Hypothetical Question

[thatguy]

Now, what I'm asking is impossible to actually do, but the point is its fun thinking up the most logical and possible theory to answer it.

Now lets day we have a ship that can go faster then the speed of light (500 000 km/s say) and we want to go somewhere only 300 000 km's away.
Now, using this ship (and please, no "its impossible, case closed" bull crap. I know its impossible, but lets have some fun, rather then being an annoying dick) we travel at 500 000 km/s to our destination.
SO, if we are going faster then the speed of light, will we reach the destination, and not be seen yet, as the light particles of our movement havent reached our destination yet?

[Sphere]

I am not sure what you mean. Certainly the light that reflected off you at your starting point would not have reached your destination but light can still reflect off you once you reach it.

You would still be completely visible, although you would be able to see an image of yourself in the past if you looked back towards your starting point, just like the stars we see today are actually images millions or billions of years old.

[Belgian General]

Besides, the light would arrive less than a second later, so you won't even notice.

[Helm]

I think there would be some kind of weird time distortion involved, you would arrive before you set off or something to that effect.

[Ummon]

You would actually change cone-of-light. I think that involves several distortions, yes.

[Nimthill]

You could look back and see yourself flying backwards (as the light 'particles' that touched you first will arrive last.)

Would be quite cool tbh!

[Simetrical]

Nothing moving at the speed of light can be detected before it arrives, no. For instance, you can't dodge lasers, because you can't see where they're going until they actually hit. Naively, then, one would suppose that if you traveled faster than light, you would be undetectable before you arrived, yes. For instance, this would be the case in Newtonian mechanics.

[Event Horizon]

Nothing moving at the speed of light can be detected before it arrives, no. For instance, you can't dodge lasers, because you can't see where they're going until they actually hit. Naively, then, one would suppose that if you traveled faster than light, you would be undetectable before you arrived, yes. For instance, this would be the case in Newtonian mechanics.

Actually if you travelled through space at a velocity greater than the speed of light you would cease to exist in the present or future as you travelled through time at a negative velocity, but this is mere laymans understanding of Relativity.

[Playfishpaste]

We're ignoring special relativity here, because it would mean that you'd gain more mass then the amount of energy you're using to move. Though even if we didn't, you wouldn't necessarily cease to exist, you'd renormalize or simply distort space time and create some cerenkov.

[Simetrical]

Actually if you travelled through space at a velocity greater than the speed of light you would cease to exist in the present or future as you travelled through time at a negative velocity, but this is mere laymans understanding of Relativity.

No, it's rather simpler than that. In relativity, material objects simply can't travel through space at a velocity greater than the speed of light, period. There's no ceasing to exist or whatever.

Technically you'd be allowed to travel through space faster than light if your mass were imaginary. But this seems unlikely. If it did happen, then yes, you'd be going backward in time, sort of. Not in a way that could transmit information, as far as I've heard, so not in a very interesting way.

[Playfishpaste]

So virtual particles can travel faster then light?

[Ummon]

Tunneling particles can too.

[Simetrical]

So virtual particles can travel faster then light?

Virtual particles have real mass. As far as I know, they cannot travel faster than light.

Tunneling particles can too.

I don't think tunneling particles travel faster than light in any sense.

[Playfishpaste]

Virtual particles have real mass. As far as I know, they cannot travel faster than light.

I don't think tunneling particles travel faster than light in any sense.

As far as I knew they only had relativistic mass. even then though, that would mean they wouldn't be able to travel as fast as light.

[Simetrical]

http://www.aei-potsdam.mpg.de/~mpoessel/Physik/FTL/tunnelingftl.html

As that clearly states, they don't move faster than light in the sense of special relativity. They may "move faster than light" in some way that can't convey information, but we've known that's possible for a long time (e.g., quantum "spooky action at a distance" in the EPR experiments). The example of a shadow is also sometimes given to show how things that are sort of tangible can move faster than light.

[Ummon]

http://www.aei-potsdam.mpg.de/~mpoes...nelingftl.html

[Ummon]

Sure, I know the difference. Although with shadow/light borders there is no mass involved. Now, I should not be wading in areas which are not my own, but I suspect that one may devise ways to make them "do" something worthwhile, to those electrons. They have already done so with EPR effects.

[Simetrical]

Sure, I know the difference. Although with shadow/light borders there is no mass involved.

Nor with group velocities, really.

Now, I should not be wading in areas which are not my own, but I suspect that one may devise ways to make them "do" something worthwhile, to those electrons. They have already done so with EPR effects.

They've already done what, transmit information faster than light?

[Ummon]

The have used EPR as a sensor to increase resolution in quantum optics. I don't remember the exact outline of the experiment, it was an occasional read years ago.

[thatguy]

See, this s why Science is more fun then maths.



You guys know that galaxies can exband faster then the speed of light, or something along thoselines.
Thats pretty sweet.