Faster Than Light Travel

[Ziggurat]

Here's an intriguing thought: do faster-than-light inertial reference frames exist? If so, then I think it would appear in these that ordinary slower-than-light matter was moving faster than light. (must do the math sometime...)Since no inertial frame is to be preferred, it might be the case that all matter is already moving faster than light.

No, the math does not support an equivalence between FTL and non-FTL frames. Our past and future are separate and distinct, but the past and future of FTL reference frames is not, and you can continuously transform from past to future by rotation.

 

[Plasmadog]

Nasa did a study a few years back looking at the feasibility of various approaches to space travel, including some ways for achieving FTL.

Nothing was identified as being worth further research at this time, but it makes for a good read:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/research/warp/warp.html

 

[luvhumility]

Very interesting subject to ponder...!

I think I recall that the "weak" force called gravity may propagate at faster than the speed of light.?? This would account for the theory of relativity's equations balance to include an increase in an objects mass and or energy as C is approached. Since we do not yet completely understand the realations between Mass, Energy and Gravitation I suppose it is possible. I suspect one would need to transcend gravity artificially before this level of speed might be reached. it may be possible... More basic gravitational experimentation would need to be done. Previous assumptions may be holding us back I suspect. ressonance theory through the conservation of rotational/angular momentum I also suspect is the key!

lh

 

[ponderingturtle]

Wild-assed speculation begins here.

All arguments concerning the impossibility of matter moving faster than light seem to rely on the fact that matter can't be accelerated to the speed of light and beyond. I don't know what this says about hypothetical matter that might always have been moving faster than light.

You are forgetting about the causality violations inherent in the system, come and see causal violations inherent in the system.

Here's an intriguing thought: do faster-than-light inertial reference frames exist? If so, then I think it would appear in these that ordinary slower-than-light matter was moving faster than light. (must do the math sometime...)Since no inertial frame is to be preferred, it might be the case that all matter is already moving faster than light.

Well the transformations used to translate between them gets messed up in much the same way that all relativity get messed up at velocities over c, as you end up with imaginary numbers and all kinds of oddness results.

 

[luvhumility]

You are forgetting about the causality violations inherent in the system, come and see causal violations inherent in the system.


Well the transformations used to translate between them gets messed up in much the same way that all relativity get messed up at velocities over c, as you end up with imaginary numbers and all kinds of oddness results.

I agree, but how does one get past these symbolic forms e.g. mathmatics restrictions, to find another way to describe a system in its entirety and allow for conversions from particle to wave dynamics. Schrodinger and Einstien seemed to cojecture and argue about this same subject quite often...

I suppose someone needs to "break the laws/rules" and find/try a new model and throw out the old math forms and find a new way to make these relations
actually work. hmmm,....

lh

 

[fuelair]

Very interesting subject to ponder...!

I think I recall that the "weak" force called gravity may propagate at faster than the speed of light.?? This would account for the theory of relativity's equations balance to include an increase in an objects mass and or energy as C is approached. Since we do not yet completely understand the realations between Mass, Energy and Gravitation I suppose it is possible. I suspect one would need to transcend gravity artificially before this level of speed might be reached. it may be possible... More basic gravitational experimentation would need to be done. Previous assumptions may be holding us back I suspect. ressonance theory through the conservation of rotational/angular momentum I also suspect is the key!

lh

Functionally gravity propagates instantaneously.

 

[luvhumility]

Functionally gravity propagates instantaneously.

fuelair,

I agree, (I'm suprised, most do not seem to know this) I suppose If one thinks about it, conservation of angular momentum, when transformed to the strong forces does convert to photonic emission... so one might wonder If matter can itself be compressed to do similar.

So grav props faster than light...so that might be the area to explore.

I have tried playing with gravity sensors with limited success, the directional focus of the detectors seems to have problems.

