Skip to main content

The speed of light again

The speed of light again

The reason, why we are thinking that nothing can cross the speed of light is that we do no possible opportunities to make a rocket, what jet would travel faster than the speed of light. Only photons and electrons can create the exhaust, what speed is the speed of light, so we cannot just break the cosmic speed limit by thinking that way. There are two ways to make the virtual crossing of that speed.

1) The first method works only if the escaping velocity of the surface of the particle is higher than the speed of light. So for working that thing needs a black hole, where the craft can be driven. 

In the first case, we can drive our rocket straight to the black hole, and check, what happens behind the event horizon. The speed that we should use is extremely high, and we should have the photon rocket for that mission.

The thing is that the impact speed of the spacecraft should be near the speed of light when it would impact to the event horizon, or the crew would scratch in pieces. And after that the thing, what would happen is that the escaping velocity of the black hole crosses the speed of the light. That is the reason, why we are calling that thing as the black hole. Even the light cannot escape from the black hole.

2) Rising the impact speed between particles higher than the speed of light. So when two particles like electron and positron would travel the opposite way in the particle accelerator the impact speed of those particles is higher than the speed of the light. (Speed of particle 1+ Speed of particle 2)

The second way to cross natural laws is just pulling the particles of the plasma to the craft, which travels extremely high speed, which is near the speed of the light. That means that the speed of the hypothetical spacecraft would travel let's say 50% of the speed of light, and the particles are pulling against is by using the force, what would be something like 80-90% of the speed of the light. That means that the impact speed between the craft and plasma is higher than the speed of the light, and that thing is called the relative crossing the speed of the light. But what effect that thing would have to the things, what happens inside the craft? This is the idea of WARP.

The WARP would just pull the plasma inside it, and then it would shoot the ion jet against that flow, what is hoped to stretch the universe. The thing in those ideas is that we cannot just break the natural laws, but we can go around them. There are two ways to make WARP-effect. The first is to make WARP-engine, and the second is to drive the spacecraft to the direction of the sun by using high speed. In the natural WARP system, the solar wind would allow the spacecraft impact with particles by using the impact speed, which is faster than light (Speed of craft + speed of incoming plasma). But does that thing affect things, what happens inside the craft? That's a different thing.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

When robots are laughing and crying.

When robots are laughing and crying.  Does the AI have feelings?  Does the AI have feelings? Or can it be emphatic? The fact is this program code that controls the AI determines if it can give empathic reactions. The problem with the human nervous system is that we don't make a difference in the writing of empathic letters or telling empathic stories human or AI. Our nervous system is not adapted to AI yet. And that's why we cannot separate text written by AI from text that made by humans.  What does somebody make with AI that can emulate feelings? The fact is that the cyborgs are useful tools for infiltration operations. The human-size robots can have WLAN/6G connections with the central computers. Or they can form a neural network that shares information between all group members. The robots can also act as walking neural network-based supercomputers. That can make complicated solutions.  In those networks, each member shares information and their data-handling capacity all o

Earth 2.0 has been caused discussion about the possibility to find another civilization

    Earth 2.0 has been caused discussion about the possibility to find another civilization The Earth 2.0 or officially Kepler-452b is locating extreme log distance from Earth(1).    A new Earth-type planet has been found near the star, which is similar to our own Sun. The journey to that planet would take 1400 years, even if the spacecraft will reach the speed of the light. The planet has been found in the year 2008, but the confirmation of the existence of that planet has been taken time, but in 2015 the confirmation has been got, and Earth 2.0 has turned true.  The mass of that planet is 1,9 times Earth and the temperature is excellent if we are thinking about liquid water, but the journey to that planet will take so long, that we cannot ever go in there by using regular rockets and technology. The thing is that this kind of planets are the most interesting if we are looking for the lifeforms, which are similar to us, and the problem with that kind of things is that the communicatio

Tunguska meteorite and the natural nuclear fission

  Image I Tunguska meteorite and the natural nuclear fission 1) Tunguska UFO-theory  Tunguska meteorite is the mystery, that has been solved once, but then the case has been open again because Lake Cheko was not suitable for an impact crater. That lake has been introducing as an impact crater of the Tunguska meteorite. But the problem is that the shape of that lake is like a swimming pool. And that means it cannot form by a meteorite. So the mystery remains.  Meteorites can launch the natural nuclear fission if they hit the uranium ore, and transfer the impact energy to that ore. And is the thing that the famous "Tunguska" meteorite caused that kind of effect? There is also a theory that some "UFO" explode in that area, but the thing is that it is only theory, but interesting topics for some TV-series.  So I will begin this text by handling that theory, which is one of the incredible and outstanding theories in the world. Officially there is no physical evidence of