use this answer and tell him that Planck length may be a smallest unit, but distances aren't a fixed number of Planck units and speeds can change less than one Planck length per second.

Thanks for helping me out, you guys are great!
Vanadium 50 said:
It may. Or the smallest length could be something else. Or there may be no smallest length.
Well, it's even worse: due to time dilation and length contraction the chosen units/intervals won't necessarily be consistent with each other for different observers, or the same observer at different points in a trip.
 
  • #15
russ_watters said:
due to time dilation and length contraction

This is sort of fixable, but of course there is always cost. For now I would say it's an idea that lacks both experimental evidence and theoretical motivation.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters

1. How fast is the speed of light?

The speed of light is approximately 299,792,458 meters per second in a vacuum. This is equivalent to about 670,616,629 miles per hour.

2. Can humans travel at the speed of light?

No, it is currently not possible for humans to travel at the speed of light. According to Einstein's theory of relativity, the closer an object gets to the speed of light, the more mass it gains and the more energy it requires to accelerate. This makes it practically impossible for humans to reach the speed of light.

3. What are the potential consequences of traveling close to the speed of light?

Traveling close to the speed of light can have significant consequences. As an object approaches the speed of light, time dilation occurs, meaning time slows down for the object relative to an observer. This can have major effects on aging and perception of time. Additionally, objects traveling at high speeds can experience length contraction, where the length of the object appears to shrink in the direction of motion. This can also lead to changes in mass and energy.

4. Is it possible to travel faster than the speed of light?

According to current scientific understanding, it is not possible to travel faster than the speed of light. The speed of light is considered to be the universal speed limit, and it would require infinite energy to accelerate an object to this speed. Additionally, objects with mass cannot reach the speed of light, as their mass would become infinite.

5. What are some ways scientists are studying and testing the limits of the speed of light?

Scientists are constantly studying and testing the limits of the speed of light through various experiments and theories. Some methods include using particle accelerators to accelerate particles to near-light speeds, observing astronomical objects and phenomena that are traveling at high speeds, and conducting thought experiments and mathematical calculations based on the principles of relativity.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
495
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
281
Replies
6
Views
335
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
25
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
848
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
23
Views
1K
Back
Top