Is there anything that could travel faster than the speed of light?
612849
NO energy, matter, or information has EVER been observed to exceed the speed of light.\n\nTheoretically, there are particles known as "tachyons" ( see wikipedia ) that travel ALWAYS in excess of that of light but never AT or BELOW that speed. Although never observed, their theoretical existence has sent many physicists to look for them ( or their trails ! ) \n\nthere are many abstract entities that "travel" faster than light.  for example, the shadow of a large celestial object ( a planet say ) on another celestial object can be observed to move at great speeds.  a shadow however is not a real entity ( i.e. mass or energy ) and it cannot convey information.
867201
nothing can go faster than the speed of light (in theory) so the answer is 3*10^8
72176
If you're asking about some mass being accelerated up to and beyond the speed of light, no it is NOT possible. Einstein theorized that the faster an object moves, the greater will become its mass. This increased mass would require more energy to accelerate it even more, which in turn would increase its mass, which would require more energy to go faster, etc., etc.,. Ultimately to get this object up to the speed of light would require infinite energy, and that's impossible. This isn't just theory anymore either; mass increase versus velocity has been observed countless times in modern particle accelerators.\n\nOf course there are plenty of sci-fi novels, TV shows and movies (like Star Trek and warp drive) where things move faster than light, but unless someone can find a way around Einstein and all the evidence that he was right we'll never be able to attain FTL travel.\n\nBy the way...worm holes don't provide a way to MOVE faster than light. So-called worm holes, if they exist at all, are nothing more than short cuts; going through a worm hole you'd still have to obey the speed limit imposed by Einstein.\n\nPersonally I hope that some day some radically new branch of physics is found that would allow us to get around Einstein, but right now it doesn't look too good.
1002813
The key point to this whole question is if you could travel faster than light.  Since at our present knowledge of physics says no, and our current tech is not able to get anywhere remotely near the speed of light let alone faster than it, we will assume this hypothetical question implies these two things don't matter.\n\nIf so, then yes you could see into the past if you had an adequate viewing device which could discern the light you would receive at the end of your journey--light which you left behind by going faster than it.  But to see exaclty the number of years in the past as the light year distance you travelled, you woould have to move instantaneously.  If you had any non-relativistic travel time, you would have to consider time of your journey to determine how far in past you were seeing.  If you travelled 1.1 times the speed of light, you would only get to see .1*light year distance in years past.
734986
Some things are already able to reach the speed of light such as photons (light).\n\nAccording to Einstein's theory of relativity though, it requires an infinite amount of energy to reach the speed of light.\n\nSo we can't ever make a spaceship go at the speed of light.\n\nWe are currently trying to make atoms move at the speed of light but we only get close with particle accelerators.
811109
You misunderstand Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity. It doesn't say that you can't have something move faster than the speed of light. Only "information" can NOT move faster than the speed of light. By information, I mean any "signal", like electromagnetic waves (which includes light, radio waves, etc. etc.). Any material object within the Universe are also restricted by Special Relativity, since material objects also carry "information".\n\nFor the Universe or the fabric of spacetime to be expanding faster than the speed of light is NOT a violation of Special Relativity, and the Universe will not be moving backwards in time.\n\n--------------------------------------------------------\n\nEdit - Ok, here let me clarify why I said that Special Relativity (SR) does NOT apply to the expansion of the Universe:\n\nVelocity of something depends on which definition of distance we use. So, if we assume that the distance of an object at time t is the distance from our position at time t to the object's position at time t measured by a set of observers moving with the expansion of the Universe, and all making their observations when they see the Universe as having age t, then the velocity (change in D per change in t) can definitely be larger than the speed of light. This is not a contradiction of special relativity because this "distance" is not the same as the spatial distance used in SR, and the age of the Universe is not the same as the time used in SR.\n\nIn the special case of the "empty Universe", where one can show the model in both special relativistic and cosmological coordinates, the velocity defined by change in cosmological distance per unit cosmic time is given by v = c ln(1+z), where z is the redshift, which clearly goes to infinity as the redshift goes to infinity, and is larger than c for z > 1.718.\n\nFor the "critical density Universe", this velocity is given by v = 2c[1-(1/sqrt(1+z))], which is larger than c for z > 3. \n\nFor the "concordance model" based on CMB data and the acceleration of the expansion measured using supernovae, a flat Universe with Omega = 0.27 (this would be our Universe), the velocity is greater than c for z > 1.407\n\nAll this just means that for any expanding universe, there will be a value of z (i.e., redshift or cosmological distance) that will give the appearance of galaxies moving at velocities greater than c.
1001554
According to Einstein and Stephen Hawking, travelling at the speed of light (for anything with mass, ie not photons) is impossible.  But travelling near the speed of light is theoretically possible.\n\nIf you were to travel close to the speed of light you would go into the future a lot quicker than those who don't travel close to the speed of light.  It would require huge amounts of energy.\n\nUnfortunately it would be a one way system.  To travel back it time it would be necessary to bend the whole universe.  Or you could find a way of travelling to parrallel universes (if they exist) and that would solve problems for both forward time travelling and back time travelling.
351358
The first answerer is right about the mass increase.  As a mass approaches the speed of light, one of the effects is that the more energy you provide it in order to increase its velocity, the more the mass increases, according to Einstein's famous formula E=mc^2.\n\nThe speed of light is the absolute limit for velocity.  A mass can approach closer and closer to this speed, but can never surpass it.  So, to answer your question, mankind can and likely will build spaceships which can go significantly faster than the present-day ones can, but we will never be able to travel at the speed of light.
