The Speed Of Light May Soon Be Possible Through A New Thruster

[BADecker]

We (the USA) have had the ability to fly anywhere in the solar system in a short period of time, since the 1960s. We have decided against doing so for obscure reasons. Any of the hurdles regarding the actual "rocket" and its acceleration could be overcome rather easily. Things that might not be overcome so easily, are high-speed impacts with objects (even tiny pebbles) in space. Further development of our old science (which was abandoned in the '60s), could have made the stars available to us back then. See To the stars by atom bomb: The incredible tale of the top secret Orion Project - https://newatlas.com/orion-project-atom-bomb-spaceship/49454/.

Combining the above with the below discoveries, we could surely reach the stars rather easily. Faster than light could be achieved, thereby sending us back into time as well as reaching the stars faster. With regard to the time distortions experienced by high-speed (Einstein's relativity), faster than light could bring us back to previous times so that we would not outlive the people we left behind on Earth.


The Speed Of Light May Soon Be Possible Through A New Thruster

The concept of interstellar expeditions has been of particular interest, thanks to the Star Trek movies and series. New discoveries seem to bring us closer to the reality that travelling through the speed of light may soon be a reality. Or so we want to believe. Just imagine, if man sent its fastest space probe to the nearest reachable star, Alpha Centauri, it would take tens of thousands of years to get there. Really mathematically daunting actually. Having said this, most scientists believe that interstellar travel won't happen in the next several centuries. The galaxies in the universe are so ridiculously vast, it is hard to imagine such a theory.

But, it has never stopped some scientists from exploring the possibilities. Recently, a number of advanced models of propulsion have come about, fusion engines, ion thrusters, light sails pushed by lasers, wormholes, and even hydrogen bombs, have made the concept of interstellar travel a bit more possible.

The latest theory is from a physics professor emeritus at Fullerton, Jim Woodward, who has proposed a Mach-effect gravitational assist ( MEGA) drive. Strange as it may sound, Woodward submits that his drive could slowly accelerate with the help of a propulsion system powered by electricity, not combustible fuel. It is based on a disputable sub-component to Einstein's general relativity, the principle holds that the inertia is directly tied to gravity – and in theory, clears the way for " propellantless propulsion."

If you don't mind some scientific jargon, a stack of piezoelectric crystals generates the thrust, by storing small amounts of energy and vibrate when electrified. The synchronization of tens of thousands of vibrations per second produces physical momentum.Woodward calls these crystals "gizmos", and explains that the changes in mass or "Mach effects" will slowly but surely accelerate to incredible speeds. His followers describe it as "rowing a boat on the ocean of spacetime."

[Spendulus]

We (the USA) have had the ability to fly anywhere in the solar system in a short period of time, since the 1960s.


We have decided against doing so for obscure reasons. Any of the hurdles regarding the actual "rocket" and its acceleration could be overcome rather easily. Things that might not be overcome so easily, are high-speed impacts with objects (even tiny pebbles) in space. Further development of our old science (which was abandoned in the '60s), could have made the stars available to us back then. See To the stars by atom bomb: The incredible tale of the top secret Orion Project - https://newatlas.com/orion-project-atom-bomb-spaceship/49454/.

Combining the above with the below discoveries, we could surely reach the stars rather easily. Faster than light could be achieved, thereby sending us back into time as well as reaching the stars faster. With regard to the time distortions experienced by high-speed (Einstein's relativity), faster than light could bring us back to previous times so that we would not outlive the people we left behind on Earth.


The Speed Of Light May Soon Be Possible Through A New Thruster

The concept of interstellar expeditions has been of particular interest, thanks to the Star Trek movies and series. New discoveries seem to bring us closer to the reality that travelling through the speed of light may soon be a reality. Or so we want to believe. Just imagine, if man sent its fastest space probe to the nearest reachable star, Alpha Centauri, it would take tens of thousands of years to get there. Really mathematically daunting actually. Having said this, most scientists believe that interstellar travel won't happen in the next several centuries. The galaxies in the universe are so ridiculously vast, it is hard to imagine such a theory.

But, it has never stopped some scientists from exploring the possibilities. Recently, a number of advanced models of propulsion have come about, fusion engines, ion thrusters, light sails pushed by lasers, wormholes, and even hydrogen bombs, have made the concept of interstellar travel a bit more possible.

The latest theory is from a physics professor emeritus at Fullerton, Jim Woodward, who has proposed a Mach-effect gravitational assist ( MEGA) drive. Strange as it may sound, Woodward submits that his drive could slowly accelerate with the help of a propulsion system powered by electricity, not combustible fuel. It is based on a disputable sub-component to Einstein's general relativity, the principle holds that the inertia is directly tied to gravity – and in theory, clears the way for " propellantless propulsion."

If you don't mind some scientific jargon, a stack of piezoelectric crystals generates the thrust, by storing small amounts of energy and vibrate when electrified. The synchronization of tens of thousands of vibrations per second produces physical momentum.Woodward calls these crystals "gizmos", and explains that the changes in mass or "Mach effects" will slowly but surely accelerate to incredible speeds. His followers describe it as "rowing a boat on the ocean of spacetime."

