Relativity Challenge Question

Well, since I'm no quantum physicist, my reply is going to be simple. The photon travels at the speed of light, and if the spaceship reached the speed of light, regardless of its source of energy, its mass would be converted to energy and would therefore not finish. It also takes time to accellerate any mass to the speed of light, therefore not keeping up with a photon from the start. Now the only question in my mind is whether or not the photon is a particle or a wave, even though you stated that it's a coupled electromagnetic wave, and I think the wavelength doesn't really matter.

If the rules of quantum physics apply? First, we do not know the speed of either mass, however, I am going to assume that they are traveling at the speed of light. If that is so, then the spaceship and the photon will become infinite in size once they reach their top speed, meaning that neither would get very far. Right?

As far as I know, the photon is essentially massless and really doesn't have an acceleration phase of the journey. Let's just say it leaves the starting line at cruising speed, which is the speed of light.

Now the flyweight spaceship does have mass and will require some fraction of time to get up to speed since it is at a stop. Even with an infinite improbability drive there will be some finite amount of time required to get up to speed.

Now, is this a running start? If so, then both reach the ribbon at the same time if they both reach the speed of light, but the speed of light for the spaceship is really an asymptote. It is like, as a professor explained to me, standing at one end of the room with a girl standing at the other. At each delta T in time you move half way to the girl. Will you ever reach the girl? Technically, no, but you will get close! So the photon just edges out again in the race.

Now the really bad news. Even though your ship travels at relativistic speeds, the trip to the finish line may seem like a wink of time to get there, it really takes you just a bit more than one year to get there. Even with electronic filing, your tax return will be late by one more year! Even your finest bistro mathematics can not help you here. You will loose!

Meanwhile, to add insult to injury, six months after your departure, a young extol-quantum physic student suddenly has an insightful flash and discovers the Tachyon Propulsion Drive. After a short squabble over who has patent rights, the IIRS (Interstellar Internal Revenue Service) confiscates the university for back taxes that will be due and employs the technology on a new financial crusade. Amazingly, when you get to the finish line an IIRS agent has already arrived to confiscate your relic of a spaceship and return you back to the IIRS office via a slow sub-light freighter, just to maximize the interest and penalties.

The Photon of light will reach first.

Photons are massless particles that travel at the speed of light(Your right, wavelength doesn't matter). There is no running start in this contest so the ship must accelerate up to speed, but with infinite energy, it does so almost instantly. When an object with a mass approaches the speed of light, it starts to gain additional mass. Our spaceship with the infinite energy will accelerate nearly instantly and gain mass nearly instantly, becoming an infinite black hole almost instantly. The event horizon of the infinite blackhole then will propagate at the speed of light, right behind the photon. Basically the biggest gravity wave possible with the photon running for it's life right in front of it.

Now I realize why Americans (myself included)are gaining weight, not the diet, but the increase in the speed limit. (Yeah, I know weight and mass are not the same).

I thought it was cause we all stopped smoking.

This one kind of boggles the mind with all the impossible parameters. However, obviously the spaceship would win. After accellerating past the speed of light relative to a particular point in space which is the finish line, the spaceship would start going backwards in time relative to that point in space, causing it to get there before it started. The next question is if this unstoppable force of a spaceship were to meet an immovable object in space, who would win?

The question says "the rules of relativity still apply", so time travel is not possible. That only happens in the movies. In real life, an object with mass can never reach the speed of light, ever. Instead of going faster, it gains mass instead. So the spaceship would never quite reach the speed of light.

The photon travels at the speed of light. In other words, the Photon would always be traveling slightly faster than the spaceship and would win the race.

Here are some links on relativity:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light http://www.opencourse.info/astronomy/introduction/ 09.light_relativity/

The speed of light relative to what? What is standing still mean if the universe is expanding. The frame of reference is not only a point in space but the speed at which that point is traveling toward or away from you. I think the theory is flawed.

The whole point of relativity is that the speed of light is the same, regardless of the reference frame.

So when you say "The speed of light relative to what?" The answer is it doesn't matter what the speed of light is relative to, it's always the same speed, c.

The thing you have to understand about relativity is that it redefines velocity by coupling time and space. By coupling I mean that time and the spatial coordinates are not independent variables t,x,y,z, but are related to each other. Since velocity is distance over time, this coupling has dramatic effects on a body in motion at high speeds

Relativity is quite correct. It's been verified by many experiments. The problem is people love to talk about relativity without actually learning the math involved and so they get confused when there own incorrect assumptions prove to be inconsistant. Don't get me wrong, I am including myself in that crowd. It's usually at that "that doesn't make any sense point" where I have a choice of "is relativity and countless experiments confirming it wrong" or "Is my understanding wrong" that I always figure it's the later and its time to review the math again to get a fresh perspective.

