Science theories are only an approximation of observed reality. They can only be refined so that they are progressively more accurate. Your simulation relies on the accuracy of blender to represent the environment you want to test.
The most you could hope to say is that blender doesn’t behave like the observable universe.
Duh!
I “trust physicists” because I have a limited, but sufficient knowledge of what they know, and have satisfied myself as to the reliability of their methods/calculations/results. Might I ask how much you understand advanced physics? People spend their entire lives studying it, and haven’t found a way to what you are trying to accomplish, and yet you think you can do it right off the bat in a Game Engine physics simulator?? Please reconsider.
Those physicist probably misplace things and have hard time finding them.So that is not saying anything.They probably were not thorough.
Do you believe in wormholes?
They said ounce that we could not go faster than the speed of sound.Sometimes you have to not listen to people and do your own thing.If the guy believed what they said we would not be going faster than the speed of sound.You must reconsider that you could be wrong.Sometimes you can make advanced things out of crude equipment.
Who said we can’t go faster than sound and when?
Back to the speed of light and relativity. In theory reaching the speed of light is “possible” but it would require an infinite amount of energy. The problem is that mass is dependent on the velocity of an object, and this has been proven on several occasions. Intuitively we use a newtonian model which is accurate enough for pretty much anything we encounter on daily basis, but as I said before it starts breaking down as the speed increases. What happens at high speeds is in no way intuitive to most people and “doesn’t make sense” unless you truely understand that type of physics
For example in the large hadron collider in cern where a proton can be accelerated to 7 Tev (~1.12 µJ). A proton at reshas a mass of 1.67 kg. Using the standard expression for kinetic energy E = 1/2mv^2 and solving for v gives v = Sqrt(2E/m). Adding the energy of the proton in the LHC and the mass of the proton gives the result v = 3.6610^10 m/s which is a bit over 100 times the speed of light. Yet the actual speed of the protons is 0.999999991 * c.
The same goes for adding velocities. If you are inside a truck moving forward at 80 km/h and throw a ball forward at 40 km/h the overall velocity of the ball is not 120 km/h
I know this is old but its so funny I just couldnt resist, First off OP its a nice try but the laws of Physics do not allow for matter to exceed the speed of light, The matter in question would gain mass as it gains speed and require more and more energy to go faster. As the matter reached light speed it would have infinite mass and therefore would require infinite energy to maintain its speed. The only thing in physics that can move at the speed of light is light (Photons) and were not even sure that the speed of light is a constant, The only known way to “move” faster than the speed of light is to move spacetime around and that would still take a LOT of energy and a strange form of matter called dark matter in order to bend space time around a ship and contracting it in front of the ship while expanding it behind the ship thus moving spacetime around the ship not the ship through spacetime and thus not breaking the speed of light… My physics is a bit rusty so im not sure I am not sure i have all the details exactly correct but the general idea is there. Before I go i just want to ask one question, If as you say your model built in a computer generated environment based on basic Newtonian physics and calculated on a simple home computer worth around $600 to $1000 were the answer to travel between the stars don’t you think we would have figured it out by now and living among other alien races with advanced technology? I just think its a bit arrogant to assume that you with your little computer and a free 3D animation program think you have solved a problem humanity has been working on and investing billions of dollars into for years.
Holy crap you must be trolling.
We are not talking about an old idea here but a new idea.And you are using old ideas to much to undestand it.That is why you cannot understand.You are going to have think differently in order to understand it.Some of your old ideas are not going apply.Everyone seems arrogant with a new idea.But that is a misconception.
So, you have invented faster-than-light travel. Now write it down, ger it peer-reviewed, publish it and claim your nobel prize.
Write down your idea in detail and explain to us why the relativistic effect won’t matter
laws of Physics are based on perception. There is no way to be sure. Did I dream this computer monitor or is it real?
Edit, So maybe you can do it.
Any of you with blender can this experiment.
step 1.Make a cube with these speed on it which is in this picture.
Actually, negative mass would have a negative momentum, and I have no idea what that would mean…
Would pushing it pull it?
Negitive mass, could be the key to traveling light speed,
Its tricky to create from what I understand though.
I now have a cube and cylinder moving in circles and I am still no closer to understanding what you are talking about…
I don’t think ignoring observable science counts as a new idea…
From what I gather, negative mass would be repelled by gravity, but what does repelling a negative momentum do? Pull it?
This would mean negative matter would act like normal mass, except the faster it went, the less mass it would have.
About real factual science.
Even if you can go the speed of light, time would stop from that reference point, so you could never apply the brakes… You would need some sort of “gate” you aim for at the other end, that some how slowed you and turned on your brakes.
There’s only one thing you need to do in order to go faster than light: move. At ligth’s speed, time is still and all distances go to 0. Therefore, a photon never moves, and maybe it actually never existed: it’s born and it died in the same exact place and moment.
This is obviously theory, and we will be able to talk about the speed of light and maybe even time-travel (tough time may actually be just a macroscopic effect of quantum gravity) when someone will get to know what time actually is, and when the theory of macroscopic gravity will be integrated with quantum physics.
Did you do the experiment or are you just talking?
I believe physicist can make mistakes don’t you?
You don’t know until you have done that.
It’s world speed does incerease, but there is something known as the correllis effect.
Also those motions (the loc and the rot) in real life require some force. That force takes energy, and as it gets closer to the speed of light, exponentially more energy.
Try making the objects dynamic and using forces. I suspect your simulation won’t work.
So there are a few restrictions here:
Here’s a challenge:
Get off the computer and build it. Try it for yourself and discover the physical limits.
On a related topic, this article may be of interest:
https://what-if.xkcd.com/1/
