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

    • Because of what they have done to VMware I will never buy anything Broadcom again.
    • AMD releases hotfix for driver install issues on Windows 10 PCs by Taras Buria Earlier this week, AMD released an important graphics driver update. Version 26.6.2 brought AMD FSR 4.1 support to the previous-gen Radeon lineup, the RX 7000 series, giving users better upscaling tech that was previously locked to the newest GPUs. However, the driver turned out to be a little buggy, with users reporting installation issues on systems still running Windows 10. AMD quickly acknowledged the bug and today released a hotfix to resolve the problem. The AMD 26.6.3 Hotfix update is now available for download from the official website. Given that it is a hotfix release, it has only one change in its release notes: AMD announced the update on its official X account and added that a WHQL driver update with the necessary fixes would be released next week. Meanwhile, users can apply the hotfix or roll back to the previous driver using the official AMD Cleanup Utility. You can download AMD Software: Adrenalin Edition 26.6.3 Hotfix Preview Driver from the official website here. It is compatible with all currently supported graphics cards and 64-bit Windows 10 and 11. Full release notes are available on the same page.
    • With Microsoft now listening to its core audience and acting upon received feedback, fans can finally expect a much better version of Windows 11 than what was available five years ago. Here is to five more years, Windows 11! I guess we all need a good laugh now and again...
    • Amazon Prime Day 2026 deal sees Samsung Odyssey 49" 240Hz QD-OLED monitor at lowest price by Sayan Sen Earlier today we covered a very good deal on JBL's BAR 800 Dolby Atmos soundbar system as the unit is available for just $600 as part of Amazon Prime Day 2026 deals. That's not all though as there are many more discounts to choose from. If you are looking for a high-end monitor, Samsung's 49 inch G9 QD-OLED gaming monitor is a solid deal too as it's currently just $855 (purchase link under the specs table down below). It is a super-ultrawide (32:9) 1440p curved gaming monitor and as such should offer a very immersive experience. The G93SC is a 49-inch QD-OLED (Quantum Dot OLED) screen and that means it should have excellent contrast as well as color reproduction. Brightness is a bit lacking though so if you are looking to set it up in a relatively bright room, you may be better off with something else. Speaking of external light and brightness, the major difference on the G93SC vs the newer G93SD is that the latter comes with Samsung's "Glare Free" technology to reduce glare while the C model packs a glossy finish. The technical specifications of the Samsung G93SC are given in the table below: Specification Value Panel Type OLED Screen Shape Curved Screen Curvature 1800R Resolution DQHD (5120 × 1440) Aspect Ratio 32:9 Brightness (Typical) 250 cd/m² Brightness (Minimum) 200 cd/m² Contrast Ratio 1,000,000:1 HDR Support VESA DisplayHDR True Black 400 HDR10+ HDR10+ Gaming Response Time 0.03 ms (GTG) Refresh Rate Up to 240 Hz Viewing Angle 178° Horizontal / 178° Vertical Color Support 1 Billion Colors Color Gamut 99% DCI-P3 (CIE1976) Adaptive Sync FreeSync Premium Pro / G-SYNC Compatible DisplayPort 1 × DisplayPort 1.4 HDMI 1 × HDMI 2.1 Micro HDMI 1 × Micro HDMI 2.1 USB Hub 3 × USB 3.0 Speakers Built-in Speaker Output 5W × 2 Channels Operating Temperature 10°C – 40°C Operating Humidity 10–80% (Non-condensing) Stand Type Height Adjustable Stand (HAS) Height Adjustment 120.0 ± 5.0 mm Tilt -2° (±2°) to 15° (±2°) Wall Mount 100 × 100 mm (VESA) Included HDMI Cable HDMI-to-Micro HDMI Cable Included DisplayPort Cable Yes Get it at the link below: Samsung 49" Odyssey G93SC Series Curved Gaming Monitor, QD-OLED: $854.99 (Sold and Shipped by Amazon US with Prime) Prime subscription can be cancelled within three business days at no cost. Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Actually Windows 11 is the GUI from Windows 10 X slapped onto Windows 10. Hence the many performance issues and initial limitations of the UI, like all the restrictions on the task bar placement and features. You could not even right click on the Taskbar and bring up task manager when it first shipped. Windows 10X was truly a new OS from the ground up. Basically a lightweight OS that ran containers for various app types. Win32 got its own container. Performance was not good and OEM’s pushed back on it, but wanted a new OS to push Pc sales. Hence Windows 11. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_10X
  • Recent Achievements

    • 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
    • One Year In
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      466
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      123
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      82
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!