What happens to objects traveling slower than the speed of light, if they accelerate to a speed faster than...

Question

the speed of light?
and... If Special Relativity allows for things to exist traveling faster than the speed of light, why and how would they be destroyed if they slowed to fall beneath the speed of light?

well, I found some information on it... so I guess now all I can ask is what anyone thinks about the following...
http://science.howstuffworks.com/relativity3.htm

"Many creative minds have wondered that since time slows down as you approach the speed of light, if you could find a way to travel faster than the speed of light, could you travel back in time? If I am to believe that special relativity is correct, then I am also to believe that the following events would occur. In order to travel faster than the speed of light, I assume that you would at some point have to travel at exactly the speed of light. For example, you can not travel 51 miles/hour without having traveled 50 miles/hour at some point, of course, this is providing that you were traveling 50 miles/hour or less to begin with. Now SR tells us that at the speed of light, time stops, your length contracts to nothing, and your resistance to acceleration becomes infinite requiring infinite energy (as observed by a frame

of reference that is not in motion with the system). These conditions do not sound very conducive to life. Thus, I conclude that time travel into the past, using the concepts of SR, has some severe issues to overcome."

and also...
http://science.howstuffworks.com/relativity4.htm

"As you pursue a better understanding of SR, Do Not fall prey to these errant statements:

~Time slows as speed increases. (Only when viewed by another frame of reference)
~Objects shorten as speed increases. (Same as above)
~SR can't handle acceleration. (Biggest misconception about SR)
~Mass increases with speed. (Energy increases, not the rest mass)
~Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. ~Crossing the speed of light barrier from either a faster or a slower speed is disallowed."

Answer 1

Rachel,

Either the guy who wrote that HSWs article is wrong, or he is not explaining himself very well when he says that it is a myth that objects cannot accelerate to the speed of light and then cross the barrier.

I would call him an idiot, but I'll let you judge for yourself.

First, according to Special Relativity, E = mc^2/sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2). (This is the correct formula for a massive moving object, NOT E=mc^2 which only applies to a massive object at rest). Notice, as we accelerate the object so that v increases, as it gets closer to c, v^2/c^2 gets closer to 1. The closer it gets to 1, the closer the denominator gets to 0. The closer to zero the denominator gets, the more and more energy the particle needs to have such a velovity. Anything divided by 0 is undefined mathematically. In other words, the object cannot get to a velocity of c since the Energy would have to be infinite. So, if Special Relativity is true, then we can never accelerate an object using mechanical means to reach the speed of light or pass it up. This is confirmed in particle accelerators.

Now what we really mean by "the speed of light" above is "the speed of light in vaccuum (denoted by c)." But if we are talking about a material other than vacuum, then the speed of light in that material is less than c. IT is actually equal to v = c/n, where v is the velocity and n is the index of refraction of that material. It is very possible to slow light down enough that high energy particles that enter the material travel faster than the speed of light in the material. This is not a violation of Special Relativity since the high energy particles are not traveling faster than light in vaccuum. When a particle travels through a material faster than the speed of light of the material, the particle emits a special type of radiation (light) called Cherenkov Radiation. Detecting this radiation is a way to detect particles, and we have detectors in use that is based on this idea.

Now, it is true that Special Relativity never says a particle cannot travel faster than light or at the speed of light. Massless particles naturally travel at the speed of light. Also, just because we can't accelerate a particle to the speed of light doesn't mean that some particles can't get there my other means that we don't know about. However, no one has ever detected such a phenomena, and no one has come up with a way to explain how to do it. As far as physicists are concerned, no massive particles can travel at the speed of light or faster.

See the link below for a discussion on Faster than Light phenomena and why I say the guy who wrote the HSWs article is an idiot and judge for yourself. This guy who wrote the page below is a professional scientist.

Answer 2

Hi. At the risk of sounding stupid, your analogy to the 50 MPH to 51 MPH is not far off. Einstein's theory only says that travel AT c is not possible. But the uncertainty principle would not allow anything to travel AT c because then we would then know it's velocity. If your speedometer was more finely graduated such that it registered in Plank units instead of MPH units then you could indeed go from just under to just over c. But as a gentle answerer said, then you would turn into tachyons which can ONLY travel faster than c.

Answer 3

U don't understand nothing travels at or above the speed of light and there is no power source able to supply that power. E=MC^2 if u manipulate that around u will see that the cloister u get to the speed of light the power required is logarithmic increase and at the speed of light the mass will equal infinity,which will turn into a black hole.

Answer 4

The only thing faster than light is a Tacyon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacyon

Its only theoretical but it has momentum and velocity but no mass. Since it has no mass there is nothing to increase as it travels around the light speed limit.

Answer 5

So, then, the question is, "What is time?" Time is what forms mass. It begins with the construction of the electron, which forms all other atomic particles. Physical time in this instance is that of electromagnetic energy. This is a one-dimensional form of energy that becomes three-dimensional when formed into the electron. Were all the mass of our universe to be reduced to its lowest form, it would become all one dimensional. At that time there would be no such thing as physical time. Everything would have exactly the same value of existence "c" and there would be no variation of speed in any segment of existence.

An interesting aspect of this is that the reduction of all matter to its lowest form demonstrates that time moves in a single direction (present to past) and it is all linear at the speed of "c". There exists no "direction" in a one-dimensional world. everything must move in the same direction, no matter what direction an outside observer might think.

So, once at the speed of light a mass converts into electromagnetic energy and from there it can go no further. It becomes, at that time, physical time - the foundation of our universe.

This concept is further seen in the physics trilogy. E = mc2, m = E/c2, and c2 = E/m. Notice in the first two that the basis of both is that of the c2 value. Energy and mass are variables but c2 is not. This value is that of physical time. The basis and foundation of mass and energy. Once these are reduced to the value of c2, they no longer exist as anything other than physical time, nor can they exist as anything other than this value Then the c2 = E/m value demonstrates that physical time is an energy value composed of a relationship between the two.

http://360.yahoo.com/noddarc there is a short writing entitled "What is a Graviton?" that explains what the force of gravity is.

Answer 6

The Special Theory of Relativity quite clearly proves that no material object can travel at the speed of light or greater than that speed.

Answer 7

As things approach the speed of light they become heavier and heavier. According to Einstein nothing can approach the speed of light because there there would be a 'divide by zero'-type error as the mass of the object goes to infinity.

Answer 8

it would start out in its original form, speed up,turn into light,speed up even faster,and as it speed up it will turn into something else.because nothing has ever traveled faster than the speed of light its impossibe to describe the physical form of something that dont exist and because it dont exist there is no way to predict how it will react to speed or the lack of it.

Answer 9

I think it would still catch fire and adventuly cool off and the effects of it would cause a creter in the earth or whatever planet or moon it lands on