Um, friction against what? The cold hard empty vacuum of deep space? Or perhaps some as yet undetected dark matter?
Faster than the speed of Light?
Sort:
Um, friction? Blink, blink.
Um, not you bbrout, I meant that to ryuzaki_lawliet. friction is caused by resistance with other substance, or have I been misled?
My understanding is that friction is one manifestation of the electro-magnetic force. A neutral particle such as a photon or neutrino could not possibly be affected by friction since it does not interact via the electro-magnetic force.
Also, zero mass is not a prerequisite for light speed, since neutrinos have been shown to have mass.
My personal belief (and prediction) is that photons also have a very small mass, much smaller even than the neutrino, but who knows.
Without mass how could there be the momentum to sustain speed?
taodell wrote:
Without mass how could there be the momentum to sustain speed?
I'm not the best one to answer this but I think that you are using an equation from classical Newtonian physics. Momentum?=mass(volume). I'm not sure what the relativistic equation would be though.
Hey taodell, I know you weren't talking to me. It's ok. But I still must say to our friend Bill ... uh, friction?? Electromagnitism?? Um, I am at a bit of a loss to know where to start on this one. Bill, could you please define your terms? How do you define friction? Not, "what is it?" so much, but how do you define it?
it's physically impossible to travel faster than the speed of light. it just isn't possible. you can talk about the possibility of a wormhole, but we all know they only exist on a molecular level.
Wormholes are theory. Big difference between theory and reality. Interesting stuff done on white hole theory back in the late 70s. There is some stuff done within quantum mechanism, particularly Einstein's paradox, which postulates FTL. Perhaps the best approach is to compare the field equations with Schrodinger equations. They represent two different differential equations to describe stuff. The field equations have the restriction of the speed of light, Schrodinger is very closely related to diffusion which does not strictly determine a speed of propagation.
Feb 7, 2009
0
#31
I have just become a member of this team and think it will be my duty to provide a little brevity to these topical conversations,I may also provide a different view from which to look at the topic,humour is often just something ordinary seen from an extraordinary perspective.So I hope to occasionally ,very occasionally have something funny to say you might find rather interesting and I will have no idea what I've said. Thank you , by the way If the universe suddenly came to a huge halt would scotland suddenly find itself in the carribean because it is freezing here.
Ah, the Scots. If Scotland ever ended up in the Carribean, perhaps through some spontaneous wormhole, you would have nothing to complain about and hence, become very, very depressed.
Feb 8, 2009
0
#33
I never thought about that,but I could live with depression If the climates right,and we dont have to swap Whiskey for Jamaican Rum.Besides all we need for a right good moan is a long Q.
Feb 8, 2009
0
#34
Ryuzaki_Lawliet wrote:
i think the time warp junk is just sci-fi no one has been able to achibe the speed of light much less faster. the reason light is the fastest is it has no mass. the mass of objects cause friction causes them to slow down it's acceration. the massless photon isn't effected by friction making it fast. in order to become as fast as light you have to have no mass. in order to achieve speed faster than light you would therefore need negative mass which i believe is impossible for this dimension if any dimensions.
The reasoning for negative mass being that as you approach the speed of light mass increases to the point at which you would have zero mass is my understanding of this correct? and how much friction is there in space there has to be some to explain why the expansion of the universe is slowing down.Friction possibly?
it is not physically possible to travel faster than the speed of light. anyone who knows scienc/physics would know this.
Well, mister striyker66, thank-you for the input.
I will choose to ignore the put-down based on my assumption that you haven't read the posts here. I was speaking relativistically, as in how two objects might interact when meeting at a combined speed much greater than c. And what if you were one of those two objects? Light from the approaching object would reach you a split second before the object. Not much warning with near light speed travel.
Apr 2, 2009
0
#37
Taodell this theory wasn't incubated in your mind while watching Monty Pythons The Meaning of Life was it? As there is a song in it about the vastness of the universe that begins with Just remember your on a planet thats evolving and revolving,revolving at nine hundred miles an hour
Its orbiting at nineteen miles per second or so its reckoned a sun that is the source of all our power
The sun and you and me and all the stars that we can see are moving at a million miles a day
In an outer spiral orb,at 40,000 miles an hour in a galaxy we call the Milky way
Our galaxy itself contains a hundred billion stars,its a 100,000 light years side to side,
he goes on to say the universe is expanding at the speed of light 12.000.000 a minute thats the fastest speed there is.Oh now we all feel sufficiently insignificant can I have your liver? LOL. Please you tube the Galaxy song by Eric Idle If you haven't seen it, they are inspiring.
Very intersting. I am such a beginner but I am willing to read adnd learn. So I have to ask something. It is silly but I am curious...>.>...What kind of particles if any is light composed of? Or what exactly is light? Like for instance sound travels in waves. But I do not think the waves are formed from any type of particles.^_^
May 18, 2009
0
#39
This is hilarious. Taodell has got people swallowing this thread hook line and sinker. Folks are even trying to explain relativity to him. 
This is right up there with some of Beast719's best threads!
Friction?