Now all we have to do is unify the weak and strong forces and gravitation and we get a brownie button!!! (I will keep trying forever I think)~ I luv this stuff...

lh

 

[TobiasTheViking]

grav waves does, according to GR not travel faster than light, that is according to newtonian physics.

According to GR gravity waves travel at exactly the speed of light.

if gravity traveled faster than the speed of light it might be possible to transfer information faster than the speed of light. Gravity telegraph. Not sure how it would be done, but it might be possible.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I agree, but how does one get past these symbolic forms e.g. mathmatics restrictions, to find another way to describe a system in its entirety and allow for conversions from particle to wave dynamics. Schrodinger and Einstien seemed to cojecture and argue about this same subject quite often...

I suppose someone needs to "break the laws/rules" and find/try a new model and throw out the old math forms and find a new way to make these relations
actually work. hmmm,....

lh

The particles to wave issue is irrelvent, what is relevent is its mass, if it has no mass it travels at the speed of light if it has mass it can not.

 

[phildonnia]

You are forgetting about the causality violations inherent in the system, come and see causal violations inherent in the system.

Well the transformations used to translate between them gets messed up in much the same way that all relativity get messed up at velocities over c, as you end up with imaginary numbers and all kinds of oddness results.

Thanks. Actually, I've been here drawing little diagrams and trying to figure out what a FTL object would look like. Not that I don't trust y'all that it's just impossible, but it's fun to think about anyway.

 

[gentlehorse]

*snip* ...it's fun to think about anyway.

Yeppers.

Faster than light travel leads me to ask: Faster than light in relation to what? I can conceive of two spaceships moving away from each other at .51c. Relative to each other, each would be moving faster than the speed of light. If one ship fired a laser at the other, the laser beam would never reach it. If, however, one of the ships slowed down to .48c, a laser fired from one would pass (or hit) the other. Here's the neat part: If one ship fired a laser past the other, and the second ship measured the speed of the beam as it passed, it would be c, despite the fact that we would expect it to be either .49c or .52c (depending on which ship did the firing).

Regardless of your frame of reference, meaning no matter how fast or slow you're moving, the speed of light is c. Too wierd--

I wonder if I have any idea of what I'm talking about...

 

[Genesius]

Faster than light travel leads me to ask: Faster than light in relation to what? I can conceive of two spaceships moving away from each other at .51c. Relative to each other, each would be moving faster than the speed of light. If one ship fired a laser at the other, the laser beam would never reach it.

Wrong. C is a constant, so the speed of the ship firing the laser doesn't enter into it. The laser beam would be redshifted by the recession of the light source, but it would pass the other ship.

 

[fuelair]

fuelair,

I agree, (I'm suprised, most do not seem to know this) I suppose If one thinks about it, conservation of angular momentum, when transformed to the strong forces does convert to photonic emission... so one might wonder If matter can itself be compressed to do similar.

So grav props faster than light...so that might be the area to explore.

I have tried playing with gravity sensors with limited success, the directional focus of the detectors seems to have problems.

Now all we have to do is unify the weak and strong forces and gravitation and we get a brownie button!!! (I will keep trying forever I think)~ I luv this stuff...

lh

and, quite possibly a trip to Sweden!! (Wish my knowledge was at that level!)

 

[Ziggurat]

I wonder if I have any idea of what I'm talking about...

No, you're not really getting the heart of relativity. When changing reference frames (going from the frame in which both ships move away at 0.51c to a frame in which one ship is motionless and the other is moving), you cannot simply add velocities. That is not intuitive (it's natural to assume you can - that's called Galilean relativity), but it's true. In the frame of either ship, the other ship will still move at less than c.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Thanks. Actually, I've been here drawing little diagrams and trying to figure out what a FTL object would look like. Not that I don't trust y'all that it's just impossible, but it's fun to think about anyway.

