Question Past the speed of light

[KILLEN]

What would happen if there are multiple different speed combining to be greater than the speed of light?

EX
Revolution speed of our moon around earth = A
Revolution speed of Earth around the sun = B
Revolution speed of the sun around the milky way = C
The movement speed of the milky way towards andromeda galaxy = D

Can A+B+C+D >= the speed of light?

 

[COLGeek]

Seems you can actually determine the values for each and add them up. Have you tried doing just that?

Keep in mind that the rotational speed of the Moon, Earth, and even orbital speed around the Sun are going to be relatively slow compared to the speed of light.

 

[KILLEN]

Yes I know It was just a hypothetical example meant to show how it worked
Moon - 1023 m/s
Earth - 29,784 m/s
Sun - 230,000 m/s
Milky way - 110,000 m/s
total ~ 370,000 m/s
which is .15% but it could for a star system that is very close to Sagittarius A* or another sufficiently large black hole it might actually work in theory

 

[promytius]

So, ...no.

 

[COLGeek]

Yes I know It was just a hypothetical example meant to show how it worked
Moon - 1023 m/s
Earth - 29,784 m/s
Sun - 230,000 m/s
Milky way - 110,000 m/s
total ~ 370,000 m/s
which is .15% but it could for a star system that is very close to Sagittarius A* or another sufficiently large black hole it might actually work in theory

You do realize that rotational speed does not equate to lateral speed (that seems to be the basis of your "theory")?

 

[Atlan0001]

You do realize that rotational speed does not equate to lateral speed (that seems to be the basis of your "theory")?

Throw speed. Either accelerating centrifugal or equally but oppositely, decelerating centripetal, relatively speaking, that is.

 

[KILLEN]

I understand But orbits are lateral and they are just being pulled around so that at one point it would be lined up properly so that when it moved around the larger body it is also going forward

Keep in mind this is not meant to be a useable form of transportation

 

[COLGeek]

I understand But orbits are lateral and they are just being pulled around so that at one point it would be lined up properly so that when it moved around the larger body it is also going forward

Keep in mind this is not meant to be a useable form of transportation

The whole premise is flawed from any practical aspect. Still, I get the thought process you are pondering.

These are not the droids you seek...

 

[Atlan0001]

I understand But orbits are lateral and they are just being pulled around so that at one point it would be lined up properly so that when it moved around the larger body it is also going forward

Keep in mind this is not meant to be a useable form of transportation

We conceive the Earth to be traveling a curvature in orbit of the sun. The Earth realizes travel in a Newtonian straight line NOT curving at all. It would take external forces to push or pull it out of its straight line of travel. Hmmm! An example of an asymptotic Schrodinger cat-like.... whatever!

 

[Classical Motion]

Imagine a hula hoop. This hula hoop has an 186 million mile diameter. And a 3 million mile cross section. Paint one red circular stripe around the hula hoop. One turn.

The earth rotates around the cross section of the hula hoop once, per rotation around the hoop.

The earth rides on that stripe.

One rotation around the hoop, going around the hoop. A one spin within a one spin.

It’s an exchange of momentum. For six months the earth falls and accelerates into the sun. It over shoots, and rises, slows from the sun for the next six months. The momentum of the earth is yo-yo-ed once per rotation, once per year. 6 mo. Fall, 6 mo. Rise.

The fall is a curve fall and the rise is a curve rise.

Six mo. above and six mo. below the sun’s plane.

This is what I see. A one turn closed helix.

 

[Gibsense]

Whatever. The simple answer is that time is as fast as you can go - without explanation that appears a stupid comment. I can back it up but half a bottle of wine and a nice malt tells me I should not try at this rather comforting time.. I gave up smoking some years ago but the brain boost from nicotine is sorely missed.

What happened to the thread where the guy said he had written a book. His ideas were nearly correct?

 

[Classical Motion]

What if we could tack a rate on top of a velocity of c. Would that rate be quicker than c?

Let a photon have the shape of an arrowhead. The angle of that head is a density rate.

A c rate density. A skinny head has slow rate. A fat head has a very fast rate.

A slow ramp and a fast ramp. Radio is skinny. Light is medium. Gamma is very fat.

 

[Ignat]

What would happen if there are multiple different speed combining to be greater than the speed of light?

EX
Revolution speed of our moon around earth = A
Revolution speed of Earth around the sun = B
Revolution speed of the sun around the milky way = C
The movement speed of the milky way towards andromeda galaxy = D

Can A+B+C+D >= the speed of light?

Einstein's postulate about the constant speed of light and the impossibility of exceeding it is just an assumption. Hubble says that distant galaxies can move at speeds higher than the speed of light. Although Hubble's law is, to put it mildly, very approximate. I believe that there may be speeds higher than the speed of light, but we currently cannot detect them with any device, even at the quantum level.

