POINTLESS POSTULATES THAT I CAN NOT PROOF

This is something Ive been thinking about for a long time and with the freedom of speech thing in mind i have decided to write my almost stupid ideas on this page and hope some scientist with too much free time on their hands and some tolerance for foolishness decides to prove me wrong, or right i leave that decision to said scientist. Just let it be known that at the time of this basis for someones PhD thesis paper i have never seen any such theory guesswork utter disregard for physics as we know it, before today so i claim this pointless postulate as mine and any future work done with or on it will provide me with lots of undeserved glory and accolades. I have for a very long time been fascinated with the idea that maybe fingers crossed we !the human race" will, before i die of old age, finally achieve interstellar capable engines propelling us to new suns to claim as our own. To achieve this however we have to understand some basic physics that states that time and speed are related in a way that achieving the speed of light will leave us with the issue of having years pass for the people outside said very fast transport while only days pass for those inside. This means that simply travelling to distant star systems would become very difficult as returning home is simply not an option, home will have moved on to other things and forgotten you. #f course not to mention how attaining this speed would probably drain the planet of its resources to propel one ship. I$m sure there is some scientist or some geek nerd somewhere trying to find solutions to the above problems and probably thinking along the lines of time being controlled. %n idea i have to shout is &'() *T+PID and hopefully beyond our capabilities or potential capabilities. Those issues however are not my concern, instead i am more concerned with the fact that the universe seems to have a speed limit set at the speed of light. This had me thinking along the lines of all those great, weird mostly terrible *ci,i movies i love to watch and they mostly seem to think that to travel out of our solar system we either have to bend the fabric of space or tear a hole in the universe and travel through a parallel universe where the rules of physics may be different from ours. I have to admit they both seem to be good ideas if we could figure out how to do any of that. -y concern is why would there be a speed limit which we cannot hope to e.ceed. That simply defies logic. /hy would the approaching 0 !speed of light" cause the universe to stretch itself so the speed of light remains constant1 *o i came to the unproved, untested and probably, maybe correct conclusion that once you e.ceed this upper limit of speed in our universe you might break into a parallel universe where the speed of light is the slowest speed you are capable of achieving. In this theoretical imaginary universe, what they would consider 2m s would translate as the speed of light. /ithout looking at this any more deeply and making any more assumptions about our universe, let us first consider this3 e.isting in this accelerated universe would mean one could not interact with ours as we are too slow our molecules would simply go through theirs as they would not recogni4e the bonds between them. It also means that achieving the speed necessary for interstellar flight might re5uire less energy or at least easier to achieve. The 5uestion that arises in my mind at this is, would this new accelerated universe be bigger than ours to compensate for the distance travelled in the same amount of time moving at the upper limit of each universe speed restrictions because then this would make that universe unsuitable for travelling as we hope though i think it may provide some new sources of energy that if they could be utili4ed in our universe may help us achieve interstellar travel. ,or a universe where the slowest particle vibrates at the speed of light almost anything you could convert to energy would provide a greater amount of energy than its closest counterpart in a slower state.

The biggest problem I suspect would be identifying and holding onto any such matter seeing as to how we could not even interact with said imaginary universe. I$ll leave the hard part to someone with the 5ualifications to disprove !hopefully prove" my train of though then maybe sharing with me some of the credit and thanking my out of the bo. thinking when they win an 6obel %ward. I don$t ask for much 7ust two percent credit would satisfy me.