# My FTL Theory

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

##### Guest
Hello,<br /><br />i have a few theories for an object travelling FTL and would like to ask if one of them is viable. <br /><br />i'm no genius or anyting but i did do high school physics and have a keen interest in things like this. <br /><br />heres the theory: <br />basically when you have a spinning disc it spins at a certain rpm but the inside area will spin slower than the outer edge as the outer edge covers more distance in the same amout of time as the inner. <br /><br />now if you had a very large disc say around 72km+ in radius made of a light material like wire and took it into space so there was no gravitational force on it and you had it attached a powerful motor that could spin at 40,000+ rpm i calculated an object sitting on the outer edge of the disc would be travelling faster than the speed of light. <br /><br />is this idea valid? or is there some loophole i'm not thinking of?<br /><br />any feedback would be great as in my mind it seems a valid theory.<br /><br />cheers<br />

O

#### odysseus145

##### Guest
It would still take an infinite amount of energy to accelerate the edge of the disk to FTL speed. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

M

#### mcbethcg

##### Guest
In other words, your motor would not do it.

L

##### Guest
thanks for the replys guys.<br /><br />i disagree that the motor would need an infinate amount of energy however as the motor is only applying its force to the inner most part of the disc. any force from the load/weight of the disc would easily be overcome with a powerful enough motor. <br /><br />and the motor doesn't need to spin at the speed of light. it just has to rotate 40,000 rpm and then inherintly, the outer edge will spin at the speed of light due to the distance it travels over the same unit of time.<br /><br />this is all a hypothetical theory at the moment. you'd need a lot of money to make a disk with a 72km radius. but that size would decrease with a faster motor say spnning at 100,000 rpm.<br /><br />i don't see how this wouldn't work....<br /><br />any thoughts?

N

#### nacnud

##### Guest
Your motor would still be mechaniacly coupled to the outer edge of the disk, it has to accelerate all of the disk not just the middle, hence the motor would need an infinite amount of energy to accelerate the edge of the disk to lightspeed.

M

#### mcbethcg

##### Guest
The outer part of the disk would aquire infinite mass as it approaches light speed.<br /><br />Surely you can see that since the motor is driving the center of the wheel, and that the center of the wheel is driving the outer part of the wheel, it would bog-down the motor?

H

#### harmonicaman

##### Guest
No, no, no!<br /><br />You can't circumvent the addition of velocities paradox. You can't do it because of the way velocities are added at relativistic speeds - and Einstein say's so! <br /><br />Normally, in Newtonian mechanics, velocities are added as follows:<br /><br /><b>v<sub>1</sub>+v<sub>2</sub>+v<sub>3</sub>=v<sub>4</sub></b><br /><br />But at relativistic velocities (at or approaching "c", the speed of light), you must deal with this awe inspiring equation:<br /><br /><b>w = (u + v)/(1 + uv/c<sup>2</sup>)</b><br /><br />No matter how cleverly you try to state the problem, <i>you cannot</i> overcome Einstein's rules of Special Relativity<sup>1</sup> and the Lorentz Transformation. This has been tested again and again and so far nobody has been able to poke a hole in this fascination equation.<br /><br />If you continue to labor the point; I'll have member Saiph get really technical with you... <br /><br />1. Special Relativity and the addition of velocities

U

#### umpa_lumpa

##### Guest
I don't know, the idea sounds probable...have you done all the math for it?

L

##### Guest
thanks umpa_lumpa.... i have done enough math to calculate that would be the minimum rpm and size ratio for the outer edge to exceed or equal light speed.<br /><br />i can see whay may of you believe this idea is impossible due to einstien's theorys of relativity etc.<br /><br />The thing is i'm working from the presumption that objects CAN travel faster than the speed of light. i'm of the belief that the velocity of objecs has no relation to the speed of light and are not limited by it. i believe objecs can travel as fas as they like under certain circumstances. <br /><br />i am one of the few that doesn't agree with many of einstiens theorys and am currently working on my own theory of speed and light and why einstein and some of his work might not be correct. <br /><br />this idea above, is one of the ways i've thought of proving that objects can travel faster than the speed of light. i have a couple of others that seem totally feasible and likely with enough funding. <br /><br />i know many of you might be thinking ... "this noob.... decades of thought and experiment have backed up einstien and his work..." but i will continue my work until i succeed or am convinced that i am 100% wrong, and so far no one or nothing has convinced me of this. <br /><br />anyways thanks for your feedback guys.

H

#### harmonicaman

##### Guest
<i>"The thing is i'm working from the presumption that objects CAN travel faster than the speed of light. i'm of the belief that the velocity of objecs has no relation to the speed of light and are not limited by it. i believe objecs can travel as fas as they like under certain circumstances."</i><br /><br />Time and again this has been proven to be a false assumption. You cannot go faster than "c". You cannot go faster than time. "m" cannot reach relativistic velocities - to do so would mean leaving the universe and there is no "There" there... <br /><br /><i>"i am one of the few that doesn't agree with many of einstiens theorys and am currently working on my own theory of speed and light and why einstein and some of his work might not be correct."</i><br /><br />Show me an experiment, <i>any experiment</i>, which can demonstrate that Einstein and the TOR are incorrect in explaining of the fundamental workings of our universe. <br /><br />Thoughts, no matter how profound, may not equal facts.<br /><br /><i>"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts."</i><br /><b> - Albert Einstein</b> (1879 - 1955) <br /><br />

P

#### pocket_rocket

##### Guest
Do you have access to a 100 trillion horsepower motor to test your theory with? If so, you might reach 30 percent c, but beyond that point the HP will need to be increased exponentially to the point that you will need all the power in the universe itself to increase speed, and still will remain just below c.

T

#### trisco

##### Guest
lopadotem, <br />I posted a question almost exactly like this a while back.<br />Anyone remember the Bicycle tire FTL question? There are a lot of good responses on that thread that helped me out.<br /><br />link -- /> Bicycle Tire

Status
Not open for further replies.