Nothing is faster than light - really?

originally posted by: howtonhawky
projectvxn

So in one post you will cite info that is not observed and claim as fact and in the next post you are gonna negate something because of something not being observed.

Me thinks you are confused much.

I am starting to realize just how convenient facts can be.

Jesus man Tachyon's are a theoretical concept, nothing more. Its frustrating for folks like projectvxn and myself to see people spouting sillyness when just 3 minutes on the wikipedia page would educate you enough to speak intelligently about it.

a reply to: Wayfarer

And when he does reference a wiki article he can't be bothered to read it.

It's like having a discussion with a capricious 3-year-old.

In reference to my post - that the photons from flashlights exhibit thrust...

Michio Kaku - "Yes, flashlights have an impulse"

Starts at 0:21

In reference to my posts on this thread that micro mini black holes can propel a starship...

Michio Kaku - Where is the energy going to come from?

More...

And since some feeding black holes exhibit polar jets that expel plasma or photons at or near the speed of light --- I still stand by my theory...that a micro mini black hole's polar jets can be harnessed to propel a starship with constant acceleration, to the speed of light barrier, and beyond into the superluminal realm --- provided the starship has the required magnetic shield or shields (created by the MMBH) that protects the starship and crew from the speed of light barrier.

Cheers...

Erno

More...

a reply to: Erno86

Keugelblitz theory is fantastic.

I'd love to see a real-life experiment with Keugelblitz propulsion systems.

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: howtonhawky
projectvxn

So in one post you will cite info that is not observed and claim as fact and in the next post you are gonna negate something because of something not being observed.

Me thinks you are confused much.

I am starting to realize just how convenient facts can be.

Jesus man Tachyon's are a theoretical concept, nothing more. Its frustrating for folks like projectvxn and myself to see people spouting sillyness when just 3 minutes on the wikipedia page would educate you enough to speak intelligently about it.

That is what i said. Theoretical like something moving faster than the universe is expanding.

Other than your frustration of me do you have anything in particular to add as too what i missed about tachyons? It is all in the movie i linked too.

Is force something?

If so than why can't it be faster than light?

If no than why is force nothing since it can be measured?

I still maintain that the black hole propulsion model is highly unlikely to work or be possible.

Why?

1) Nearest black hole is.... too far away
2) Creating a black hole is... as far as we know, not possible via simply dumping lots of energy (which we need an energy source for)
3) As above for micro-black holes

Now lets assume points 1 2 and 3 we got past, then what?

1) You have have a spinning black hole (makes parts 2 and 3 more difficult)
2) The astrophysical jets emerge at the poles, if you collect one side of it (built your ship around the top hemisphere for example) it will push your ship away... From the black hole, thus decreasing the efficiency
3) We have no method or way to 'hold' a black hole in place that would cost less in energy and power consumption than simply say, taking lots of propellant.
3a) To stop or change directions you need to rotate the black hole... good luck with that because of...
4) TL;DR version of 3 -> inertia is an issue.
5) A feeding black hole spews out a horrible amount of radiation... how exactly do you imagine to A) shield, and B) stop the astrophysical jet? You realise that most of that energy is going to be transferred into heat and not working thrust.


Sooooooooooo yeah, the most unlikely manner of propulsion

originally posted by: howtonhawky
If no than why is force nothing since it can be measured?

Is "love" real? Does it exist in our reality? Then why can't it go faster than light?

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: howtonhawky
If no than why is force nothing since it can be measured?

Is "love" real? Does it exist in our reality? Then why can't it go faster than light?

Can you measure love?
Is there a meter for that?

originally posted by: howtonhawky
Can you measure love?
Is there a meter for that?

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: howtonhawky
If no than why is force nothing since it can be measured?

Is "love" real? Does it exist in our reality? Then why can't it go faster than light?

originally posted by: ErosA433
I still maintain that the black hole propulsion model is highly unlikely to work or be possible.

Why?

1) Nearest black hole is.... too far away
2) Creating a black hole is... as far as we know, not possible via simply dumping lots of energy (which we need an energy source for)
3) As above for micro-black holes

Now lets assume points 1 2 and 3 we got past, then what?

1) You have have a spinning black hole (makes parts 2 and 3 more difficult)
2) The astrophysical jets emerge at the poles, if you collect one side of it (built your ship around the top hemisphere for example) it will push your ship away... From the black hole, thus decreasing the efficiency
3) We have no method or way to 'hold' a black hole in place that would cost less in energy and power consumption than simply say, taking lots of propellant.
3a) To stop or change directions you need to rotate the black hole... good luck with that because of...
4) TL;DR version of 3 -> inertia is an issue.
5) A feeding black hole spews out a horrible amount of radiation... how exactly do you imagine to A) shield, and B) stop the astrophysical jet? You realise that most of that energy is going to be transferred into heat and not working thrust.


Sooooooooooo yeah, the most unlikely manner of propulsion

If we're lucky (knock on wood), there might be some rogue black holes nearby our star system, so that we could bombard it, with say, an antimatter bomb (if we had the werewithal to have one)...grab a small piece, an tractor beam it to a factory on a small asteroid --- Refine it to the size of a proton, and house it aboard a starship in a stasis sphere that blocks Hawking radiation and maybe X-rays.

If not...the LHC accelerator at Cern, Switzerland might be able to make a micro mini black hole, that should be able to power a starship for at least 100 years --- or just make one in outer space --- by bombarding a single point with a number of concentrated laser beams, that are powered by a massive array of solar panels.

A disc-shaped saucer starship, should be a perfect match for the MMBH (micro mini black hole the size of a proton) --- House it in a stasis sphere on the center bottom concave hull inside the saucer. The upper hull should be able to rotate independently of the bottom hull, with the upper hull housing curved thruster outlet tubes; besides thruster outlet tubes for the center top an bottom of the hull.

