Why Cant We Go Faster Than Light?

[bombus]

Hmm.... not to get into a debate... but here are MY hypothesis... feel free to dis it all you want... (A professor actually laughed at me when I said this...)

 

 

1.

Ok' date=' first off.... there is no such thing as speed

E=mc^2

 

that could mean either Mass * meter/second squared (acceleration) or Mass * meter^2/second (velocity squared)

 

*hang with me, this is long and silly*

 

Mass itself is the only constant in the universe... Time, Light, existance... all of that is relative. The REASON (I thinks) that mass 'appears' to become greater at higher speeds is because it is experiancing the effects of 'Time' in a greater degree.

 

IE. An object traveling at the speed of light doesn't become an infinate mass, but rather its mass experiences an infinate amount of time... to the outside observer there would be little difference

 

2.

Secondly...

Light, quite debated, could be either a wave or a particle.... my theory is that it actually is both and that waves and particles are not separate, but on the same spectrum... one being negative values and one being positive values (values of what I don't know) where Light intersects at exactly 0 *or 1, not sure*

 

IE. Once a mass exceeds the speed of light, its no longer comprised of particles, but rather of waves

 

3.

Light is nothing special

Using the speed of light as a goal if hardly a worthy endeavor. Its just another value, there IS nothing special about it... the universe does not depend on the fact that light is always 3x10^8 (or something) m/s and would not come crumbling down if prooven otherwise. Particles travel in relative motion. 2 objects at rest, though appearing to have no velocity, actually could be travelling several thousand m/s. Waves, on the otherhand, I think they do not exist relatively, but absolutely to some universal 0-point. The problem with current theory is they are dealing with Particle light, which APPEARS to travel at a constant velocity

 

IE. Waveform light may have an incredibly higher 'velocity'

 

In summary, since I got a little sidetracked... my Hypothesis is that Mass itself cannot exceed a certain ACCELERATION (velocity is moot). Then it does it becomes light and eventually a wave. While instantaneous to the object, from an outside view this process would appear infininate (effect of time on the object)

 

If I am right... I wonder what a Carbon-Wave would look like... it would appear as a form of radiation as far as we can comprehend

 

Posibilities:

The Tacion particle, the only known object to move faster than light... I think it is actually a Wave, with similar properties to light. What it is a wave of I don't know

 

Impossibilities:

Hey, I was sleeping when I thought this up... its probably screwy out the ying-yang[/quote']

 

 

I think you could be on to something. Why precisely did your professor laugh? He may, of course, have every right to laugh as he may know that you are incorrect due to his knowledge of other stuff (being a professor 'n' all). I like the way you are thinking though - it seems Einsteinesque!

[5614]

bombus you are indeed right that according to Einstein's theories a particle could exist which always travels faster than light and cannot go slower. However scientists looked for such a particle for a while and now the majority of scientists believe that such a particle does not exist.

[Ragib]

I'm afraid alot of this is incorrect information, and that ur prof. has good reason to laugh, though it may be cruel. You see, ur assumption which you base your theory on, that light is being debated to be either a particle or wave, is incorrect. That debate ended over 100 years ago, with the development of Quantum mechanics. Lights is not one or the other, it is both, except we can only see either its particle properties or wave properties at a time, depending on which we choose. But it is both. This isnt just light, its for everything. An electron has displayed the wave property of diffraction. Since its already a wave and particle at once, if it were to cross c, it wouldnt suddenly swap identities, because it was already both. Not to mention, you are double wrong on your statement, mass is the only constant in the universe. Firstly, mass is NOT a constant, mass converted into energy everyday in nuclear reactors. 2ndly, There are contants, such as energy, linear momentum, angular momentum (spin), electric charge, color charge. For all of those, the value in the universe does not change, it is the same throughout the universe. Secondly, This is called proof by contradicition, my next few lines. Hopefully it will make it clear to you. With all of your beliefs, eg speed of light passable, you do not believe in Eiensteins theory of Special relativity. So, then according to you, you could accelerate light by say, getting a torch and running. Its simple, going at 10 miles an hour, add another 10 miles an hour, you get 20. This example, you have C, then add your runnning speed. You exceed C. But, it had been measured and proven light keeps going at the same speed. Special Relativity Predicts this, but your theory does not work with special relativity. Quod erat demonstrandum (Thus it is proved.)

[GrandMasterK]

Do we know why light goes it's speed? Like what dictates that it hits 186,000 miles per second in a vacuum? Light particles are truely absolutely weightless? How can anything even a particle that small, be completely weightless?

 

Have we been able to make light heavier?

[Klaynos]

Do we know why light goes it's speed? Like what dictates that it hits 186' date='000 miles per second in a vacuum? Light particles are truely absolutely weightless? How can anything even a particle that small, be completely weightless?

 

Have we been able to make light heavier?[/quote']

 

a) I don't someone might

b) A photon cannot have it's velocity changed, so it cannot have a rest mass, also the maths we have that models mass energy shows us that a particle with a rest mass would need infinite energy to go the speed of light.

c) It does have a relativistic mass, and momentum, but no rest mass.

d) no because relaticisti mass is relative to the velocity of a particle, and photons cannot exceed c then you cannot increase their relativistic mass.

[ipsita14]

Well, as far as I know when an object's velocity is comparable to the speed of light, say more than the order of 10^6, It's mass becomes infinite. What happens after that, I really don't know.

[Ragib]

Think of it this way. You think of a particle in your mind, a small sphere or a speck of dust. But how your ment to think of a particle, is a little packet of energy, coming out of eiensteins mind, E=mc2 + Kinetic Energy. So if you think of it, you can set mass to 0, but still have energy there. By E=mc2, you know your conventional idea of a particle, being a small speck of dust, it actually is just a clump of energy.