Phyma Jul 17, 2013 @ 10:39am
Speed of light
Why is the speed of objects not capped by the speed of light? I like the game, but this always puzzles me.
Showing 1-15 of 67 comments
< >
IMMORTAN PATRICK SWAYZE Jul 17, 2013 @ 10:50am 
Hate to break it to you bro but the speed of light isn't a constant
Phyma Jul 17, 2013 @ 11:11am 
The vacuum speed of light is a constant. The speed of light in a medium depends on the mediums index of refractions. Anyway, objects can not move faster than the speed of light, except for some crazy hypothetical particles.
gimme da butt Jul 17, 2013 @ 12:32pm 
i.e.
tachyons
Utamaru Jul 17, 2013 @ 1:32pm 
If I remeber correctly nothing can get to the speed of light ie 1LS. the most anything or anyone can do is 99.99% of it. I beleive steven hawking explained it best in a 3 part tv series he did called "Into the Universe with Stephen Hawking" The show is on netflix btw.
Abaddonis119 Jul 17, 2013 @ 6:02pm 
Because the speed of light is only an estimation, but not perfect or truely right. Let alone, there is no real way for us to know how to measure it accurately and percisely.
Phyma Jul 17, 2013 @ 7:03pm 
The speed of light has been defined to c=299792458 m/s. The unit meter is defined to be the distance light travels in 1/299792458s. But that still doesn't let me accelerate a planet to 100c, like I can in the game.
Zefram Cochrane Jul 17, 2013 @ 7:56pm 
The speed of light through a vacuum is a constant. It doesn't vary. Basic physics class, peops.

Nothing with mass can travel at the speed of light because mass increases infinitely once you get very, very close to the speed of light. Only particles with no mass, i.e. photons, can travel at the speed of light.
JKflipflop Jul 17, 2013 @ 9:57pm 
Originally posted by Phyma:
Why is the speed of objects not capped by the speed of light? I like the game, but this always puzzles me.

This is a very common misconception bourne of too many sci-fi movie watching "scientists". There's nothing that says you can't go faster than the speed of light anywhere in science. Accelerating to that point is the issue.
Cerberus Jul 18, 2013 @ 1:23am 
But the question remains valid: Why is it possible to "accelerate" a planet to a velocity that is greater than c? This shouldn't be possible even in Universe Simulator if the only source of energy is gravity.

My theory is that the reason why this happens during a simulation is if you work with considerable "heavy" objects, e.g. a sun the size of our sun and the mass of a billion suns. This more or less means, that you have a black hole in your system that the system doesn't recognize as such. Calculating with such an object can lead to impossible results like objects being accelerated to speeds greater than c.
Seamus Allen Jul 18, 2013 @ 4:28am 
It's because this simulator is limited on basic gravitational forces of mechanical physics, relativistic physics is totally absent, so the lack of c limit. As a physics student, this is very disappointing S:
Phyma Jul 18, 2013 @ 5:11pm 
At least some people get my point. This should not be too much of an issue to include effects of special relavity in such a simulator.
Be Back In A Few Weeks Jul 19, 2013 @ 7:08am 
You know what my answer is? 2 angry camles in a tiny car.
Kyte 22 Jul 19, 2013 @ 7:00pm 

Originally posted by Seamus Allen:
It's because this simulator is limited on basic gravitational forces of mechanical physics, relativistic physics is totally absent, so the lack of c limit. As a physics student, this is very disappointing S:

Relativity DLC in the future perhaps? That would be kind of funny and also very cool

Phyma Jul 20, 2013 @ 7:18am 
Special relativity could be happening quite easily. The common equations aren't that hard after all.
Seamus Allen Jul 20, 2013 @ 7:35am 
Originally posted by Phyma:
Special relativity could be happening quite easily. The common equations aren't that hard after all.

I've been thinking the same! It's only a matter of a factor, indeed. Not to mention planets with few kilos of weight, and orbits that totally explode if you double the flow of time.
Although paid only 2,50 euros, I'm still feeling quite "scammed", as I was expecting a simulator of most of the universe, not a simulator of rotating balls S:
I strongly hope the next version will solve everything lacking or broken in this """simulator"""!
Showing 1-15 of 67 comments
< >
Per page: 15 30 50