Near Light Speed Travel Possible After All?


Recommended Posts

PhysOrg has a story about research that may indicate that close to light speed travel is possible. From the article: 'New antigravity solution will enable space travel near speed of light by the end of this century, he predicts.

On Tuesday, Feb. 14, noted physicist Dr. Franklin Felber will present his new exact solution of Einstein's 90-year-old gravitational field equation to the Space Technology and Applications International Forum (STAIF) in Albuquerque.

The solution is the first that accounts for masses moving near the speed of light.'

Source: Physorg.com

What exactly does the research address? NEAR light speed has always been 'possible' but the energy requirements depend completely on the Equation found by Lorentz via Einstein. The only restraint imposed by modern physics on space travel is that an object with nonzero mas cannot equal or exceed the speed of light in any inertial or noinertial reference frame. The energy, however, to approach just less than the speed of light by a massive object increases exponentially and reaches toward infinity before the speed of c is ever reached. I must add that a few years ago some scientists 'thought' they found a way to record behaviour that moved faster than c. If i remember right, they shot an electron (a massive particle) through a gas of cesium and were able to note its arrival before its departure! (The consquences of going faster than light.)

What exactly does the research address? NEAR light speed has always been 'possible' but the energy requirements depend completely on the Equation found by Lorentz via Einstein. The only restraint imposed by modern physics on space travel is that an object with nonzero mas cannot equal or exceed the speed of light in any inertial or noinertial reference frame. The energy, however, to approach just less than the speed of light by a massive object increases exponentially and reaches toward infinity before the speed of c is ever reached. I must add that a few years ago some scientists 'thought' they found a way to record behaviour that moved faster than c. If i remember right, they shot an electron (a massive particle) through a gas of cesium and were able to note its arrival before its departure! (The consquences of going faster than light.)

As I understand it, Einstein's equations allow faster-than-light travel, but travel at the speed of light makes things fall apart. So, if you could just, you know, "skip" going the speed of light, then things would be OK!

As I understand it, Einstein's equations allow faster-than-light travel, but travel at the speed of light makes things fall apart. So, if you could just, you know, "skip" going the speed of light, then things would be OK!

If I rember my physics corectly speed over C makes the lorentz transformations divide by square of a negitive number, producing i. I cant fathom what happens if you start going some multible of i. So you would be going an imaginary speed?

and yes einsteins equations dont alow for speed of C because it makes things divide by zero.

but also einsteins equations are wrong, because there unable to account for quantum mechanics. There preaty darn close tho, but I imagine that the mistake will have big impact as you get closer and closer to C

as for the article, I dont think anyone realy doubted the posibility of going the speed of light. Infact electrons travel near the speed of light (or is it exactly?) and they have a mass.

Edited by lostspyder
As I understand it, Einstein's equations allow faster-than-light travel, but travel at the speed of light makes things fall apart. So, if you could just, you know, "skip" going the speed of light, then things would be OK!

I don't think the equations account for faster than light travel, but that's not what this article is talking about. It's talking about solving the equations to develop a means to push a mass to a large fraction of the speed of light. There are theoretical particles that may travel faster than c called tachyons.

as for the article, I dont think anyone realy doubted the posibility of going the speed of light. Infact electrons travel near the speed of light (or is it exactly?) and they have a mass.

As far as I can remember, the speed of an electron in a vacuum can approach, but never reach c, the speed of light, in a vacuum anyway. Photons travel at the speed of light obviously

If I rember my physics corectly speed over C makes the lorentz transformations divide by square of a negitive number, producing i. I cant fathom what happens if you start going some multible of i. So you would be going an imaginary speed?

and yes einsteins equations dont alow for speed of C because it makes things divide by zero.

but also einsteins equations are wrong, because there unable to account for quantum mechanics. There preaty darn close tho, but I imagine that the mistake will have big impact as you get closer and closer to C

as for the article, I dont think anyone realy doubted the posibility of going the speed of light. Infact electrons travel near the speed of light (or is it exactly?) and they have a mass.

Correct, the lorentz transformation equation requires a factor, usually referred to as gamma, that is 1/sqrt(1-(v/c)^2)

That means when velocity is above the speed of light, you will get a factor of i on the bottom. The same thing about einsteins field equation holds true for the lorentz tranformations equations, you will have a 0 factor on the bottom.

What is interesting about the speed of light, according to theory, is that you will be everywhere at once, and yet nowhere. When you travel at near the speed of light, space and time contracts to you, so a meter in one reference frame might only be an inch in yours, and a year might only be a second. And in theory, when you travel faster then the speed of light, time becomes inverted, so you will be traveling back in time.

This is what makes the speed of light so interesting, because if the theory about special relativity at near the speed of light, and just above the speed of light hold true, then at the speed of light something will have to contract to the point of nonexistence in your reference frame.

This also makes some other topics interesting, such as what happens to an object that travels at the speed of light in an observer's reference frame. At near C speeds, you contract in that frame, so instead of a meter long, you're only an inch (quite interesting if you think about it, in the "rocket" frame, you are an inch long, but in your frame, he's an inch). But at the speed of light, in theory you'd contract so much you'd disappear.

Tachyons are a theoritical particle designed to help with faster then light travel theory, but they're not holding much water so far. And the "slowest" a tachyon can travel is the speed of light. I'd be interesting to see if faster then light travel is possible in the future, and if it's possible to cross that line.

Man did I go off into left field there...sorry, physics is my major.