It is not so much that it is impossible, but it would be orthogonal to our reality. Immagionary numbers are a standard way of changing something from one dimensional to two dimensional, so its dimensions would not be X,Y,Z but Xi,Yi,Zi, all of them orthogonal to our reality.

This is just conjecture but it would seem to make sense based on who immagionary numbers are treated and that all these numbers become immagionary at V>C

 

[ponderingturtle]

Yeppers.

Faster than light travel leads me to ask: Faster than light in relation to what? I can conceive of two spaceships moving away from each other at .51c. Relative to each other, each would be moving faster than the speed of light. If one ship fired a laser at the other, the laser beam would never reach it. If, however, one of the ships slowed down to .48c, a laser fired from one would pass (or hit) the other. Here's the neat part: If one ship fired a laser past the other, and the second ship measured the speed of the beam as it passed, it would be c, despite the fact that we would expect it to be either .49c or .52c (depending on which ship did the firing).

Wrong, relitivistic velocities don't add that way but this way
w = (u + v)/(1 + uv/c2)

where w is the sum of the of the u and V velocities

 

[Ashles]

So your saying that just because it hasn't been "proven" makes it fantasy is clearly erroneous, and also shows you lack an understanding of the most basic principles of science (Hypothesis, disproval of hypothesis, if Hypothesis cannot be disproved then it is considered scientific fact until something does disprove it).

I have a hypothesis that the sun is powered by tiny elves rubbing their wings together.

Hey I just created a scientific fact - go me.

 

[DeviousB]

So your saying that just because it hasn't been "proven" makes it fantasy is clearly erroneous, and also shows you lack an understanding of the most basic principles of science (Hypothesis, disproval of hypothesis, if Hypothesis cannot be disproved then it is considered scientific fact until something does disprove it).

This is so ass-backwards as to boggle the (scientific) mind.

The principle of science (in the form given) would be "Hypothesis, confirmation of hypothesis, if hypothesis is repeatedly confirmed it is considered a theory until something doesn't confirm it."

As for FTL, well I suppose you could always use "Closed Timelike Curves in Asymmetrically Warped Brane Universes" (http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0603045)

 

[luvhumility]

all,

again, I really like this conjecture! Good for the mind! I am glad to be in this thread...

Genesius and All:

I understand the redshift affect but is it similar or the same as the doppler affect? would it "blue shift" if the ship was coming at you? I have built a phazed antenna array doppler RF system used to determine the direction of RF (radio frequency) waves (typically vertically polarized) (like the ham radio operators and cops use to find signals/stolen cars etc) and think that technology might lead to some answers. Funny, it seems to work better if you are in motion.?? I wonder exactly why? more waves being captured? Of course laser interferometery is used for pricise measurements of distance also but I am trying to understand an experement i might run that could shed some "light" hehe... on the science of it all. I think somehow a phazed array EM field (electromagnetic field generator) might be able to do the job. somewhat like linear accelerators we use today but more controlled in the other orthogonal angles. and with much less power... At present the unit i have only receives electronically in more or less one plane at 360degrees. (to obtain vector of received wave) But one that worked sphereically (could be fast aimed any direction) might be of interest.

gee, I dont even know how i would make one??? I hope I didnt digress to much here....but you all get me thinking!!

Lh

 

[gentlehorse]

Wrong. *snip*

Wrong. *snip*

No, you're not really getting the heart of relativity. *snip*

Hmm... I figured as much.

So, two ships moving away from each other, each travelling at at .9c, would be travelling at a velocity <c relative to each other, meaning that a laser beam fired from one toward the other would overtake the fired-upon ship as if the firing ship were at rest (relative to the fired-upon). This despite the fact that the distance between the ships would be increasing at a rate greater than 186,000 miles/sec (miles and seconds being my units of choice)-- I think I get it ("think" being the operative word-- not my strong suit). Still very weird--

If I've managed to grossly misunderstand you in your attempts to enlighten, please feel free to lay the smackdown on me. Your feedback is appreciated.