Speed of Light Theory

[blackf0rk]

I've been meaning to put this down on paper for a while. Finally got around to it. I do realize that as you approach the speed of light, mass increases, and in theory the amount of energy needed to propell something AT the speed of light is infinite. But humor me on this, ok? Thanks...

http://www.enspiar.com/sol

:flamer:

[DEFYANT]

Lookin for a smaller pulley, eh?

[blackf0rk]

Lookin for a smaller pulley, eh?

ROFL!!!! hahahaha.




Yes... :depress:

[Breadfan]

The thing is, you're still using work to get the tip moving the speed of light. Regardless of HOW it's being propelled, it's being propelled. So, if the theory is correct, the theory will hold true.

So essentially, the power required to get something 60 miles long spinning at 60,000 rpm is going to get pretty astronomical.

60 miles is a BIG distance.

If the theory is correct, it still won't work because you are using force, power, energy, etc to propel to object, it's just setup differently than if it were say, a rocket engine.

Here's something else to consider. Take something on a string with a weight on the end. Let it hang out from your hand about 2 inches, and twirl it. Notice you can make it go pretty fast huh? Now let it out 2 feet, and try again, not as easy to get that same speed. See, even though you're spinning it the same speed, it's taking more work to get the outer edges going as fast.

It's an interesting idea, but I don't think it'd hold up - that is, trusting the theory is correct. :)

Now, bend the space around the area you are rotating and all of a sudden you realize the fastest way between two points isn't a straight line but to bend the line and hop across - now you're going faster than light, albiet by cheating! :D

Still an interesting take on it!

[Mike M]

Nope, it won't work...I tried it last year.

[natedog1284]

I think I'd have to agree with breadfan. Albiet an interesting idea, I think the strength of the material needed to be used to stand up to the forces that would be involved would become so heavy, that it would require more power than could ever be generated by a motor-type device in the center, especially since the mass at the tips of the blades would become nearly infinite. So, even though motor isn't spinning at the speed of light per-se, it would still need an infinite amount of energy to turn the blades to the speed of light; again, this assumes Einstein was correct. But hey, nice idea; remember, imagination is more important than knowledge....(like that? I got it from a fortune cookie :D).
-Nate

[Hotrauder]

In weightless space? Why not? Seems rather easy to spin to speeds needed but much more complicated to actually travel that fast? IS it lunch time yet? Dennis:D

[KillJoy]

Hmmmm.......

I think the necessary work into making a Balanced Mass of that size would be the limiting factor.

I definately like the though. Have you questioned any of Theoretical Physic's geats minds yet?

KillJoy

[Big House]

Very interestying indeed. But I think it would be more fesible to put a small nuclear reactor powered particle accelerator in space. Crank it up and open on end. Most of the big ones in the deserts of Arizonia and California have acheived .8 the speed of light. Understanding that space is infinite in it available room, the space needed to extend the tether line out would pose a problem. Also have you considered the force over the length of that line. I am assuming there would be a weight at the end on the tether line. If spin like to describled, the outward spinning forces would weaken and corrupt the stability of the tether.

[magindat]

The limiting factor in today's technology would be the strength of the tether. As the mass on the tip becomes infinite, each point of the tether would also be approaching infinite mass. So the force exerted on the connection point would be infinity + (infinity-1point) + (infinity -2 points)...etc. It is definately a valid theory, however limited by materials. It presents as a 'cheaper' way than direct propulsion.

To add, if it were to be attempted I would think there would need to be 2 equal 'arms'. One arm at any RPM would create a 'wobble' of cosmic proportions!

Time for another dose...:rasta:

[dwasson]

In weightless space? Why not? Seems rather easy to spin to speeds needed but much more complicated to actually travel that fast? IS it lunch time yet? Dennis:D

There may not be weight but there will be mass. You're looking at a phenomenon called "polar moment of inertia". Imagine that you have 2 weights connected by a weightless bar, 1 foot long. To move that bar will take X footpounds of force. If you lengthen this bar to 3 long, the force required may be 2X footpounds. (I have this formula in a book somewhere)

This is why shorter cars can turn faster. It's also why Porsche 911s can scare you in corners sometimes.

[dwasson]

It is definately a valid theory, however limited by materials.
I really don't think so. I think that the speed the disk can spin is limited by the strength of materials. But, you can't approach C without applying infinate force. There's a big jump between spinning really fast and the speed of light.

