# What would happen if something went faster the speed of light?

## Recommended Posts

So, I'm aware it's not possible to go faster than the speed of light, and that as something nears the speed of light it's mass increases, time slows down and bla bla bla.

What I'm interested in knowing is, if something went faster the speed of light, how many laws of physics would it break, and if that happens (theorising time now boiis!) what do you think would happen? Would the thing go back in time, or would space-time warp  around that object and create a wormhole or something even stranger.

Even if you don't want to answer the 2nd part of the question, please answer the 1st part.

##### Share on other sites

If something went faster than the speed of light, no laws would be broken. Instead, we would realize that we had misunderstood how some aspects of physics work.

As far as what would happen, that is unknown. Given that we didn't actually understand how some aspects of physics work, we would be in no position to make reasonable predictions.

##### Share on other sites

Faster-than-light allows you to violate causality, meaning there are ways for you to get a response to a signal before you send the signal (as they say: relativity, FTL, causality. Pick two)

##### Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, zapatos said:

If something went faster than the speed of light, no laws would be broken. Instead, we would realize that we had misunderstood how some aspects of physics work.

As far as what would happen, that is unknown. Given that we didn't actually understand how some aspects of physics work, we would be in no position to make reasonable predictions.

Could you please list which aspects would we be mistaken about, one's causality.

thx :)

##### Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, swansont said:

Faster-than-light allows you to violate causality, meaning there are ways for you to get a response to a signal before you send the signal (as they say: relativity, FTL, causality. Pick two)

Unless you sent the signal by faster than light pigeon.

I don't understand why this question is in mainstream Physics, not speculations but I will offer some thoughts.

32 minutes ago, 8Lec_:) said:

nears the speed of light it's mass increases, .... and bla bla bla.

Why bla bla bla?

Did you not want a serious answer ?

The apparent mass becomes asymptotic to infinity at a relative speed equal to that of light. (ask if you didn't understand this statement)

Water is flowing in an open channel, say a river or concrete channel outflow from a reservoir.

The steeper the slope of that channel bed, the faster the water flows.

Now the total energy of that water is comprised of the kinetic energy due to its velocity and the pressure energy due to its depth from the water surface to the channel bed.

If you add up the kinetic and pressure energy of the water you obtain the total mechancial energy of that water.

Dividing by mass or volume gives the specific energy per cubic metre or kilogram.

The specific energy becomes asymptiotic to infinity at a certain value of specific energy.

This situation is unsustainable so the flowing water adjusts to the situation with what is known as a hydraulic jump.

A hydraulic jump is an abrupt change in the depth of the flowing water.

This is a real phenomenon observed in some rivers and used in artificial situations like dam outfalls.

##### Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, studiot said:

I don't understand why this question is in mainstream Physics, not speculations but I will offer some thoughts.

Why bla bla bla?

Did you not want a serious answer ?

Sorry about posting it on the wrong sub forum, this was my first post

I was just saying bla bla bla as a replacement for etc; cuz I'm not interested in what complications are involved with objects being faster than speed of light (loads of articles on the interwebs on this), what I'm intrested in is, how many laws of physics would need to changed in order for this (if it were to ever happen) to fit amongst all other laws of physics

##### Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, 8Lec_:) said:

Could you please list which aspects would we be mistaken about, one's causality.

thx

Special Relativity.

##### Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, studiot said:

I don't understand why this question is in mainstream Physics, not speculations but I will offer some thoughts.

The OP is not a speculation. It's a question, and one that can be answered (to some extent) with mainstream physics.

##### Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, swansont said:

The OP is not a speculation. It's a question, and one that can be answered (to some extent) with mainstream physics.

Thank you for that clarification.

However it seems the OP is not interested in the detail offered so I will bow out.

##### Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, 8Lec_:) said:

Could you please list which aspects would we be mistaken about, one's causality.

Travelling at more than light speed allows communication back in time via a process called the tachyonic anti-telephone: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyonic_antitelephone

Talking of which, the properties of tachyons might answer some of your questions: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyon

##### Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 8Lec_:) said:

What I'm interested in knowing is, if something went faster the speed of light, how many laws of physics would it break, and if that happens (theorising time now boiis!) what do you think would happen? Would the thing go back in time, or would space-time warp  around that object and create a wormhole or something even stranger.

Even if you don't want to answer the 2nd part of the question, please answer the 1st part.

The speed of light is a universal speed limit which anything with mass can never achieve or exceed, for the reasons already stated. But perhaps one day a sufficiently advanced civilisation may be able to create "warp bubbles" around space ships and thereby have that "massless detached space bubble" move through  space FTL.

This along with wormholes and time travel at least to the future, are hypothetical possibilities allowed for by GR. The following link explains....

extract:

"We physicists have been working hard since the late 1980s to understand whether the laws of physics allow backward time travel. We do not have a definitive answer yet, but the likely answer has been summarised by Stephen Hawking, in his Chronology Protection Conjecture (see [1]): The laws of physics always conspire to prevent anything from travelling backward in time, thereby keeping the Universe safe for historians".

NB: Time dilation has been 100% validated many times, along with relativistic mass increases.

Edited by beecee

## Create an account

Register a new account