Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site pucc-h
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!floyd!clyde!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!CSvax:Pucc-H:ab3
From: CSvax:Pucc-H:ab3@pur-ee.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.physics
Subject: Re: Query - re. Speed o Light
Message-ID: <333@pucc-h>
Date: Fri, 7-Oct-83 12:23:59 EDT
Article-I.D.: pucc-h.333
Posted: Fri Oct  7 12:23:59 1983
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Oct-83 05:22:13 EDT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Lines: 26


	ellis@flairvax disagreed with my comments vis-a-vis travelling
down the NJ Turnpike at the speed of light...I said:

> 2. If you are driving at C, then you have transgressed the {known,
> well-understood, apparent -- pick one} laws of the universe and you will be
> stopped by the next traffic cop, who will of course catch you by riding a
> tachyon-constituted motorcycle.

	and he (quite correctly) pointed out

> Now wait... going the speed of light is not in violation of any law of
> physics I know! To my knowledge, your clock slows down as you approach the
> speed of light, and completely stops should that speed ever be attained.

	and went on to say by by dumping mass ( say, by converting it to
the energy used for acceleration ) one could achieve a zero-mass state, in
which case C is indeed attainable; photons do it all the time!

	I agree; but I was *assuming* that the original submitter (srm@pyuxnn)
was specifying a physical object (with non-zero mass) with a light-producing 
element on the front.

	That'll teach me to assume!

Darth Wombat