One valid theory for traveling faster than the speed of light may be tachyon drives. Since tachyons only seem to exist at lightspeed + it may be that the future is there. But there is still that problem of getting into the regime where tachyon drives might apply.

I'm not convinced that faster-than-light travel is a good idea. Your hat always blows off and there is that long wait in the dark for your luggage when you get to your destination.

[Cheeseheadbob]

After reading the link and all of the replys, my head hurts. I think I will now take the beast out and do my best to reach the speed of bliss! :D

[Big House]

There may not be weight but there will be mass. You're looking at a phenomenon called "polar moment of inertia". Imagine that you have 2 weights connected by a weightless bar, 1 foot long. To move that bar will take X footpounds of force. If you lengthen this bar to 3 long, the force required may be 2X footpounds. (I have this formula in a book somewhere)

This is why shorter cars can turn faster. It's also why Porsche 911s can scare you in corners sometimes.

No..that is because Porsche's have all their weight in ther rear and they get squirrely in the twisties.

[Dan]

The persons math works but only inside of the matter/anti-matter reactor and only with fully charged Dilithium Crystals.

Live long and prosper,

Dan

[duhtroll]

Now that we've figured out warp speed, let's go for time travel!

:P

-A

[Dan]

Time travel is too iffy. Didn't you ever watch Voyager? Jeez! :P

[duhtroll]

Kirk did it, and Janeway is a crybaby.

[Dark_Knight7096]

If you guys wanna unlock time travel, first unlock light speed. Time slows down at the speed of light, therefore, theoretically, you would be able to "travel" into the future. TIme would pass normally for all those not at lightspeed, so you could travel into the future without time changing you as much as it does everyone else. Haven't any of you guys seen flight of the navigator? Also too, black holes would be an interesting area of study for temporal displacement, there are many interesting theories there to try out. Also remember Event Horizion, the shortest distance between 2 points is not a straight line, it is zero, bend the very fabric of space itself and just pass right on through to the other one. So many interesting theories out there, all this bullcrap that no human will ever be able to use and we have so many millions and billions of dollars and manhours being devoted to it. Where are the cool theories and cool devices that we could all use? Where's my lightsaber??? I'm still waitin on those, why haven't they made those yet? :mad2: LOL, but good theory, could work, but I do think it's limited for the various reasons everyone else already mentioned though. Maybe one day it could be tried out and maybe you'll be right, who knows.

[ole69]

I'd love love to see the torque monster that could sustain this venture
60 miles of yarn is heavy but couldn't withstand the centrifugal forces of whatever weight is tied to the end of the arm

And also what fuel source will drive this machine
'cause an electric motor is limited, because electricity travels at the speed of light, so how could you surpass the speed and the resistance incurred, and maintain the RPM's over a 60mi radius

I think once we build this, the Death Star has been bornhttp://bestanimations.com/Sci-Fi/StarWars/DeathStar-02-june.gifhttp://bestanimations.com/Sci-Fi/StarWars/Ships/DogFight-01-june.gif

[dwasson]

No..that is because Porsche's have all their weight in ther rear and they get squirrely in the twisties.
And that is a polar moment issue.

[magindat]

And also what fuel source will drive this machine
'cause an electric motor is limited, because electricity travels at the speed of light, so how could you surpass the speed and the resistance incurred, and maintain the RPM's over a 60mi radius

I think once we build this,...

Put a supercharger on each electron, duh. :beatnik:

[Mike Poore]

As the forward moment increases so does centrifugal force, which wants to pull the object into a straight line, thus exerting tremendous force upon the tether, requiring more mass. If the experiment is to be conducted in a vacuum, thus negating drag upon the tether, it seems eventually the forces would slowly begin to rotate equally around each other, in free space, eventually, both attaining the same speed. But then, what do biologists know about rocket science?:dunno:

[woaface]

So why does it have to be so big? Why can't it be smaller?

[SergntMac]

'Cause size matters...

[natedog1284]

So why does it have to be so big? Why can't it be smaller?

The idea behind the theory is that light speed and faster can be obtained with the relatively slow and attainable of a motor type device. It just so happens that to break the speed of light, the blades of this device would have to be that huge, (again, we're talking about over 186,000 miles per second).