61379
MitchHellman has the best answer!\n\nBut just cuz....a tachyon (theroetical particle) cannot travel *slower* than light. An effect called phase velocity (wave mechanics) can also travel faster than light, but these things are not real in our normal sense of the word. But these are some things people do discuss which have this property.\n\nOtherwise.......no.\n\nlol
1170536
I will attempt an answer that is somewhat factual.  \n\nThe theory does not stipulate that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.  It stipulates that matter can not approach the speed of light.  In fact a hypothetical partical called a tachyon has been named that has a speed faster than the speed of light.  That partical has an imaginary mass. \n\nThe entire work comes from the equations developed by Einsten,\n\nE= MC^2/ sq rt (1- c^2/v^2)
113872
A tachyon is a theoretical particle that always moves faster than the speed of light. However, no such particles have been found and it is likely they don't exist.\n\nIn Special Relativity nothing can go at the speed of light (except something with no mass, like light). So, we cannot accelerate a spacecraft to go faster than light. As we pour more and more energy out the engine we get closer and closer, but never actually reach the speed of light. This has all be verified with lots of experiments on elementary particles, and in astronomy, much bigger things.\n\nBut, theoretically, if something started out going faster than light it would never be able to go slower. So, again theoretically, if you have a particle accelerator the energy of a collision of protons or electrons or whatever could produce a tachyon. \n\nThough, none has ever been detected, and most physics types believe it is very unlikely that they exist.\n\n\nOne thing to be aware of is that some scam places will sell you magical devices that use "tackions" or something - they often spell it wrong for legal reasons - to cure you of all disease or other nonsense. So stick with scientific tachyons!
25993
No.  No terrestrial object can travel at the speed of light.  If you were traveling at the speed of light you would literally dissentigrate from the millions of pounds of air resistance pinning you down.
64217
to answer your question it is possible to go faster the the speed of light. The speed of light is 186,000 miles per second.\n\nIf zooming beyond the local speed limit is punishable by law, then some scientists may have a gargantuan speeding ticket to pay. \n\nIn a controversial experiment reported in this weeks journal Nature, scientists at the NEC Research Institute in Princeton, New Jersey claim to have broken the ultimate speed limit -- the speed of light. Though hotly contested, some say this achievement could dramatically increase the speeds at which we can send and receive information. \n\nTaught in physics classes the world over, Albert Einsteins theory of special relativity holds that no object or information can move faster than the speed of light in a vacuum, or 186,000 miles (300,000 kilometers) per second. But NECs Lijun Wang says he created an experiment in which a light beam raced through a gas-filled chamber so quickly, it exceeded the speed of light by a factor of 300. Whats more, the light pulse appears to have left the confines of the chamber before it even entered a seemingly impossible occurrence according to theories of causality, which predict that causes must always precede their effects. \n\n"It sounds crazy, but this can actually occur," said Raymond Chiao, a physicist at the University of California at Berkeley. Chiao, one of a group of researchers who have been working to break the speed-of-light limit, explained that although a common object such as a baseball could never be flung faster than the speed of light, pulses of energy with certain complex properties have been known to bend the rules. \n\n\n\n"It sounds crazy, but it actually can occur." \n\n\n\n\nIn fact, several recent experiments, including one done by Chiao earlier this year, have pointed to energy pulses zooming faster than light speed. Yet each of these experiments has been encumbered by severe limitations on measurement or observation of the energy pulses. In contrast, this latest experiment is being touted by some as the most dramatic example yet of light breaking its own speed barrier. \n\n"The effects are much larger and more spectacular" than previous observations, said Chiao. \n\nIn Wangs experiment, a pulse of light passed through a small chamber filled with atoms of elemental cesium. A light beam traveling through such a medium has two different velocities a velocity for the individual light waves in the beam and a group velocity for the entire beam. Oddly, some light waves in the beam can actually travel backward for miniscule amounts of time, creating a sort of "tail" behind forward-moving waves. As such, a light wave and its tail can leave the gas cavity at different times, creating the effect that the light beam has left the cavity before its even entered. \n\nConfused? Youre not alone. In fact, even scientists who are familiar with this area of study are unsure about the details of Wangs experiment. And many scientists said the experiments results are still open to interpretation. \n\nWilliam Happer, a physicist at Princeton University argued that several specific problems exist with the experiment, including the fact that pulses get distorted when passed through any media other than a vacuum, or empty space. In addition, he said Wang and his colleagues performed the experiment in a way that doesnt tell the whole story, and that it can be interpreted incorrectly. "This is anything but dramatic," said Happer. "If you look at the data, theres essentially no evidence that [the beam] is going faster than the speed of light." \n\nWhats more, most scientists agree that even if such a beam can be proved speedier than light, it would probably not be able to carry any information. Such a feat could conceivably allow data to be sent back in time, thus violating laws of causality and sending quantum physics into disrepair. \n\nOthers are more optimistic as to the possible
148002
It's technically impossible for something with mass (like a spacecraft) to go the speed of light in our universe under the laws of physics.  As something approaches the speed of light, it gains mass.  In theory, if something were to actually go the speed of light, it would have infinite mass, which is impossible.  \n\nOf course, no one can say for sure.  Science fiction on television and in books have gotten around these rules by using wormholes, subspace, etc., none of which are known to actually exist.
204272
Light travels faster than sound.
134543
I believe that warp speed is supposed to be significantly faster than the speed of light (given that they sometimes consider three light years a minor detour), and it's not possible to go faster than the speed of light.  The concept of manipulating space in such a way that they can essentially create worm holes it less unrealistic, but is still purely science fiction.
557289
I read about an experiment where they actually made light travel backwards faster than the proposed limit for the speed of light.\n\nhttp://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=2544\n\nAlso, there is some proposals that what we call "the void" we call space isn't as much a void as it is micro-matter continuously coming together and annihilating each other and repeating this process continuously.\n\nSome other information on space:\n\nhttp://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=2544