You have various photon receptors on the outside hull...that feed starlight photons to the MMBH, which are gathered around the spinning acretion disc and eventually expelled to the polar jets. The upper hull rotates to shift a thruster outlet tube to the stasis sphere and allows the polar jets to escape to the thruster outlet tube near or at the speed of light.

The photon receptor closes...the hull rotates to shift the thruster outlet tube in another direction --- the photon receptor reopens (besides the center top an bottom thruster outlet tubes that run independently of the side thruster ports) --- which should explain 90 turns, instant stop an starts and extreme acceleration.

In places that lack starlight...they (otherworlders) generate fusion plasma, with a supplied small amount of seawater, that is placed between the two offboard magnetic shields --- One shield compresses against the other with extreme pressure till the fusion reaction occurs, which sends the photons to the MMBH. The starship is neutron shielded from the fusion reaction, by a small layer of seawater that surrounds the craft.

This is just my own theory on how foo fighters tic...

originally posted by: Erno86
If we're lucky (knock on wood), there might be some rogue black holes nearby our star system, so that we could bombard it, with say, an antimatter bomb (if we had the werewithal to have one)...

Nearby, will still be many light years away, and as far as we know, there isn't one 'nearby'. Cloest candidate object is 2,800 ly away. While finding a nearby rogue wouldn't be impossible, the weak lensing maps that have been made so far, turned up nothing.

Anti-matter bomb, would do what exactly? Break it in two? So you believe that something that not even light can escape from, can be broken appart THAT easily. So you have made two assumptions. 1 that we can make solar mass level anti-matter storage and 2 that it is even possible to break such an object in half...

grab a small piece, an tractor beam it to a factory on a small asteroid --- Refine it to the size of a proton, and house it aboard a starship in a stasis sphere that blocks Hawking radiation and maybe X-rays.

Tractor beams don't exist, not in the manner you describe and even if they did, you are talking about a very large object who's only interaction is to be gravitational as far as we can tell. ---- refine to the size of a proton... again? how? because you know, the whole 'anti-matter bomb' thing would act to reduce the mass of a black hole... assuming that there is even regular matter contained within. Hawking radiation is fairly low level, wouldn't need to be blocked, and stasis fild... again, doesn't exist

If not...the LHC accelerator at Cern, Switzerland might be able to make a micro mini black hole, that should be able to power a starship for at least 100 years --- or just make one in outer space --- by bombarding a single point with a number of concentrated laser beams, that are powered by a massive array of solar panels.

The LHC cannot make a mini or micro-black hole, the physics just doesn't support it being likely and the statistics looking at other eveidence says that the prediction of creating micro blackholes is basically impossible.

Cosmic rays hit the atmosphere with enormous energy every day, we do not see evidence for micro black holes being created.

A disc-shaped saucer starship, should be a perfect match for the MMBH (micro mini black hole the size of a proton) --- House it in a stasis sphere on the center bottom concave hull inside the saucer. The upper hull should be able to rotate independently of the bottom hull, with the upper hull housing curved thruster outlet tubes; besides thruster outlet tubes for the center top an bottom of the hull.

You have various photon receptors on the outside hull...that feed starlight photons to the MMBH, which are gathered around the spinning acretion disc and eventually expelled to the polar jets. The upper hull rotates to shift a thruster outlet tube to the stasis sphere and allows the polar jets to escape to the thruster outlet tube near or at the speed of light.

The photon receptor closes...the hull rotates to shift the thruster outlet tube in another direction --- the photon receptor reopens (besides the center top an bottom thruster outlet tubes that run independently of the side thruster ports) --- which should explain 90 turns, instant stop an starts and extreme acceleration.

In places that lack starlight...they (otherworlders) generate fusion plasma, with a supplied small amount of seawater, that is placed between the two offboard magnetic shields --- One shield compresses against the other with extreme pressure till the fusion reaction occurs, which sends the photons to the MMBH. The starship is neutron shielded from the fusion reaction, by a small layer of seawater that surrounds the craft.

This is just my own theory on how foo fighters tic...

And it is a theory based entirely outside of reality, you are using words and language most suitable for science fiction stories rather than anything which is actually meaningful.

originally posted by: johnb
So pretty much everybody agrees nothing can travel at the speed of light let alone exceed it.

However does sight not?

I open my eyes and can see stars from billions of light years away instantly. Now i understand that that light has been travelling that long and i am seeing where it was, that long ago but can you appreciate what I am trying to explain/ ask?

When you open your eyes you instantly see everything from the close to almost infinitely far away with no lag from distant objects.

This might just be sophistry but it's something i have occasionally pondered for years.

I have seen plenty of stupid ideas on here but that is a cracker did you actually think before you typed

Imagine you have a bindfold on and your eyes are open and a bright light is shining on your face you can't see the light because of the blindfold the light is still there on your face, it's the same as opening your eyes and seeing the light from stars billions of miles away the light had already traveled to you.

originally posted by: johnb
So pretty much everybody agrees nothing can travel at the speed of light let alone exceed it.

I don't !

originally posted by: johnb
I open my eyes and can see stars from billions of light years away instantly. Now i understand that that light has been travelling that long and i am seeing where it was, that long ago but can you appreciate what I am trying to explain/ ask?

not really !
everyone with a common sense would not ask question like this...

originally posted by: johnb
When you open your eyes you instantly see everything from the close to almost infinitely far away with no lag from distant objects.

This might just be sophistry but it's something i have occasionally pondered for years.

weed is good for your body, but not for your mindset