Faster than the Speed of Light.


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : SETI@home Science : Faster than the Speed of Light.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · Next
Author Message
C Olival
Send message
Joined: 6 Sep 10
Posts: 209
Credit: 10,675
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1092107 - Posted: 1 Apr 2011, 2:11:50 UTC - in response to Message 1091572.

Agree even with fusion, rocket propulsion would not reach even 20 percent ligh speed, that is fast compared to today's chemical rockets however. Antimatter propulsion would the fastest propulsion method that one day could techonologically be feasible, unless someone comes up with a way of using wormholes,more appropriately womholes that could actually be crossed, knows as traversable worholes, and that would be only if exotic matter with negative anergy density could be used to stabilize them. So wormholes as means of interstaler travel will stay in the theoretical physics realm still. That means then that antimatter propulsion will be the fastest way humans will ever do one day, and the feat of using antimatter as a means of propulsion, will be one of the greatest techonological discoveries.

Profile WHOSIT
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 10
Posts: 29
Credit: 162,958
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1092752 - Posted: 2 Apr 2011, 20:00:14 UTC - in response to Message 1092107.

I agree. . . . to a point.

Using "worm holes" or perhaps the possible use of a "fold space" method to travel, would almost eliminate what we humans term as time.

Therefore, it would SEEM a traveler had exceeded the speed of light from point of origin to final destination, but in actuality had not.

Instead, the traveler had exceeded a sort of "speed of time" or broken the "time barrier".

What are your and other's opinions about this? All are welcomed. ;-)
____________
Wishing you continued science "fun" and at least, always valid results,
Laters,
Rick "WHOSIT" W.
Participating in: Einstein/MilkyWay/Rosetta/SETI

C Olival
Send message
Joined: 6 Sep 10
Posts: 209
Credit: 10,675
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1092829 - Posted: 2 Apr 2011, 23:59:39 UTC - in response to Message 1092752.

The issue I think with traversable wormholes, how would matter, meaning, the spaceship and its humans traverlers, how would that matter behave in a wormhole environment? Matter might behave the same way it does in a wormhole like it does in the event horizon of a blackhole, that is bad news for any interstaler traveler. Would humans come out of wormhole in one piece or would spagettization occur to them? Hopeffully in next hundred years, fusion will become viable, and down the line, antimatter propulsion becomes reality. Solar sails as a mean of propulsion is limited, once the spaceship is by the ninth planet, pluto, then solar sails become useless. yes, Pluto allways will be the nineth planet. Perhaps using a hybrid aproach of solar sails with fusion propultion, thus saving fusion enery, once the spaceship leaves the solar system, then the fusion propulsion is activated. Has NASA and other space agencies though of installing powerful radio beacons in probes, maybe those beacons could be captured by alien radio receivers.

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32304
Credit: 14,270,455
RAC: 11,194
United Kingdom
Message 1092942 - Posted: 3 Apr 2011, 11:16:03 UTC

Traditionally we are taught that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light because at that speed, mass becomes infinite. However I'm sure that I've read somewhere, that in some atom smasher collisions scientists have calculated differently.

They analysed the resultant particles from the collisions, in terms of their trajectory, mass, and speed, and calculated that to be observing what they had, meant that a further undetected particle must have been involved that was travelling faster than the speed of light.

To put it a bit more simply, it is quite easy to work out what will happen to the pack of snooker balls when hit by the white ball, if we know the position, and mass of the pack, and the trajectory, mass, and speed of the white ball. This is how computer snooker games are written.

It's easy in a single plane, a bit harder in three, but it can be done! Will the LHC find it and will it be the elusive Higgs Bosun, we wait to see.

C Olival
Send message
Joined: 6 Sep 10
Posts: 209
Credit: 10,675
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1093145 - Posted: 4 Apr 2011, 0:15:44 UTC - in response to Message 1092942.

Might be possible that wormholes can be pruduced at the LHC, but to apply such celestial phenomena for interstaller travel, is beyond today's techonology and budgets.

Profile WHOSIT
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 10
Posts: 29
Credit: 162,958
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1093146 - Posted: 4 Apr 2011, 0:16:49 UTC - in response to Message 1092829.

Would humans come out of wormhole in one piece or would spagettization occur to them?


EWWWWWWW! "spagettization"!

Personally, I would rather come out in thousands, millions of three dimensional chunks like a 3D zig saw puzzle, rather than one long thin string of goo!

I also agree, that Pluto was always a planet when I was growing up and it remains for me, as always being a planet, darn it! LONG LIVE THE NINE PLANETS!

NASA does use radio signals to keep in touch with long range, distant probes, so there may not be a need seen by them for a special beacon to be placed on or in them or the extra fuel needed to launch 'em, while those designed to drift out and away from our solar system are expected to act as beacons in themselves, by hopefully being spotted by ETs.

