Faster Than Light

Well, you're right but for the wrong reasons.

It has nothing to do with time stopping for you (though it would). If that was the only barrier, then why couldn't you just be on a vehicle going 1mph under the speed of light and throw a 90mph fastball forward?

What actually stops you from exceeding the speed of light is a sort of implied barrier. It's like our speedometers don't go any higher than that. Theoretically, if you were to do something like what I just suggested with the baseball, the ball would effectively teleport.

The ball wouldn't teleport, it would disappear. It would be stuck in time and would therefore no longer exist in the future, so basically what you would see is this:

1. You throw ball.
2. Ball disappears.
3. You continue traveling at your speed.

Let's say that you throw the ball at 5:00PM EST on the dot on June 1, 2010, at 5:01 you would not see it because it would still be at 5:00, stuck.

Completely false.

Time, relative to the ball, would freeze. It would not disappear.

Time is all relative. Those outside such extreme speeds observing the things experiencing time dilation still see them. The objects do not cease to exist.

Well it wouldn't disappear at 5:00, but you would no longer see it because it would still be at 5:00, therefore to you it would no longer exist.

Last paragraph: The likely conclusion is that there is no real FTL communication taking place and that the effect is another manifestation of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.

I understand that. I wasn't implying that I think it's possible, just pointing you to what (I think) Adrena was talking about.

I'm a little confused on the baseball example. I know just about nothing about relativity, but doesn't light always move at the same velocity relative to you no matter what speed you're going? So if you're going .99999C, wouldn't light still appear to you to be going 300,000 KM/S relative to you? Then how would a baseball reach that speed if you through it at 90 MPH? God, I understand nothing about this. Could anyone point me to a site that explains this stuff that I might be able to comprehend?

What he was saying is you could go very close to the speed of light, and throw a baseball really hard(meaning it would continue traveling at your speed+however fast you threw it) making it go at the speed of light or faster.

The speed of light isn't relative to anything. It's concrete. It's the speed of light.

You don't seem to understand how time works. Time is our perception of the passing of events. If time stops for a baseball, that's what it perceives. It's still there. It doesn't cease to exist or continue to exist in one particular time.

If I put you in a freezer and dropped the temperature to 0K, time would literally freeze for you. The passing of time would stop for you. It wouldn't for everyone else, though.

When the baseball hit the speed of light, it would experience that same situation. However, due to the acceleration that the thrower put on it, it would continue to increase in speed. When its velocity reached a speed greater than that of light, it would, effectively, teleport to its implied destination. It wouldn't do it instantaneously, but it would go faster than mass is capable of.

kthxbye

The speed of light isn't relative to anything. It's concrete. It's the speed of light.

But doesn't light always travel 300,000 m/s (approx. of course) relative to you, no matter what velocity you may be traveling at? Don't know if that's right, just thought I heard that somewhere.

You don't seem to understand how time works. Time is our perception of the passing of events. If time stops for a baseball, that's what it perceives. It's still there. It doesn't cease to exist or continue to exist in one particular time. If I put you in a freezer and dropped the temperature to 0K, time would literally freeze for you. The passing of time would stop for you. It wouldn't for everyone else, though. When the baseball hit the speed of light, it would experience that same situation. However, due to the acceleration that the thrower put on it, it would continue to increase in speed. When its velocity reached a speed greater than that of light, it would, effectively, teleport to its implied destination. It wouldn't do it instantaneously, but it would go faster than mass is capable of. kthxbye

I'm not going to argue physics with you or anyone else again, it's bothersome. Simply, I am right and you are not.

funny how you brought this up... just recently i was explaining this to my friend's sister. i beleive its true because as we see stars as they were billions of years ago

im going to tap that shit when he isnt looking lol

Bob is right, K_A. You're dead to me.

According to the documentaries on the Science Channel, the only way an object would disappear is if it traveled faster than light, since it would go back in time.

Bob is right, K_A. You're dead to me. According to the documentaries on the Science Channel, the only way an object would disappear is if it traveled faster than light, since it would go back in time.

Nuh-ahh! If you had a flux-capacitor and went at 88 MPH it would disappear too!

Your argument is that I'm wrong and you're not arguing anymore? That's so fucking convincing.

The speed of light is not relative to anything. It always goes the speed of light.

Electrons can travel faster than the speed of light in some media.

Yet only in some media. They usually travel around 99.9...% of light.


Wow...it's amazing what a simple google search for "speed of elctrons" comes up with...quite a lot of Einstein references...and some weird experiments to do with electrons in electrical fields and the like...

And then a search for "speed of light"...wow...I could spend days reading all this stuff...

----------

MJ, read this: http://www.zamandayolculuk.com/cetin...travelvill.htm

It talks all about wormholoes, and contians the thing I think you're talking about with the baseball (two people hold a sheet and place a baseball in the middle which causes the sheet to curve at that point??).

Interesting reading.

----------

Anyone ever heard of Kerr holes (rotating black holes)?? http://www.zamandayolculuk.com/cetin...travelvill.htm Mentioned on the same site.

The speed of light is not relative to anything. It always goes the speed of light.

Okay, so let me ask another question: If you're traveling at 299,999 km/s, how fast does light seem to be traveling behind you? (assuming that light travels at 300,000 km/s)

MJ, read this:

Thanks, Lenny. Intresting read.

If you're travelling at just under the speed of light, then light travels past you like a slow moving vehicle. You won't notice a change however, because almost all light sources are constant, so it'll still be a solid beam of light. You would see head or the tail the beam of light moving slowly if it were switched on or off respectively (like with a flashlight).