However, I still say that this would be impossible, because even if the motor weren't spinning that fast, it would still require an infinite amount of energy to turn the fan blades, as the ends of such would approach infinite mass. And infinite is a number that no one (save God) will ever be able to produce, because to the best of our knowledge, such a quantity cannot exist in this universe.

...Ugh, I digress; I'm tired, I'm gonna go wash my car. :D

-Nate

[Marauderjack]

James..James..James,

You ought to know by now that "SIZE MATTERS"!!!!:lol:

Marauderjack:D

[woaface]

I don't know anything about physics but the bigger, the bird the slower the wings flap.

What you've got to consider is environmental factors such as resistance.

The thing shouldn't be bigger than a test room at NASA, if not the size of a fan or better yet a yo-yo.

[blackf0rk]

You guys are funny. This is a theory on how to make something reach that speed in a mathmatical environment. It wasn't meant to take E=MC2 and infinite energy/mass into account.

This whole contraption or "machine" if you will, is all theoretical. I didn't mention anything about using an electric motor (just used one as an example of something that can sping 60,000RPM). Also, since it's all theoretical, who's to say that other theoretical items could not be attached to this device? Like, a frictionless motor, or a infinite power source?

[Breadfan]

I never considered the materials used as a tether or the power source causing the propultion - so, my take on it stands. :)

Irregardless of the materiels or the power source it would not be feasible becuase the ends of the blades, tethers, whatever, would still be reaching the speed of light and therefore infinite mass.

You say "infinite power source" - what does that mean? How would an "infinite" power source power "infinite" mass? Keeping it purely theoretical, would infinity = infinity in this case? Is Infinity power enough to move Infinity mass...hmmmm...or do they simply cancel each other out.

Now, I'd say that yes, you can remove materials from the conversation, who knows when the strong enough materials may exist, but it's feasible to assume they could. But, I don't think you can assume an infinite power source...

So, it boils down to this, you assume that as something approaches the speed of light it gains infinite mass. While the slowly rotating center may not be going near the speed of light, the out edges would be and thus still susceptible to the same increase in mass dictated by the theory.

So yes, an interesting take on it, but unfortunately, I doubt it's that easy to cheat the system. :) Maybe there are some things that could be added to the equation though that could push it over the edge...

Anyway, I'm not saying faster than light speed is possible - I believe it is entirely possible.

Your idea would be a cool sight to see though!



Edit: There is another consideration that Mike Poore brought up that is important to consider, and that is the reaction of centrifugal force on our equation. How does centrifugal force relate to the rotational speed? Is it linear? (i.e. each unit increase of rotational speed = the same unit of increas on centrifugal force), or is it something more like and exponential or logarithmic increase? If this is the case, the faster you go, the more centrifugal force could play.

Even if your tether was strong enough to withstand anything (whatever the tether or blades may be, it's not important), what if the centrifugal force (the desire of the object to proceed in a straight line) begain to produce drag as the speed increases. (And I'm not talking about drag from wind resistance, but from centrifugal force, so it would exist the same in a vacuum). If this were the case, eventually you'd be fighting this drag as well as infinite mass, so if you had infinite mass AND the theoretical infinite power source, you'd still have that drag.

So, even if your infinite mass = infinite power, you'd still have drag....assume inifinity is "i" and drag "d" you'd have i(mass)+d=i(power) so you'd still come up short on the power side. ;)

Of course, does centrigual forces cause drag at high velocities? I'm not entirely sure so the past few paragraphs may have been for nothing. :)

[Bluerauder]

If spin like to describled, the outward spinning forces would weaken and corrupt the stability of the tether.
You mean the string will break ... right !! :rofl:

[Petrograde]

hmm,.. almost sounds like the same theory that causes the tips of helicopter blades to break the sound barrier.

[dwasson]

hmm,.. almost sounds like the same theory that causes the tips of helicopter blades to break the sound barrier.

Purty much.

[Cheeseheadbob]

Mike, I'm sorry. No theory will be considered when the word "irregardless" is used. :beatnik:


Irregardless

[ncmm]

ok. . .what I wanna know is if I'm travelling at the speed of light in my car and I turn on the headlights do they come on? :lol:

[Rob1559]

Scotty? SCOTTY????


Is anyone else afraid of that idea ripping a hole in the universe?

[Breadfan]

Mike, I'm sorry. No theory will be considered when the word "irregardless" is used. :beatnik:

LOL, gotcha. ;)

How about I "annotate" it differently... ??? heheh :cool: