What is the maximum speed we can travel at through space?

[Catastrophe]

We might be un-aware of an electrical and/or magnetic sense in water creatures. It might be common and much more spectacular than vision. Or maybe a sense of smell might be much more informative than imagined. Unlike sight and sound, maybe a history or sequence comes with it.

And even though it's dark, many can sense and react to light. What ever their senses are, they have been successful.

All of our senses seem to be mid range.

We might be un-aware of an electrical and/or magnetic sense in water creatures.

I think we should consider, not only what senses other creatures might possess, but also in what position such creatures might stand to be able to assert a maximum of any sense which might be possessed by any other creature - and whether or not such a sense might be congruent with its own.

How do you investigate the speed of operation of possible alternative senses, when you are entirely unaware of their existence? You cannot invent a telescope to probe "other dimensions" when you do not know such other dimensions exist, or have any means of accessing them.

Cat

 

[Catastrophe]

"How can some property (such as speed) be deemed beyond surpassing when we do not have the sensory perception to judge any alternative?"

Sorry, I can not relate to, or understand that question.

OK. How do you claim that the speed of light cannot be exceeded, when you have no means (or knowledge of) any possible alternative (e.g., achieving action at a distance by thought power) when you do not know of any such ability, nor (obviously) any way of measuring or influencing it.

Cat

 

[Classical Motion]

"I think we should consider, not only what senses other creatures might possess, but also in what position such creatures might stand to be able to assert a maximum of any sense which might be possessed by any other creature - and whether or not such a sense might be congruent with its own."

What does the word "position" mean? Does it mean location, orientation or sequence or rank? How does one assert a sense? To a maximum? Might? Possessed?

Can you restate your paragraph into short concise statements? Sorry I can not sense the context of your words. And I apologize for it.

 

[Classical Motion]

Something happened to this thread, let me catch up.

 

[Catastrophe]

"I think we should consider, not only what senses other creatures might possess, but also in what position such creatures might stand to be able to assert a maximum of any sense which might be possessed by any other creature - and whether or not such a sense might be congruent with its own."

What does the word "position" mean? Does it mean location, orientation or sequence or rank? How does one assert a sense? To a maximum? Might? Possessed?

Can you restate your paragraph into short concise statements? Sorry I can not sense the context of your words. And I apologize for it.

Don't worry I await the catching up.

 

[Classical Motion]

Pardon me. I didn't see post #27.

Why would you think that I implied that c can not be exceeded? All I said was that space would not impede the speed of anything.

I simply said the reason we haven't, is because we can't find a faster accelerator.

If an EM wave was faster than c, do you think we could detect it? I think we could. How about particles and mass? Do you think we could detect it? I do.

It's possible that we have already detected FTL and not know it. Or mistaken it.

 

[Catastrophe]

OK. We are in the realm of metaphysics anyway.

Perhaps we should come back to OP:

What is the maximum speed we can travel through space?

This is ambiguous. If you take "we" to mean our species, then, until we improve of knowledge beyond GR, then we have to say "not faster than c". If we accept GR, until we know better, then we are stuck with increasing speed requiring more and more fuel to accelerate. That is, more and more payload to accelerate. BUT, if you mean living beings, you have to factor in a life support system.

If you interpret "we" as meaning our ability to accelerate a material object, then we have a corresponding answer, without the LSS.

So, "What is the maximum speed we can travel through space? "

It depends on what you mean by "we". After that, it depends on our technical abilities at the time, as well as any current advances in cosmology, as opposed to metaphysics.

I think that has to be my best answer.

Cat

 

[Atlan0001]

There is no limit to speed of travel through time . . . through light-time histories and horizons. The constant of the speed of light is constant to all other speeds, which just happen to be locally relative and have nothing to do with the non-local, non-relative such as a 0-point real separated and/or separating from another 0-point real in space and time (an opening, an open, system). In a finite local closed system (as opposed to infinite non-local open system) such as a particle accelerator, or any observation per the speed of light (always of a history . . . a light-time history, universal and without any electromagnetic exception), the ceiling will be observed to be the speed of light.

Space-time histories, light-time histories, can be traveled at relatively infinite speeds. No one, and nothing, can close upon any 0-point object reality without traveling futures (+) through space-time histories (-) . . . light-time histories (-). No observer can observe any arrivals in real time, unless, that is, the observer is the 0-point object reality another 0-point object reality arrives to and effectively merges with in space-time.

Out is open space, the soft and flexible vacuum of space, a traveler is surrounded, essentially englobed, by light-time histories, all that it will travel, especially if powering, if constantly accelerating, in travel . . . real time unobserved and unobservable at distance. The only velocity it will observe will be local to it in the extreme of closed systemic locally in which 'c' will be the ceiling. In the more open systemic, the more opening systemic and accelerative vacuum between 0-point real space-time stars, galaxies, universes, the dimensionality the traveler deals in will be more, and less, than 3- and 4-dimensionality (will be combinations of many dimensions not available to, or on, Earth, on any rock, or [locally] on board a ship).

 

[Classical Motion]

Light travels very fast. But we have no problem seeing it.....or detecting it. What if we double the frequency and half the velocity, we would still detect the same frequency?

What if we half the frequency and double the velocity, would we detect the same frequency?

What if we 1/10 the frequency and 10X the velocity? Could we still detect it?

Light is not light because of velocity, light is light because of it's frequency.

If I recall, a diamond slows light down by 50% or so. But it doesn't change the frequency, we still see the light.

We should learn how to sample this light inside the diamond, like we do with radio waves. Perhaps a method of piggy backing those drops in velocity, for our current sampling rates. Until faster switches and methods are produced.

 

[Catastrophe]

The Optical Properties Of Diamonds - Israeli Diamond

Cat

 

[Atlan0001]

Light travels very fast. But we have no problem seeing it.....or detecting it. What if we double the frequency and half the velocity, we would still detect the same frequency?

What if we half the frequency and double the velocity, would we detect the same frequency?

What if we 1/10 the frequency and 10X the velocity? Could we still detect it?

Light is not light because of velocity, light is light because of it's frequency.

If I recall, a diamond slows light down by 50% or so. But it doesn't change the frequency, we still see the light.

We should learn how to sample this light inside the diamond, like we do with radio waves. Perhaps a method of piggy backing those drops in velocity, for our current sampling rates. Until faster switches and methods are produced.

The diamond, like water or anything else of substance, is a maze through which light travels. It would only appear to slow down the speed of light. At every part, every bit, of the maze, the speed of light would be 'c'. It would be 'c' going in. It would be 'c' coming out. It would be 'c' as it traveled, reflected or deflected, in and through the maze. It's transit time in and through the maze would make it seem to have slowed in speed, but that would be an erroneous conclusion. It is a horizon, a universal horizon. You can't tie a tether to your local locality and throw the other end of the tether to it like a fishing line, it would gain the mass of a black hole. All otherwise it keeps, it maintains, its distance as a constant horizon.

So, there is a speed limit from here to the speed of light (an acceleration to it), but no speed limit through the horizons of universe (singular) and universes (plural) as such, as long as that horizon keeps its 300,000kps distance local to you and your measurement of it to be 300,000kps, or round about, in your travels no matter what the relative velocities where you might be, Even velocities that become infinite and not relative any longer to some original departure point (some original universe). A universal horizon except from here to it, as acceleration (+), or as deceleration (-), to it.

 

[Classical Motion]

So, if we cut a diamond into the shape of a cube or rod, we still can not shine a light thru it? And if and when that light propagates thru, does it not slow down?

I was taught 300,000 km/s for vacuum, with a refractive index of 1. Water slows it down to 225,000 km/s with a RI of 1.3. Glass 200,000, RI 1.5. Diamond 125,000 with a RI of 2.4.

Although I do not know how this is determined. Maybe they use reflection for this too.

I have often wondered if a media might spin light as it propagates thru it. It would spin at the F relative rate, so different F, different spin rates,.....might cause dispersion. Or vary refraction angle. Or change in RI with change in F. Maybe a portion of the propagation V is converted to rotational V, depending on the media. And with no media, we get no rotation and get full propagation V....and a RI of 1.

Refractive index might be spin rate. A spin velocity factor.

 

[Atlan0001]

Again, as I see how things are, multi-dimensionally, there is no maximum speed of travel through space since space-time has no fixed absolute measure of space and time between any two or more points of space-time. The bubble, the bubbles, of space-time are inflationary / deflationary. Our dealing in it bodily locally every second of every day -- excepting massively (e=mc(square)) and how we actually shrink the distances of our world -- is very small productions compared to the greater quantum mechanical (micro-macro-verse) related "'Alice in Wonderland' type rabbit-holes" potentials of space-time off-planet and outside this closed systemic bubble.

There has been a complete failure of premise, of physicists who picture time stretching out to compensate for how they see the constant of the speed of light to exist. The total failure of premise in the such a picture, such a realization, is that it doesn't keep space and time merged together in / as one variably expandable / contractable warp-balloon-bubble (of infinities of such balloon-bubbles without and within balloon-bubbles, without and within balloon-bubbles) of [space-time]. Two in one, two sides of one coin, not a naked singularity of time as space. Space is divorced from time in the physic of time stretching (space made a fixed physic and time made manipulative as some kind of space of its own separate from space) and that is not how the merger of space and time works or is supposed to work. They are to both to expand and/or contract together as a symbiotic-like [unity] of two regarding any movement (even any turning movement, any spin), any travel. With space stretching with time stretching, time, to mean real-time, not light time-histories, stops slowing (time dilation) in one universal dimension of it (the traveler's time), ipso-facto, time speeding up in a paralleling universal dimension of it (the observer's -- or the inertial -- frame). Again, I'm talking an umbrella universe's objectively universally 0-point real time, not any subjectively relative light-time-histories. Aging, and clocks, may depend on a lot of things, but they do not depend on any like a time dilation or contraction that cannot possibly exist without a corresponding space dilation or contraction.

