bluescience

Well you would have to take this a bit behind. First you must now Einstein's famous equation of E=mc2 and the fact that the more mass an object has the more energy is required to accelerate it. You must also know that kinetic energy is the energy an object has due to its motion. So as something starts moving at a fixed speed, its kinetic energy is constant. However the moment the object accelerates, its kinetic energy increase. And kinetic energy is simply energy, the word "kinetic" behind it simply specifies the type of energy. Taking the previous statement into consideration and applying it to the Einstein's formula: E=mc2, we deduce that mass increases as an object accelerates(not as it moves at a constant speed). So when an object tries to reach the speed of light it simply keeps on increasing in mass. Now according to Newtonian physics, the more the mass of an object, the more energy is required for it to accelerate. So while the object is reaching the speed of light, in that case it mass becomes infinite. It is almost like a function in mathematics reaching a limit or an asymptote, in which it becomes infinitely closer to the number or asymptote it is approaching. In the same manner anything with mass will become infinitely closer to the speed of light as it increases but will never reach the speed of 186000 mi/s(speed of light). And in the process of reaching the speed of light, its mass grows infinitely, and thus it would recquire and infinite amount of energy to sustain the speed of light for anything with mass. This last statement is the result of the formula: E=mc2 . If you have infinite mass in the formula, then you must have and infinite amount of energy to sustain the infinite mass which is the effect of an object moving at the speed of light. Thus, only light and other waves that have no intrinsic mass, can reach the speed of light.

so im studying up on the The theory of relativity. While reading about general relativity, I came across the principle of equivalency. I do not understand why there is no difference between the effects in an accelerating box and a box at "rest" in a gravitational field. I also do not understand how Einstein reasoned this theory. Any help is appreciated!

well isn't the goal of science to find or create a universal theory that describes the universe and its behaviour

Of course not. US humans have only made our own number system to try and solve things in an orderly way. If you look at the works of Cantor, you get proof that there is a whole number system that exists that encompasses our little number system. For example, there is a number system that can prove the cardinality of the different levels of infinity(olafs) and ones that can include, what we call imaginary numbers as counting numbers. So no, math cannot solve everything until we expand our number system.

so my friend and I had a very interesting discussion. What is knowledge? Don't you need life for their to be knowledge. Like say there is a bottle on a table. in the universe it just exists, it is just there. But as soon as you have a life form pobserve it and "know" it exists, then that is knowledge. What do u think?

First, some people on this forum are correct since, yes, the reason why you cant reach the end of the universe(which is space since space is created as our universe has started to expand from a point of singularity since the "big bang") is because we will always be stumped by the fourth dimension. If you were the bring a 2 dimensional creature to the earth; and assuming the earth is a perfect sphere, and you told the creature to go find the edge of the earth, he wouldn't be able too since he would always be moving along that 3-dimensional sphere and sometimes reach the same exact spot he was when he started. This is the same thing that happens to us. Assuming the fourth dimension is time, the only way you could move to the edge of the universe would be moving through the fourth dimension or time. so we would need a time machine. This is because if you go back to the 'flatlander" analogy, the 2-d creature could be at any 2-d surface of the sphere, at any depth in the sphere. To reach the edge of that sphere, he would need to travel thru the 3rd dimension to reach the edge of the sphere. So we must travel through the fourth dimension if we need to reach the edge of space. Then we face the question of what happens if we were to cross that edge of space into nothingness. What would happen if we put our hand past the edge of space? This is not what science is about. Science is the pursuit of knowledge in our universe. Remember the ultimate goal of science is to create a theory in which we can describe the whole universe in, so far we have two theories that are closest to that: The theory of relativity and Quantum Mechanics.