Starship Asterisk*

If a galaxy is 100 light years across then, travelling at the speed of light, would it take 100 years to go from one side to the other?

Travelling at the speed of light, I expect it would appear to you, the traveller, to take 100 years, however you would appear to take far longer to an observer.

makc

isn't orbital velocity only crucial to obtain orbit and can't escape velocity be less if you are traveling tangent to orbital direction?

BMAONE23 wrote:if you are traveling tangent to orbital direction

ha ha, can you really travel any other way? I mean, with your engines OFF? I guess you can think of escape velocity as orbital one for infinite orbit. I guess it's just lower orbits simply correspond to higher speeds.

l3p3r wrote:

If a galaxy is 100 light years across then, travelling at the speed of light, would it take 100 years to go from one side to the other?

Travelling at the speed of light, I expect it would appear to you, the traveller, to take 100 years, however you would appear to take far longer to an observer.

Incorrect, you would get there instantly, while observer would see that taking 100 years.

Exactly - unfortunately wouldn't your mass also be infinite - therefore requiring an infinite force to propel it to that stage?

I keep wondering where that "accumulating mass" is coming from?

There is no such thing as a free lunch.
Unless it is coming from some "other dimension"?

Norval

The mass is converted energy, you know E=MC^2!

Incorrect, you would get there instantly, while observer would see that taking 100 years.

Aha! Ashamed I am for not getting that right! Thanks.

Hello Empeda

If you are at the speed of light. Your mass relative to an object standing still is theoretically infinite.
But! relative to your self you are not. Therefore you can consistently push yourself with what ever energy you expell. But! what gravitational forces are being excerted upon you is the controlling factor on your speed. So! it maybe that it comes down to it that the top speed of an object is the speed of light.
We as man will hopefully find ways to overcome our limits and limits of our surroundings.
Stay Cool

craterchains wrote:I keep wondering where that "accumulating mass" is coming from

It does not "come from" somewhere, it IS your kinetic energy, mostly. You should rather ask where that kinetic energy would come from, instead.

Empeda2 wrote:Exactly - unfortunately wouldn't your mass also be infinite - therefore requiring an infinite force to propel it to that stage?

don't you think when we figure out how to break the light speed barrier that we will figure out how to break the mass barrier as well?

Your mass is constant relative to your self.
Relative to other objects would depend on their speed.
So in a way relative to another oject yes it would be infinite and therefore would require infinite energy to move away from that object.
Have to try it one day

If you could isolate the gravity around you, you would be able to go as fast as you want.
Smile

Anyone remember all the ways mankind would not be able to break the "sound barrier"? There are so many articles in old science magazines from the 40's, reading them gives one a sense of what some are still saying today. Give yourself a good laugh, find some old science mags and read about how come we cant go faster than sound.

Norval

One way is to build a space ship that is not affected by gravity. But! uses the gravity to over come the speed of light. Build a motor that creates an anti gravity field.
Smile.
Sometimes we just have to dream of the ways and hows and whys.

Then again,,,

,,, maybe that is now possible?!?!
http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php?t=827

Norval

Wow i did not know that!!!!

Has anybody got info on the antigravity

Try clicking on the links Harry.

Smile,,,,,,thanks mate

I should have said MORE info.

Keep Cool

well, in its basics, antigravity is that thing phisicians invented, to rely upon every time they have nothing else to rely upon. for one example, Einstein once brought antigravity in, when gravity itself seemed to be not enough to explain universe expansion; it's not the case now, but people have got long used to it, and still insist on using it. for another example, you are trying to invent it, when your theories are not enough to allow for superluminar speed It's like a magic stick - when you "wand" around with it, everything becomes possible.

Anti-gravity in it's basic principle of operation seems to be similar to an alternator that provides electricity for autos. Fields of energy acting on other fields of energy to produce the desired affect. Similar to the skins of an onion, layer upon layer. Balancing these fields against one another and varying their strengths and shapes gives the desired effect.

Just a quick study.

Yet it is stated that these effects will not go beyond the speed of light. We need something far faster.

Norval

Creater chain i think you are right.

Darn and i was thinking of building a graviton motor to see if i could reach the speed of light.

So, toss out the antigrav as it aint gonna go fast enough.

Must go faster, must go faster.

Norval

If you were going the speed of light you'd get there instantly from your point of view. How much faster do you want to get there? Sheesh.

To explore to go where no man has gone before, thats why we need to go at the speed of light and beyond.

harry wrote:To explore to go where no man has gone before, thats why we need to go at the speed of light and beyond.

A baby is 2 weeks old. I think he's ready for the Iron Man competition.


We haven't left our own magnetosphere, and you guys are talking about inter-stellar and even inter-galactic travel as if you were planning a trip to Hawaii.


Oh, there I go again, being negative... 8)