Ask Science
Ask a science question, get a science answer.
Community Rules
Rule 1: Be respectful and inclusive.
Treat others with respect, and maintain a positive atmosphere.
Rule 2: No harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or trolling.
Avoid any form of harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or offensive behavior.
Rule 3: Engage in constructive discussions.
Contribute to meaningful and constructive discussions that enhance scientific understanding.
Rule 4: No AI-generated answers.
Strictly prohibit the use of AI-generated answers. Providing answers generated by AI systems is not allowed and may result in a ban.
Rule 5: Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
Adhere to community guidelines and comply with instructions given by moderators.
Rule 6: Use appropriate language and tone.
Communicate using suitable language and maintain a professional and respectful tone.
Rule 7: Report violations.
Report any violations of the community rules to the moderators for appropriate action.
Rule 8: Foster a continuous learning environment.
Encourage a continuous learning environment where members can share knowledge and engage in scientific discussions.
Rule 9: Source required for answers.
Provide credible sources for answers. Failure to include a source may result in the removal of the answer to ensure information reliability.
By adhering to these rules, we create a welcoming and informative environment where science-related questions receive accurate and credible answers. Thank you for your cooperation in making the Ask Science community a valuable resource for scientific knowledge.
We retain the discretion to modify the rules as we deem necessary.
For answers to historical questions, please check out our sister community: !askhistorians@lemmy.world
view the rest of the comments
Allowing the magic part, the kinetic energy equation still applies. So fast velocity minus the slow in that direction. Might as well have been going a bit slower than light. A grain of dust at even a small percentage of light has a lot of energy.
Add to my guess that I think relativity might rear its head in this and say that even if it was going that fast, it would only appear to go less. Same reason why light is seen to go at c by all observers, no matter the frame of reference. There's equations for that.
The kinetic energy equation does not apply, because classical mechanics (including E~k~ = 1/2mv^2^) only works for scenarios much slower than c.
in relativistic scenarios you have to use Einstein's math. That involves multiplication by the Lorentz Factor 1/√(1-v^2^/c^2^). Solving for any velocity larger than c results in taking the square root of a negative number, which means that the kinetic energy of a superluminal object is literally imaginary (in the mathematical sense).
Valid point. We'd never be in the position anyway because we've already used "magic" to create the possibility.