I understand that the speed of light is measured the same regardless of whether you are going toward a source of light or going away from it. I understand that this couples time and space. However, that perception is related to our "fixed" point in space which indeed is not fixed at all. So who is speeding, the earth or the sun? Since the sun is much larger than the earth, the assumption is that the sun is the fixed point. Not necessarily. Relative to other bodies in motion in the solar system, it very well may be the earth that has a more relatively fixed position at a particular time. All this leads me to conclude that the speed of light is instantaneous and time is what is changing relative to our position in space. In the context of this theory, your point in space is very relevant and it does matter regardless of whether any of your other points matter or not.

First of all, Our solar system (including the Sun) is moving around 16.5 Kilometers per second in orbit about the Milky Way Center, our galaxy (including the solar system) is flying outward from other galaxies at an even greater speed. Everybody knows the sun isn't stationary.

You wrote:

"However, that perception is related to our "fixed" point in space which indeed is not fixed at all."

Not "perception", we all know that nothing is stationary, we are just chosing a reference frame where the sun's velocity is the zero of the system. In such a frame, the sun's velocity is equal to zero (or close to it)

There is no assumption that the sun is motionless because of it's size. That is a complete misunderstanding on your part. It's choice of reference frame. You define the zero velocity to be equal to the speed of the sun. This allows you to understand local effects and ignore larger scale effects (galactic rotation, Expansion of Universe, etc.)

Light is not instantaneous. Light travels at velocity c regardless of reference frame. This was settled in the 17th century by Romer in his observations of Jupiter's moons, not to mention by 1000's of other experiments over the last 350 years since. Here's a link below.

http://galileoandeinstein.phys.virginia.edu/lectur es/spedlite.html

I must refer you to this link as I can not in the constraints of this forum explain to you what I am refering to. http://users.isp.com/retic/physics/hoax.htm In 2.6 this is quoted "As with the Special Theory of Relativity, the Aether Relativity Theory allowed one, regardless of his velocity through space, to be free to consider himself at rest and apply the Lorentz Transformations to observations made in systems which were moving with respect to himself. It must be pointed out that Special Relativity did not have the difficulties with respect to electromagnetic phenomena alleged to be a weakness of the Aether Relativity Theory for the simple reason that, instead of resolving those difficulties, it arbitrarily defined them as non-existent." This is a quote from 2.9 "Since the Aether Relativity Theory preceded the Special Theory of Relativity by two years and was in actuality the same theory in a different form, it was necessary to make a determination between them. That became a matter of belief rather than proof and, as the multitudinous deaths in religious wars over the centuries have amply demonstrated, the more unprovable a belief is, the more savagely men will fight to defend it." In 3.6 "The Einstein Hoax consists of maintaining the quasi-religious belief that the phenomena associated with velocity and gravitation cannot be understood by ordinary men using their common sense. It can only be understood in terms of mathematics performed by initiates who possessed the prerequisite 'yup's. Whether it is recognized or not, all of the essentials of a religion are present. There is a deity in the form of Dr. Einstein, who, like most of the men who have had that role thrust on them over the centuries, probably did not seek or even relish it. It has an established but unproven set of truths which were revealed by that deity."

Don't believe everything you read on the internet...

Couldn't the speed of light be found out by, seeing how far it travels from "point A" to "point B"? I am saying is just remove the universe. measure to distance at Time Constant (TC) 1 (point A) and TC 2 (point B). Now TC-0 is when it is created. I use tc1 and 2 becuase of the debate wether light needs a time period to get to speed. To give a real world refernce to the jarbol I just said. Just like the sailors of old determine thier speed. Because there is no fixed point out on the ocean, you use where you have been recently. to mark the spot, you toss out a rope with knots in it. and you count how many knots pass in a given TC. Using this method you could take account ALL things realative (known or unknown). Or here is another way. It is like the speedometer in your car. It does not measure the distance traveled and takes the time to figure it out. It takes the know distance of the circumfernce of the tire and based on the rotational speed of the tire it can calculate the speed of the car. Now I know there is a difference between speed and velocity, but right now I can not tell you what it is. That is why I have included both examples. Now for my opinion, I think the photon is going to win. because as someone said before, the ship can not reach the speed of light because energy will turn in to mass and thus slow down requiring more energy to keep speed and there fore flop out. where as the photon would just keep cruising.