Will humans ever achieve light speed?

[Timco]

Possible??

[LAP1DOUG]

Everything seems to turn into a wave at the speed of light, so they would not be coming back.

[heliguy]

What were you smoking last night?

[schnellman]

Originally Posted by LAP1DOUG

Everything seems to turn into a wave at the speed of light, so they would not be coming back.

Ahhh, but what trip!

[particlewave]

No, because it won't be necessary (not to mention physically impossible). The distance between the stars will never be traversed by sheer speed, but there are other ways...the world of quantum mechanics is intriguing

[jmatta]

Only in the movies...

[Jager]

Originally Posted by Timco

Possible??

Are you in a hurry to get somewhere??

[JFP in PA]

Originally Posted by Timco

Possible??

No, for a simple and verifiable reason: If you look at Einstein's equation, E=MC2, as body approaches the speed of light, it will increase to infinite mass, implying that you would need a power source of infinite energy in order to push it past the speed of light, which therefore becomes a physical impossibility.

[gj3ny]

There was a time when we believed the world was flat and that you would hit a wall as you broke through the sound barrier. What is impossible today often becomes possible as we learn more. Who know?

[JFP in PA]

Originally Posted by gj3ny

There was a time when we believed the world was flat and that you would hit a wall as you broke through the sound barrier. What is impossible today often becomes possible as we learn more. Who know?

"Learning more" is not going to help violate the laws of physics......

[Timco]

Originally Posted by particlewave

No, because it won't be necessary (not to mention physically impossible). The distance between the stars will never be traversed by sheer speed, but there are other ways...the world of quantum mechanics is intriguing

Like in The Fly???

[pothole]

There's no reason why you couldn't get so close as to be essentially the speed of light.

99.9999999999999% is possible (though would require epic amounts of energy). That said, accelerating to large fractions of the speed of light in a conventional manner is not the solution to travel large distances in cosmic terms!

[JFP in PA]

Originally Posted by pothole

There's no reason why you couldn't get so close as to be essentially the speed of light.

99.9999999999999% is possible (though would require epic amounts of energy). That said, accelerating to large fractions of the speed of light in a conventional manner is not the solution to travel large distances in cosmic terms!

The mathematics implies that to obtain and sustain just 50% of light speed in a vessel massive enough to be practical for inter galactic travel, the total amount of propulsive energy needed would become staggering to the point of absurdity.

[Johnny Danger]

Depends on how much Plasti-Dip is needed.

[gj3ny]

Originally Posted by JFP in PA

"Learning more" is not going to help violate the laws of physics......

Theoretical laws?

[JFP in PA]

Originally Posted by gj3ny

Theoretical laws?

I would hardly call Einstein's equations "theoretical"; people have been trying to prove them wrong for over a hundred and ten years, and every challenge only to end up reconfirming their validity............

Even the concepts those equations predicted way back then that were considered "wildly unrealistic dreaming", like black holes and dark energy, have come to pass.

[The Radium King]

when i was a kid my science teacher told me there were nine planets. now their are eight. the laws of physics can change. these laws are really just best guesses presented as fact. Ask Newton, ask Archimedes. their laws were once inviolate also. the problem is that we want to believe whatever we are told, as we are a product of a system designed to produce unquestioning obedience (did school teach you to question authority, or to seek the answer that would best please the teacher?). we should think critically and ask more questions. unfortunately, the same system that has trained us to blindly believe has also trained us to shout down those that do not.

lightspeed? mebbe, but a whole lotta energy for little return. most likely a workaround is the best bet, as per mr. wave. read 'flatland', written in 1884, to get the brain thinking about some of the options that may exist.

[JFP in PA]

Originally Posted by The Radium King

when i was a kid my science teacher told me there were nine planets. now their are eight. the laws of physics can change. these laws are really just best guesses presented as fact. Ask Newton, ask Archimedes. their laws were once inviolate also. the problem is that we want to believe whatever we are told, as we are a product of a system designed to produce unquestioning obedience (did school teach you to question authority, or to seek the answer that would best please the teacher?). we should think critically and ask more questions. unfortunately, the same system that has trained us to blindly believe has also trained us to shout down those that do not.

lightspeed? mebbe, but a whole lotta energy for little return. most likely a workaround is the best bet, as per mr. wave. read 'flatland', written in 1884, to get the brain thinking about some of the options that may exist.

The number of planets is not "a law of physics", it is a human interpretation of the definition of what constitutes a planet. And none of Einstein's equations predicted the existence of Pluto, that was the astronomer Clyde Tombaugh, who found Pluto on February 18, 1930.

As for overturning the concepts Einstein developed, by all means, go out there and prove him wrong.........if you can. A lot of very intelligent people have tried for a very long time, which is why his principal's are considered "laws" that are uniform across the cosmos.

[Nimbus117]

Is this another 3.2S vs Boxster base thread?

[JFP in PA]

Originally Posted by Nimbus117

Is this another 3.2S vs Boxster base thread?

No, but it is a rather brisk and interesting discussion of non-Newtonian physics............