As for everything else you posted in between these, everything posted here is speculation and you have your right to do so as well. ;-) I enjoyed reading your thoughts on the subject. :-)
____________
Wishing you continued science "fun" and at least, always valid results,
Laters,
Rick "WHOSIT" W.
Participating in: Einstein/MilkyWay/Rosetta/SETI

C Olival
Send message
Joined: 6 Sep 10
Posts: 209
Credit: 10,675
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1093520 - Posted: 5 Apr 2011, 3:13:07 UTC - in response to Message 1093146.

Ideas are born out of speculative ideas. Have any interesting candidate signals been picked up the Paul Allen Array so far? If any ETI radio signals are picked up, that array will probably detect them, the Paul Allen Array is more powerful than Arecibo.

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3815
Credit: 393,242
RAC: 238
Italy
Message 1093557 - Posted: 5 Apr 2011, 7:18:10 UTC - in response to Message 1093520.

The SETI Institute is running a program called SetiQuest. See www.setiquest.org. I have been unable to understand if they have obtained any result with this program, which processes the Allen Telescope Array data.
Tullio
____________

C Olival
Send message
Joined: 6 Sep 10
Posts: 209
Credit: 10,675
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1094146 - Posted: 7 Apr 2011, 1:25:29 UTC - in response to Message 1093557.

interesting

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3815
Credit: 393,242
RAC: 238
Italy
Message 1094239 - Posted: 7 Apr 2011, 7:35:53 UTC
Last modified: 7 Apr 2011, 7:36:40 UTC

Just to complete the information, I have downloaded from SetiQuest a binary called OpenSonATA 1.0 on my Linux box with SuSE 11.1 and it works up to a certain point. Then they now post a SonATA source code but you must have SuSE 11.3 to compile it. Since I am planning to upgrade to 11.4 I did not try to compile it. But how many people use Linux and how many of them use SuSE Linux 11.3? Most users run Windows and many run Mac OS X.
Tullio
____________

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8567
Credit: 4,232,738
RAC: 1,113
United Kingdom
Message 1094341 - Posted: 7 Apr 2011, 16:33:24 UTC - in response to Message 1094239.
Last modified: 7 Apr 2011, 16:35:09 UTC

Just to complete the information, I have downloaded from SetiQuest a binary called OpenSonATA 1.0 on my Linux box with SuSE 11.1 and it works up to a certain point. Then they now post a SonATA source code but you must have SuSE 11.3 to compile it. Since I am planning to upgrade to 11.4 I did not try to compile it. But how many people use Linux and how many of them use SuSE Linux 11.3? Most users run Windows and many run Mac OS X.


Eeek... That all looks to be at 'Alpha' status...

The software processes the ATA data to give waterfall plots that then must be human-eyeballed to look for any patterns that might be signals. All very manual.

Anyone who can follow the download and compile instructions can easily use other distributions other than SUSE Linux. It's only that the instructions examples are blindly given for that distro as an example.

Using cygwin, you could well give it all a try even on Windows!

I'll give that a pass for the moment until the system is developed for greater automation. At the moment, it looks just like an 'outreach' project.


Keep searchin',
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3815
Credit: 393,242
RAC: 238
Italy
Message 1094349 - Posted: 7 Apr 2011, 16:53:08 UTC

I agree with you, but how many people know how to compile a program? I have read on the openSuSE news that there is a Canterbury project which includes open SuSE, Debian, Gentoo, Grml and Arch Linux. Once there was a Standard Linux project and now I am running Scientific Linux in a VirtualMachine called BOINC_VM developed by CERN in a project called LHC++@home, which is still an alpha project. But there you don't have to compile anything, only to install a VirtualBox on your PC, which can run Linux, Windows or Mac OSX, the rest is automatic once you attach to the project after getting permission. I wondered once why the SETI Institute is not using the BOINC platform and was insulted as a "nonnetto" (silly old man) for asking that question. I may be old, but I am an alpha tester for a CERN project.
Tullio
____________

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8567
Credit: 4,232,738
RAC: 1,113
United Kingdom
Message 1094456 - Posted: 7 Apr 2011, 20:26:31 UTC - in response to Message 1094349.
Last modified: 7 Apr 2011, 20:28:25 UTC

... I wondered once why the SETI Institute is not using the BOINC platform ...


Perhaps the SETI Institute wish to keep their distance away from all the other searches and groups. Their particular search may be more tuned to generate public 'awareness' and 'interest' rather than develop the sort of automated search that s@h are attempting.

It will be interesting to see how the ATA progresses and how the SETI searches develop using the ATA data.

Keep searchin',
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Toranaguy
Send message
Joined: 17 Jun 02
Posts: 4
Credit: 4,651,730
RAC: 2,934
Australia
Message 1095160 - Posted: 9 Apr 2011, 4:59:52 UTC

I have often thought about this topic myself. but before I mention my idea I want to address the issue of mass increasing as you approach the speed of light. if that is the case then wouldn't gravitational attaction increase as well? and if so has anyone detected any high speed blackholes cruising about the universe? maybe this is something the guys and gals at einstein@home should look for? although not all lifeforms exist at once. any advanced species that has been around for millenia may have a solution to mass.