 

[CreatedEvolution]

I have thought about larger and larger black holes and galaxies all belong to a bigger bh. This was as a schoolboy. But I did laugh at the speed of light being unsurpassable. In 11th grade physics I suggested photons do have mass and can be scientifically pushed off of. However the result could be horrific

 

[CreatedEvolution]

I have thought about larger and larger black holes and galaxies all belong to a bigger bh. This was as a schoolboy. But I did laugh at the speed of light being unsurpassable. In 11th grade physics I suggested photons do have mass and can be scientifically pushed off of. However the result could be horrific

To me photons are electrons in some form

 

[Atlan0001]

Give me a meaning for the break down of relativity, and the build up of relativity, as you might realize them to be. I don't need to give meanings myself since I've been there, done that, many, many, times. I'd like to know what others think, since Einstein considered "spooky action at a distance" to make the constant of the speed of light the slowest possible speed there is or can be, though it is the maximum everywhere "local-relative!"

Werner Heisenberg, for one, did a good job of giving meaning to the break down and/or build up of relativity.

 

[CreatedEvolution]

Give me a meaning for the break down of relativity, and the build up of relativity, as you might realize them to be. I don't need to give meanings myself since I've been there, done that, many, many, times. I'd like to know what others think, since Einstein considered "spooky action at a distance" to make the constant of the speed of light the slowest possible speed there is or can be, though it is the maximum everywhere "local-relative!"

Werner Heisenberg, for one, did a good job of giving meaning to the break down and/or build up of relativity.

Theories were never proven even in the modern age there is plenty of error. Once you say it is fact nothing travels faster than the speed of light I will consider believing you. I have the earth was flat opinion of many theories. And I believe Einsteins theory lacked factual proof but rather just smart thinking that the answer is close much like pi

 

[CreatedEvolution]

To give an example of sunlight being matter. It reacts with chemicals. It makes plants grow, I believe it was once suggested that electrons had no mass either

 

[Atlan0001]

Physicist Michio Kaku once wrote in his book, 'Hyperspace', that once we solve "the problem of relativity" we will have no problem with speed in getting around the galaxy and beyond. Physicist Stephen Hawking pretty much thought the same.

Neither one were meaning traveling faster than the speed of light, which would be a resulting summation of speed only after the fact of there and back. Maybe not even then, since travelers always, ALWAYS, start out from observed and observable destinations histories past and travel lines destinations histories future . . . putting departure points where destination points were in SPACETIME (trading departure points evenly for equal but opposite destination points in the SPACETIME MATRIX).

 

[CreatedEvolution]

Physicist Michio Kaku once wrote in his book, 'Hyperspace', that once we solve "the problem of relativity" we will have no problem with speed in getting around the galaxy and beyond. Physicist Stephen Hawking pretty much thought the same.

Neither one were meaning traveling faster than the speed of light, which would be a resulting summation of speed only after the fact of there and back. Maybe not even then, since travelers always, ALWAYS, start out from observed and observable destinations histories past and travel lines destinations histories future . . . putting departure points where destination points were in SPACETIME (trading departure points evenly for equal but opposite destination points in the SPACETIME MATRIX).

I theorize with emf antigravity it’s theoretically possible to be pulled to the bh as fast as magnets of that size work. Seconds theoretically. This is related to my chemistry solar system theory. And EMFs if you tap into a magnetic frequency of the bh I think it’s possible to what they call warp speed there

 

[Atlan0001]

Ad post #21:

The day a physicist realizes where travelers start "time travel" from in time -- regarding observed and/or observable destinations relative to starting points -- is the day "the problem of relativity" is solved for professional physicists and cosmologists.

 

[CreatedEvolution]

The bh has gravity or an emf so intense light does not escape. If we mimic this emf frequency I theorize it will instantly be magnet to the bh that also has such a powerful emf that no light escapes

 

[Gibsense]

Einstein's postulate about the constant speed of light and the impossibility of exceeding it is just an assumption. Hubble says that distant galaxies can move at speeds higher than the speed of light. Although Hubble's law is, to put it mildly, very approximate. I believe that there may be speeds higher than the speed of light, but we currently cannot detect them with any device, even at the quantum level.

Recessional speed from expansion is not an issue. Einstein's theories do not say that recessional speed (the addition of space between galaxies) is limited to the speed of light.

The Hubble effect - as you might call it - definitely can lead to a recessional speed greater than 'c'. Belief is unnecessary. The speed of light limitation is about travel through space
The recessional speeds between galaxies can be achieved WITHOUT any speed through space. That is the galaxies can be stationary.

Einstein's special and general theories are not "just assumptions" as your GPS navigation and the odd hydrogen bomb can demonstrate.

The speed of light is a condition IMO associated with the 1:1 ratio of light speed to time. Eg 'c' and time describe the same function. Although our universe has a speed for light that never changes - because the ratio never changes - its 'c' value can if you compare it with different epochs. So although 'c' is never exceeded in a comparative epoch a faster speed for light might be assessed. An example would be the period of inflation (the speed of light then would have been measured the at approx 300,000 km/second but compared to now those values would be fast). This last Para is just me and it can be difficult to understand/explain. Previous paras are as near to fact as can be at this time.

 

[Ignat]

To me photons are electrons in some form

Einstein's fairy tales about photons are even more fabulous than his theory of relativity. A particle without mass is very cool! )))

 

[Ignat]

The recessional speeds between galaxies can be achieved WITHOUT any speed through space. That is the galaxies can be stationary.

How is that!