I think the only real limitation to speed is being able to see. There is always this unpredicatable part to the universe that will keep anyone deploying a payload of any value blindly forward. Having said that - I think you can see at the speed of light - so I'm just wondering what the next barrier will be. First it was the sound barrier, then the light barrier. Maybe once we get that fast we'll discover objects that never go slower than the speed of light, and then we'll want to get to going that fast. After all there is a huge universe out there that'd I'd love to go speeding in. [/star Trek thinking] So yeah, end of this century is a bit early, but we'll do it soon enough. It'd be nice if I was alive when we made anti-gravity engines!

Edited by JoDaddy

Also on a side note, theres no reason to say that the earth isnt travling the speed of light relitive to some other observer right now. Hence we could all be traveling near the speed of light already :D

Actually, we are traveling at near light speed to particles traveling at near light speed. A particle or object or whatever, traveling at near the speed of light wouldn't "know" it's traveling, everything would be traveling at "it's speed," in the other direction relative to it.

It's all about reference frames.

But there are some laws about reference frames that hold true throughout. Like if an event can cause another in one reference frame, it can cause it throughout all reference frames. This is the "causality" rule or something similar, I forgot the exact rule. But when you travel at faster then light speed, the causality relation breaks down, because it's possible to have a result happen before the cause, at least in theory. This is one of the many interesting things about time travel and faster then light speed.

Do you guys believe the universe is expanding? If so where does it end? It seems if so we could extrapolate an origin?

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/myst...day_040524.html

I think the more interesting question is not where it ends, since most scientists will agree that the universe is finite, or where the origin is (though the origin would be interesting), but rather what will happen to the universe. Will it expand constantly? Will it reach a peak and shrink back to that origin? Or will it keep expanding until it reaches a point and "rip" into 2 universes?

Well, you know, in the 80's we thinking to have space colony on the moon by 2000...

Or that the cars would fly like planes...

So i'm pretty septic...

according to the 1950's we were suppose to have flying cars and jetpacks by now too

wheres my jetpack dammit!!!!????

Actually, we are traveling at near light speed to particles traveling at near light speed. A particle or object or whatever, traveling at near the speed of light wouldn't "know" it's traveling, everything would be traveling at "it's speed," in the other direction relative to it.

It's all about reference frames.

No, not everything. Einstein postulated that light travels at 3e8 m/s in all reference frames, stationary or moving.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Ford execs say they made a mistake when they replaced human engineers with AI by David Uzondu Ford recently announced that over the last three years, it's had to rehire about 350 "gray beard" engineers to mentor younger staff and reprogram diagnostic systems and AI tools that were failing to meet up to quality expectations. The company's VP of vehicle hardware engineering, Charles **** said that leaders overlooked the deep experience of veterans who survived many product cycles. **** admitted that simply replacing them with AI was a huge mistake, and that while AI is "a fantastic tool," it remains "only as good as the information you use to train it." The rehired engineers now run mandatory meetings to troubleshoot vehicles and reprogram automated engineering software and AI tools to prevent glitches before production. These technical specialists hunt for failure points before a part ever reaches the plant floor. This hands-on process prevents the massive recalls and defects that previously cost the company billions. CEO Jim Farley noted that this return to human oversight quickly decreased warranty coverages and recall costs. The change saves the automaker hundreds of millions of dollars as it aims to cut one billion dollars in expenses this year. In last year's JD Power Quality Survey, an annual study that measures the quality of a car during the first three months of ownership, Ford finished 10th among mainstream brands and scored below the industry average. But this year, JD Power ranked the automaker as the top mainstream brand, placing it above the likes of Toyota Motor Corp. and Honda Motor Co. Ford attributed this massive improvement directly to the expertise of these returned engineers. Ford's realization that AI cannot magically design and test quality vehicles without senior human oversight is just the tip of the iceberg. When Careerminds looked at companies that conducted AI-driven layoffs, researchers found out that 35.6% of those companies had to rehire more than half of the employees they previously fired. Another 32.7% had to rehire between 25% and 50% of them. In 2024, Sebastian Siemiatkowski, CEO of Klarna, proudly announced that its new chatbot was doing the work of 700 full-time customer service agents. As a result, the fintech company froze hiring and cut hundreds of positions. But by mid 2025, and into 2026, Klarna was scrambling to recruit human agents again because customer satisfaction had plummeted. It turns out, while AI is very good at answering basic questions like how to check an account balance, when faced with complex customer issues that require nuance, the thing usually resorts to the unhelpful, robotic corporate jargon we all know and love.
    • Free AI in IDEs is shifting to paid models Or you know, you could just learn to actually design and code apps, use frameworks to handle the repetitive parts and not use AI at all - and voila... free for life!
    • In a sane world US antitrust laws wouldn't even allow these companies to be in the position to be subjected to EU directives. As you say, better than oligarch nothing.
    • Apple reportedly has a second-generation iPhone Fold planned for 2027 Good grief, Apple hasn't even released a first folding phone and the Apple faithful is already obsessing over the sequel? Seriously people, go out and touch grass... because this level of obsession is borderline stalkery/neurotic.
    • I checked on the IPs associated with every login and they're all mine... And whenever I get a new prompt, there is no activity to show for it. 
  • Recent Achievements

    • Enthusiast
      Xonos went up a rank
      Enthusiast
    • Conversation Starter
      Admir earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      First Post
    • Apprentice
      daryld went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Contributor
      Carltonbar went up a rank
      Contributor
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      405
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      169
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      129
    4. 4
      neufuse
      69
    5. 5
      Xenon
      68
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!