Anyway my idea was just using the vacuum of space itself to propel of suck you in the direction you want to go. I don't know if open space is a perfect vacuum? my understanding is the reason you can't maneuver is because the effects of the vacuum on all sides or points of your vehicle. if there was someway we could cancel out the effects of a vacuum on the rear of the vessel it might pull you in the direction you want to go. until you reach a speed where particles in space start inpacting the front of the vehicle and create a boundary flow. which will result in the choking of the vacuum.

Just a thought...

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8567
Credit: 4,232,738
RAC: 1,113
United Kingdom
Message 1095262 - Posted: 9 Apr 2011, 13:39:16 UTC - in response to Message 1095160.
Last modified: 9 Apr 2011, 13:42:21 UTC

... the issue of mass increasing as you approach the speed of light. if that is the case then wouldn't gravitational attaction increase as well?...

The object mass due the matter remains unchanged. It's the effective or relativistic mass that increases due to the ever increasing energy that has been added to accelerate up that mass. E=mc^2 after all. Add energy and you in effect increase the mass.


Anyway my idea was just using the vacuum of space itself to propel of suck you in the direction you want to go. I don't know if open space is a perfect vacuum?...


Space is far from being a perfect vacuum. You have pressure gradients and particle flows. You also have radiation pressure. Look up solar sailing and the details about the exploration of the heliosheath by the voyagers.


Solar systems, galaxies, and even our universe have an all pervasive magnetic field. Make use of superconductors, or make use of vast plasma coils, and you could electromagnetically sail away!


Keep searchin',
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2619
Credit: 1,180,227
RAC: 12
United States
Message 1095284 - Posted: 9 Apr 2011, 15:08:45 UTC - in response to Message 1095262.

As far as pressure is concerned. the vacuum in outer space is given as 10^-12 Torr which is probably much better than we could produce easily in the laboratory. There is a small average of one or two molecules per cubic meter.

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32304
Credit: 14,270,455
RAC: 11,194
United Kingdom
Message 1095611 - Posted: 10 Apr 2011, 8:47:57 UTC

One of the first queations I posted here some years ago was, why is the speed of light what it is? Why is it Approx 186,000 miles per second?. Why not 150,000 or 200,000?. The answer came back that it HAD to be at that speed, else the universe wouldn't exist in the form that it does today.

Any got an update on that?

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3815
Credit: 393,242
RAC: 238
Italy
Message 1099696 - Posted: 22 Apr 2011, 17:06:02 UTC - in response to Message 1095611.

One of the first queations I posted here some years ago was, why is the speed of light what it is? Why is it Approx 186,000 miles per second?. Why not 150,000 or 200,000?. The answer came back that it HAD to be at that speed, else the universe wouldn't exist in the form that it does today.

Any got an update on that?


e squared divided by h/2pi and c is a dimensionless constant equal to 1/137, which equals the ratio between the strength of the em interaction and the strong nuclear interaction. So these three constants are all entangled, so to say. What is missing is the gravitational interaction.
Tullio
____________

Profile Wahnsinn Images
Send message
Joined: 21 Apr 11
Posts: 7
Credit: 7,977
RAC: 0
Germany
Message 1100649 - Posted: 25 Apr 2011, 22:49:20 UTC

The Problem here is that whatever you do, if you speed up your system( that's you and your spaceship) is getting more Energy. Near the Speed of Light this Energy will have Mass itselve, so you are more heavy than you where before.
This means, you put in the same Energy, but only get for example the half speed more (I actually don't know if it is really the half, but in the end it has the same effect). So it is like adding in this way: 1 + 0.5 + 0.25 + 0.125 + ...
You can calculate this row a infinite time, but you never reach 2, but you get really near.
____________

RealX1
Send message
Joined: 16 Apr 11
Posts: 4
Credit: 610
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1101601 - Posted: 29 Apr 2011, 5:07:24 UTC
Last modified: 29 Apr 2011, 5:11:20 UTC

I'm new here :D and loving these threads. These are my thoughts on this topic- some of which have been echoed by others.

Let's say that the speed of light(c) 'can't' be broken. Perhaps, as mentioned, breaking the speed of light isn't relevant. At some point in the future we may learn how to skillfully manipulate time and space(and therefore distance). Percentages(or multiples) of c may only end up being a limited part of the puzzle.

There is no generally accepted proof that c is breakable, so far indicating that Einstein's theory may be correct. What about his theories about the curving of space-time? Could we somehow harness this knowledge in the future? We already know we can manipulate the passage of time by approaching c, what if we were also able to manipulate the curvature of space? We might have to circumvent c through various means.

In terms of interstellar travel- we know that the speed of light is relatively slow.. As said, it would also be hard for us to handle going that fast, the debris, slowing down, etc (let alone going even faster) and we still wouldn't get very far, very fast (unless we moved multiples of c)...Hopefully we're near enough to some extrasolar planets for possible colonization because I assume that's where we'd start. Its good that there might be ways other than sheer speed in which to traverse great distances. We'll need all the help we can get.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · Next

Message boards : SETI@home Science : Faster than the Speed of Light.

Copyright © 2014 University of California