News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Is lightspeed really a limit? Solving super-luminal Speci... by bcgraham on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @12:24PM (#4637005)
If you were actually going the speed of light, all travel becomes instantaneous from your reference frame.
Re:Is lightspeed really a limit? Solving super-luminal Speci... by stephengillie on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @12:50PM (#4637150)
If you were actually going the speed of light, light would still have to be able to go ~300kmh faster than you. To make this happen, time slows down for you.

That's what special relativity says - in any reference frame, light is always traveling v + c, where v is your velocity and c is the speed of light.

To make this happen, time itself slows down. But how would this actually work? Does this mean electrons would "orbit" within the electron cloud more slowly? (If not, then molecules larger than Z=137 may be possible.)

Re:Is lightspeed really a limit? Solving super-luminal Speci... by felipemnoa on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @01:02PM (#4637198)
>>But how would this actually work? Does this mean electrons would "orbit" within the electron cloud more slowly?

Yes, all of the particles within that frame of reference slow down. Why? Who knows. Maybe space becomes more "viscous" which slows down all particles within it.

Re:Is lightspeed really a limit? Solving super-luminal Speci... by capnrefsmmat on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @01:12PM (#4637243)
The "why" in the framework of special relativity would be "because the Lorentz transformations rotate points in four-dimensional spacetime."

If you imagine every event as having (x,y,z,t) coordinates in a particular reference frame, the Lorentz transformation is a 4x4 matrix which rotates events to show what would be observed in another reference frame. You trade spatial distance for temporal distance and vice versa.

This comes out of the structure of spacetime, rather than viscosity of some kind, which would be visible as a force.

Re:Is lightspeed really a limit? Solving super-luminal Speci... by felipemnoa on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @01:29PM (#4637323)
Your answer does not explain why. It correctly predicts the universe but it is not a why. Why do all particles slow down as speed increases? I'm looking for a more fundamental answer here.
Re:Is lightspeed really a limit? Solving super-luminal Speci... by capnrefsmmat on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @01:56PM (#4637441)
"Spacetime is a Minkowski space" is why. Remember that mysterious viscosity cannot explain particle slowdown, because the particles appear to be perfectly normal in a co-moving reference frame.

If you're looking for something more than a model that correctly predicts the universe, you're looking for something other than physics.

Re:Is lightspeed really a limit? Solving super-luminal Speci... by felipemnoa on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @02:32PM (#4637570)
I'm looking for a more fundamental model.

Edit: Let me see if I can make myself clear. We know that c is constant no matter how fast you are moving. If c is constant then it can be derived that time slows down and distances get compressed, etc. etc. etc. Einstein derived all of this by realizing that c is constant in all frames of reference. Now, if I ask "Why does time slow down?" and I get the answer "because c is constant" then we are just going in circles. It seems that that is what is happening here. Correct me if I'm wrong but are you not using a derivation of the fact that c is constant as an answer? I'm looking for a more fundamental reason as to why time slows down. Which is the same as asking why c is constant.

Re:Is lightspeed really a limit? Solving super-luminal Speci... by stephengillie on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @01:42PM (#4637379)
To felipemnoa (since there's no reply link under your latest post in my view)

All solid matter moves forward in time at the same speed, minus the speed in which it's moving in the other 3 dimensions. Light and other particles only move forwards in time.

Re:Is lightspeed really a limit? Solving super-luminal Speci... by 7rurl on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @01:12PM (#4637244)
Also, when traveling at the speed of light the entire universe would appear to have collapsed down to a single point, because of length contraction. So really, the notion of movement or change completely breaks down when you are moving at the speed of light... except in your reference frame were everything is normal. Also, it would take an infinite amount of energy to accelerate something to the speed of light, so the speed of light is a limit that you can never actually reach (i.e. an asymptotic limit).
Re:Is lightspeed really a limit? Solving super-luminal Speci... by foxhill on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @12:51PM (#4637155)
*if you were actually going at the speed of light from a stationary observer, all travel becomes instantaneous from your reference frame.

the speed of light, c, can be violated from your frame of reference, but the external observer doesn't see this - it's your perception of time that has slowed down.

you reach the speed of light (from the perspective of an external observer) when your local velocity is infinite (and then all travel becomes instantaneous).

Re:Is lightspeed really a limit? Solving super-luminal Speci... by felipemnoa on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @12:48PM (#4637145)
But from my own frame of reference all I would see is people frozen in time traveling a the speed of light, not really instantaneous. So in essence, the laws of physics have a built in hibernation mode for anybody traveling at c </joke>.
Re:Is lightspeed really a limit? Solving super-luminal Speci... by y0ghur7_xxx on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @12:46PM (#4637127)
Why is 299.792.458 m/s instantaneous from your reference frame? Like the OP, I don't understand.
Re:Is lightspeed really a limit? Solving super-luminal Speci... by felipemnoa on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @12:51PM (#4637154)
Within your own frame of reference time slows down the faster you move. This is why from your own frame of reference light seems to always be moving at c no matter how close to c you get. Once you get to c time will be frozen. So if you travel for an entire year at c to you it will look like it was instantaneous, it wasn't, you could say you were "unconscious" the entire time. Somebody from a different frame of reference will notice you traveling at the speed of light and will notice that you are frozen in time.
Re:Is lightspeed really a limit? Solving super-luminal Speci... by capnrefsmmat on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @01:04PM (#4637210)
Careful. Within your own frame of reference, time always progresses at a normal rate. When you are traveling near the speed of light, distances contract; at the speed of light, all distances in the direction of travel would be zero.

On the other hand, someone stationary watching you travel near the speed of light would say that your clock slows down more the faster you move, but lengths stay the same.

Re:Is lightspeed really a limit? Solving super-luminal Speci... by felipemnoa on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @01:08PM (#4637226)
>>Careful. Within your own frame of reference, time always progresses at a normal rate.

You are correct. I don't think I said otherwise. I guess I should have been clearer, time slows down in the frame of reference traveling at c when looking at it from a different frame of reference. I'm sure we are saying the same thing.

>>at the speed of light, all distances in the direction of travel would be zero.

Yeah, but a person observing you in a different frame of reference won't see that. The fact that distances are zero is just another way of saying that time has slowed down in your frame of reference. Is just two faces of the same coin.

Re:Is lightspeed really a limit? Solving super-luminal Speci... by capnrefsmmat on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @01:28PM (#4637316)
> The fact that distances are zero is just another way of saying that time has slowed down in your frame of reference. Is just two faces of the same coin.

Indeed. You can see this sort of effect in, say, the muon decay demo in my relativity simulator:

http://www.refsmmat.com/jsphys/relativity/relativity.html

The muon decay lifetime observations can be explained equally well in terms of time dilation or length contraction.

Re:Is lightspeed really a limit? Solving super-luminal Speci... by foxhill on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @12:51PM (#4637158)
the speed of light, c, can be violated from your frame of reference, but the external observer doesn't see this - it's your perception of time that has slowed down.

you reach the speed of light (from the perspective of an external observer) when your local velocity is infinite (and then all travel becomes instantaneous).

Re:Is lightspeed really a limit? Solving super-luminal Speci... by capnrefsmmat on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @01:08PM (#4637223)
I'm not sure what this means. c cannot be exceeded in any frame of reference. Your "local" velocity is always zero -- you always measure your own speed with respect to yourself to be zero.

From your perspective, reaching the speed of light causes all distances in the direction of travel to become zero. Your clock functions correctly and time travels at the ordinary pace. From a stationary observer's perspective, distances are the same but your clock has stopped.