- Aug 4, 2007
- Reaction score
- London, England
<sigh> No, we know no such thing. Really, we simply do not have adequate knowledge to make such an absolute statement.No, we do know that we can't accelerate past c. To do so would require more than infinite energy.
Such claims of ultimate knowledge are, as I said, hubristic. In effect, by making such a statement you are attempting to predict the entirety of future human discovery and knowledge. No sensible person does that. (Hint: Too many humans, including scientists, suffer from extreme hubris).
All that anyone can honestly or scientifically say as things currently stand is that (a) we currently know of no practical way to accelerate past light speed and (b) our current understanding of physics indicates that it is probably impossible in any practical way.
But it would be foolish to erroneously extrapolate from true and valid statements (a) and (b) above to an absolute statement such as "we do know that we can't accelerate past c", which is simply untrue as things stand.
In short, "knowing" is not the same as "as far as we can tell based upon best current theory" and the two things should never be conflated.
Sure, see also my footnote in #362.If we want to travel faster than c we will need to do it without acceleration.
But the possibility of other ways to create the net displacement within a certain timeframe that faster than light travel would otherwise have provided does not mean that we know things that we most certainly do not know for sure, other than on a current theoretical basis. I do not dismiss the significance or meaning of "theory" in scientific terms; indeed, I am pointing out what theory means in practice.