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

    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 by Razvan Serea TeraCopy is a compact program designed to copy and move files at the maximum possible speed, also providing you with a lot of features. Copy files faster. TeraCopy uses dynamically adjusted buffers to reduce seek times. Asynchronous copy speeds up file transfer between two physical hard drives. Pause and resume transfers. Pause copy process at any time to free up system resources and continue with a single click. Error recovery. In case of copy error, TeraCopy will try several times and in the worse case just skips the file, not terminating the entire transfer. Interactive file list. TeraCopy shows failed file transfers and lets you fix the problem and recopy only problem files. Shell integration. TeraCopy can completely replace Explorer copy and move functions, allowing you work with files as usual. TeraCopy is free for non-commercial use only. For commercial use you need to buy a license. The paid version of the program includes the following features: Copy/move to your favorite folders. Save reports as HTML and CSV files. Select files with the same extension/folder. Remove the selected files from the copy queue. TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 changelog: Added support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. Improved exception handling and automated bug report upload. Fixed several minor bugs and small memory leaks. Build 26 (June 24) Fixed a rare exception when a transfer completed. Features added since version 3.17: Enhanced speed graph. New multi-threaded copy engine. Support for copying to multiple targets. Queue system for managing multiple copy operations. Support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. TeraCopy entry in the modern Windows Explorer context menu. Integrated toolbar in the title bar. Why receive LocalSend transfers with TeraCopy? Handle file conflicts: Skip, overwrite, or rename files when a file with the same name already exists. LocalSend always creates another copy, which can waste time and disk space, especially when resuming an interrupted transfer. Filter unwanted files: Apply ignore lists or remove files manually before accepting a transfer, so unnecessary files are not downloaded. Better performance on fast networks: In tests over a 10 Gbps connection, TeraCopy received files several times faster than the standard LocalSend app on Windows. Download: TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 | 14.5 MB (Freeware, paid upgrade available) View: TeraCopy Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Briefly used Turbo Pascal (and Turbo C++) in 97 and soon after that I bought PC magazine that included a full version of Delphi 2. I still use Delphi today, some 29 years later.
    • Age of Empires Mobile comes to PC, here's how to carry over progress from your phone by Ivan Jenic Image: YouTube/Microsoft Microsoft just released Age of Empires Mobile for PC. The game, officially called Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, is available for free on Steam and Microsoft Store, almost two years after its initial release for handheld devices. Age of Empires is one of those franchises that entire generations grew up with. The original came out in 1997, and immediately got people hooked to building civilizations and crushing their enemies on the battlefield. However, the franchise today is a far cry from its roots, as Age of Empires Mobile is, well, a game optimized for handheld devices, and not a classic RTS title we’ve all loved for years. And, of course, it includes in-game purchases. The PC version is still a mobile game at its core, but it’s been optimized for desktop play. There’s mouse control, full keyboard compatibility, and a refined UI. Microsoft also refreshed the visuals with some 4k textures, so the game should look better on larger screens. The game supports Crossplay, so you can switch between your phone, tablet, and PC without losing anything. But linked progress doesn’t come out of the box, as you have to enable it first. Here’s how to link your progress: On your mobile device, open Age of Empires Mobile. Go to Settings (Gear icon) > Account. Select Bind Account and choose a sign-in option. Once you enable account binding, sign in on PC using the same method, and your progress will be accessible across all your devices. Xbox Game Pass subscribers also get a bonus reward pack on PC, which includes: 1 Monthly Pass Token 1 Custom Resource Chest 10 Universal 60-Minute Speed-Ups 1,000 Empire Coins Exclusive Player Portrait Frame You can find more info about Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, as well as download links, on the Age of Empires official website.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      458
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      79
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!