Genady

Needing infinite amount of energy is a phrase which means that no finite amount of energy will do it. Say this: "A massive body cannot reach speed of light using a finite amount of energy." There is no "infinite" in this statement. This is what relativity says.

We don't do it in relativity. We just say that you cannot reach speed of light with a finite amount of energy. No infinite energy is used anywhere in relativity.

Yes, we can. This energy being infinite means that any finite amount of energy is not sufficient to accelerate a massive body to the speed of light.

You cannot subtract a dimensionless value from a value which has a dimension. Fail.

No, it is not considered infinite. No, you do not have such a thing.

Do you mean "sweeping parallels"? Meridians are lines which connect the poles,

c=1 ft/ns soit c-1=0 ft/ns

c = 3*10^8 m/s = 1 ft/ns, and c-1 = (1-1) ft/ns = 0 ft/ns

Why do we need a ref bot? Can't two bots discuss, and a human be the referee? I think I've lost what is a point of the exercise. (Maybe because I don't watch TV for many years now.)

If they were missing BEFORE the impact, then they transformed BEFORE reaching speed of light. Then, they transformed while being at rest. We don't need to accelerate them to refute this.

I don't think so. Spherical wave radiates from a center out. Rather, a circular wave on a spherical surface.

If some particles are transformed before reaching the speed of light, then in some reference frame they are transformed while being at rest. Physics is the same in all reference frames. We don't even need to accelerate particles. Just to observe if particles get spontaneously transformed sometimes. Which of course have never been observed. The result of the experiment is negative. Done.

Do they transform before or after reaching c?

I doubt. Geodesic on a sphere is a great circle.

I can start three separate conversations to simulate three bots and copy output of one into input of another.

Like consecutive circles of latitude? (btw, the link works for me, strange...)

Spherical spiral? Project.pdf (redwoods.edu)

I cannot do it on my side. Guess we need another player here.

Here is the next step in this little experiment. I copied the previous bot's response as a query, repeated here: And here is what the bot had to say about it:

I would be very surprised if the response were identical. And it is in fact quite different:

I think my bot agrees with you. Here is its response:

I remember Susskind mentioning that Feynman "certainly was a showman".

If you accelerated a particle to a speed which is arbitrarily close but not equal the speed of light, then there is a reference frame in which the particle is at rest. To accelerate in this frame, you have to start all over again.

I didn't download the attached paper. But I think exceeding speed of light contradicts causality, regardless of what happens to mass/energy.

There are many regularization schemes leading to the same result. AFAIK, Riemann zeta function is one of them and is not necessary. Regularization is not just a mathematical trick. It has physical basis. As explained in Zee, A. Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell: Second Edition (p. 72). Princeton University Press,