 

[Atlan0001]

Following up the above, I've flown enough times that being an innate "visual mathematician" I naturally tried to think of how much ground space and time I was occupying all at once, like a particle at speed being [uncertainly] everywhere in a box all at once, while traveling pretty fast at 30,000 feet above the ground. I knew it was a shrunken world of space and time [distance] relative to me) below me . . . and I knew the same type of physics would apply to all space, and time, for a travel over and through light time histories wherever in the universe . . . the [universal 'ground' or 'flatland'] of all outer space being those always ever-crossing -- from every direction there is of a spherical dome -- grid lines of light time histories (nonlocally mutually canceling as to apparent light speed . . . only having light speed at the traveler and the traveler's measure of it locally). The faster one would travel, the more of those mutual cancelations to a universal ground 0-point one would occupy all at once, an expanding warp-balloon-bubble of space, and time, a unity of space and time into space-time, not any naked singularity of time dilation toward the speed of light (of that traveler's -- particularly of those travelers who would be under continuing powering -- continuing accelerations, would locally see and experience, and measure exactly the same thing as the observers in Einsteinian preferred inertial frames).

The real problem for a powered traveler, and far worse for any unpowered traveler, would be the curvatures, the spirals, the vortices, the whirlpools, trying to throw him out of his line of travel if he points his nose into a straight line -- he thinks exists -- to the destination he observes in the "observable universe." At any distance from him it's going to move on him, out of a straight line forcing navigational corrections on the traveler (if the traveler is unaware of an arc line that would [lead] his destination and cut the curves, putting him in a truer, straighter, line to rendezvous with his destination, itself ever traveling in the universe.

The universe isn't lacking in dimensions. It reminds of Stephen Hawking's description of the single particle that has six sides, the six sides of the single particle themselves being six separate, six different, particles. Thus, a many-sided universe, the many sides of the multiverse universe being many separate, many different, universes, only one of which may be "observable universe." A different universe, including its travelers, to each different observer in it.

 

[Atlan0001]

Just how much space does the Einsteinian observer occupy, all at once as to time, in Einstein's preferred warp-balloon-bubble frame of reference? And just how much space does the traveler occupy, all at once as to time, in his warp-balloon-bubble frame of reference at a greater -- or even, possibly, a lesser -- relative speed?

At a greater relative speed, I see the traveler to occupy more, to ever vastly more, space all at once as to time (like the particle in the box (the bubble) of 'uncertainty' that is to be found anywhere and everywhere all at once as to time in that box (that bubble) of 'uncertainty') than Einstein's observer.

 

[Atlan0001]

"I see the traveler to occupy more, to ever vastly more, space all at once as to time...." To mean straddling ever more light time history gridline 'time zones' in space all at once per the traveler's own time on his own traveler's clock.

 

[Atlan0001]

So damn slow(!) || So damn fast(!):

'c' = +1>0
'c' = -1>0
'c' = 0>+1
'c' = 0>-1
'c' = (+/-)
'c' = 0
'c' = 1

So damn Fast(!) || So damn slow(!).

 

[Atlan0001]

So damn fast(!) || So damn slow(!):

The (horizon) coin and being on both sides of the coin at one time, the same time. A physic that is binary base2.

 

[Atlan0001]

A dimension, a physic, that like the biggest dimension, the biggest physic, of Horizon of them all (the PBB(B)H (cc) Horizon (T=0)), is binary base2 (T=0 / T=1)!

The horizon of the speed of light and the Horizon of the Infinite Multiverse Universe run in closely paralleling courses in many forum threads, but I think this is last time I will have these rails, this particular train, run so parallel. Above, I've reached a closer understanding of this particular train. Others may not and there may be some kind of continuance of the ideas but that will be a different story.

 

[murgatroyd]

I wonder if there is a fork of ChatGPT 3.5 posting to this comments section? How would we be able to tell the difference?

 

[COLGeek]

I wonder if there is a fork of ChatGPT 3.5 posting to this comments section? How would we be able to tell the difference?

There are ways to tell and is something the moderation team watches for.

 

[Mart943]

A related question. Is there any knowledge yet about the speed that gravity waves travel at?

 

[Pogo]

AFAIK, to the precision that they can measure, gravity waves travel at c, the speed of light.