No.

[franky1]

2 problems with light speed
1. you better have quick reaction speeds to avoid the asteroids. its not gonna be like fly on the windshield. but more like rocketlauncher through the entire car.

2. you know about centrifugal force(your obsessed with centrifuges recently) so you must know about g force.. so accelerating to light speed will either take a while to get to that speed. or.. rip the muscles from your bones. yep even in space


now. get out the sci-fi section. i know you love it. by try to learn some facts now an again

[suchmoon]

If BADecker travels at the speed of light away from us (one can only hope) will he be invisible? Sounds like good deal.

[Spendulus]

If BADecker travels at the speed of light away from us (one can only hope) will he be invisible? Sounds like good deal.

No. He would achieve infinite mass and absorb all things.

[allahabadi]

There we go again, another one of mumbo-jumbo science, dude seriously are you trolling on a mass level or are you sincere in your efforts to probe these unscientific or pseudoscientific nonsense.

On a very serious note, traveling at or even close to speed of light can have huge implications and I won't believe for a second that any organisation or nation capable of doing it would have not tried it.

[Spendulus]

There we go again, another one of mumbo-jumbo science, dude seriously are you trolling on a mass level or are you sincere in your efforts to probe these unscientific or pseudoscientific nonsense.

On a very serious note, traveling at or even close to speed of light can have huge implications and I won't believe for a second that any organisation or nation capable of doing it would have not tried it.

You can say that, but even as we talk, there could be a near infinite size mass Badecker hurling toward us at 99.9999999% of light speed, and we wouldn't know.

[BADecker]

There we go again, another one of mumbo-jumbo science, dude seriously are you trolling on a mass level or are you sincere in your efforts to probe these unscientific or pseudoscientific nonsense.

On a very serious note, traveling at or even close to speed of light can have huge implications and I won't believe for a second that any organisation or nation capable of doing it would have not tried it.

You can say that, but even as we talk, there could be a near infinite size mass Badecker hurling toward us at 99.9999999% of light speed, and we wouldn't know.

But if that BADecker was traveling significantly and sufficiently faster than the speed of light, he just might travel into the distant past before he can hit the Earth. Maybe the dinosaurs weren't killed off by a meteor after all. Maybe BADecker did it.

 

[Cnut237]

It's impossible for an object with mass to travel at the speed of light. This is basic physics.

If anyone is interested, there's some discussion of light speed in the quantum physics thread here.

[Cratoon]

Wouldn't this speed lead to deformation of materials?

Still great news though. Hope one day space travel will go past the speed of light limit with some amazing new technologies.

[Cnut237]

If BADecker travels at the speed of light away from us (one can only hope) will he be invisible? Sounds like good deal.

Technically we need to consider a couple of additional points. One, the universe is expanding. Two, space is not a perfect vacuum.

In order to propel our BADecker such that it moves beyond our light cone, the first point (space is expanding everywhere, all the time) means that a slightly sub-luminal velocity would be sufficient. However the second point works against us: the BADecker would not achieve light-speed-in-vacuum due to its interaction with cosmic detritus. So whilst with a huge amount of energy we could propel the BADecker at sufficient velocity, it may be, if the first point does not outweigh the second, that at times when the BADecker is traversing a particularly thinly populated region of the interstellar medium, we still catch a tantalising glimpse.

The other option is that we somehow fold space around the BADecker, such that we can move it beyond our light cone.

--

Edit: Also, be careful where you point that thing. If we fire a BADecker at near light speed away from us but directly towards the sun, then its huge relativistic mass m_relBADecker would mean the kinetic energy it/he possesses could conceivably be sufficient to blow up the star, and atomise everything out to the orbit of Mars. Frankly I'm starting to think the whole plan is a bit irresponsible.

[Spendulus]

If BADecker travels at the speed of light away from us (one can only hope) will he be invisible? Sounds like good deal.

Technically we need to consider a couple of additional points. One, the universe is expanding. Two, space is not a perfect vacuum.

In order to propel our BADecker such that it moves beyond our light cone, the first point (space is expanding everywhere, all the time) means that a slightly sub-luminal velocity would be sufficient. However the second point works against us: the BADecker would not achieve light-speed-in-vacuum due to its interaction with cosmic detritus. So whilst with a huge amount of energy we could propel the BADecker at sufficient velocity, it may be, if the first point does not outweigh the second, that at times when the BADecker is traversing a particularly thinly populated region of the interstellar medium, we still catch a tantalising glimpse.

The other option is that we somehow fold space around the BADecker, such that we can move it beyond our light cone.

--

Edit: Also, be careful where you point that thing. If we fire a BADecker at near light speed away from us but directly towards the sun, then its huge relativistic mass m_relBADecker would mean the kinetic energy it/he possesses could conceivably be sufficient to blow up the star, and atomise everything out to the orbit of Mars. Frankly I'm starting to think the whole plan is a bit irresponsible.

NOW YOU KNOW why we desperately need the multiverse.

[eddie13]

Most of the universe is moving away from us faster than the speed of light.. It’s relative..
We are moving faster than the speed of light away from most of the universe..

Faster than the speed of light as compared to what arbitrary stationary reference point in space?

[Cnut237]

Faster than the speed of light as compared to what arbitrary stationary reference point in space?

I think, from the previous posts, we have to take the relativistic infinite mass BADecker as that reference point. If we can accelerate it to light-speed (such that we are travelling at light speed relative to the BADecker), the expanding universe takes care of the rest and moves it beyond our frame of reference. Essentially by creating a large separation quickly, we are exposing the local nature of special relativity. Unless you're talking about the links in the original post? I didn't read them because I'm lazy and - in neat counterpoint to my own posts - they're probably nonsense.
One day I'll be good enough for ChipMixer.

[franky1]

how about just accelerate badecker to the speed of light towards our own sun.

in short. badecker burns up in 499seconds.

[Spendulus]

Faster than the speed of light as compared to what arbitrary stationary reference point in space?

I think, from the previous posts, we have to take the relativistic infinite mass BADecker as that reference point. If we can accelerate it to light-speed (such that we are travelling at light speed relative to the BADecker), the expanding universe takes care of the rest and moves it beyond our frame of reference. Essentially by creating a large separation quickly, we are exposing the local nature of special relativity. Unless you're talking about the links in the original post? I didn't read them because I'm lazy and - in neat counterpoint to my own posts - they're probably nonsense.
One day I'll be good enough for ChipMixer.

Ah, the General Theory.

May I suggest, that the entire theory breaks down when considering the measured speeds of objects/people running away from The Badecker?

This is a "Runaway speed phenomena."

[BADecker]

how about just accelerate badecker at the speed of light towards our own sun.

in short. badecker burns up in 499seconds.

As usual. Oh, well. We're getting used to it, right?

Accelerating at the speed of light is talking about accelerating TO velocities way beyond the speed of light. Both, the speed of the Solar System through space, and the reversal in time have something to do with things.

The Solar System is moving through space about a 143 miles a second. If you sent BADecker towards the sun at the simple velocity of the speed of light - assuming you were sending him from Earth towards - it would take about 8.6 minutes for him to get to the Sun. And depending on the point of the sun you had aimed him at, he might even miss it altogether... depending on how far the sun moved.

If you want BADecker to get to the Sun, you have to send him toward the spot the Sun will be at when he gets there. This isn't so easy to calculate. Scientists and astronomers have a difficult time calculating this stuff for rockets and satellites. Lots of things come into play, including Earth rotation speed at the place on Earth you launch him from.

Then, when you throw in the speed of light acceleration rather than just velocity, you have BADecker going backwards in time, and possibly at a terrific rate of backwards time movement (See Einstein's Relativity Theory.). This means that you have to calculate how far back in time he will go so you can aim him at the place the sun was when he would get back there.

You better take a course in simple celestial mechanics before you start blabbing about something that you don't seem to know anything about.

Ah, the General Theory.

May I suggest, that the entire theory breaks down when considering the measured speeds of objects/people running away from The Badecker?

This is a "Runaway speed phenomena."

Well, actually, if you are running away from BADecker, this might actually send him further into the past with regard to you... if you are running the exact opposite of the direction he is accelerating towards. If you are running laterally from BADecker, there could be all kinds of time vectors (as well as space vectors) that might come into play... at least concerning your past relationship to BADecker. But it might not be substantial regarding BADecker'srelationship with a past position of the Sun.

However, in all of this, we don't have any practical measurements outside of atomic clocks on jets to suggest what might happen. When considering an acceleration at the speed of light, quantum mechanics might introduce all kinds of interesting phenomenon.

[franky1]

badecker has problems locating the sun..
heres a tip. during the day. point towards that bright thing in the sky.

but atleast he is now recognising that accelerating to the speed of light will cause him to pas out well before the 499 seconds (before hitting the sun due to the force involved)

yep speed of light is like 1021g to have achieved such speed within 499 seconds
however at 9g your blood cant circulate and you pass out. this means you pass out and die before you reach the sun
but atleast your body is then cremated within 8 minutes of death
enjoy the ride for about 1-2 seconds

and thats just normal physics

[Spendulus]

yep speed of light is like 1021g to have achieved such speed within 499 seconds

That's just 10k meters/sec/sec, and your speed target is 300M m/sec.

Not 499 seconds but 8.3 hours at a thousand g.

Light actually is pretty speedy.

[BADecker]

this means you pass out and die before you reach the sun

Not in a bath with a pressurize helium-oxygen mix as used in deep-sea diving.

What does accelerating to the speed of light have to do with it? Are you talking about the velocity being the speed of light when the Sun is reached, from a zero start on Earth? If that's what you mean, you'll never hit the Sun if you shoot directly at it that way. It will have moved by the time you reach spead-of-light-velocity.

You can't shoot at the Sun this way, and expect to hit it, even if it is overhead. You need to shoot at the place where it will have moved to by the time you get there. Accelerating to light-speed from zero, in a 93 million mile distance, takes way longer than 8.6 minutes. And the vectoring and distance changes as you shoot at the place where the Sun will be when you reach light-speed.