VEYRON - time taken to reach speed of light? how many gears would you need??

tomaschonnie

ok here's a rather silly question but I hope we can have some fun with it. I should preface this by saying that I don't know enough about gear ratios and the like myself to calculate it so I'm hoping you guys can help out here.

the speed of light is 299,792,458 m/s or 1,079,252,849 km/h so...

(a) How long would it take the Bugatti Veyron SuperSport to go from 0-1,079,252,849kph (or as near anything can get to said speed, say 99.9999%) assuming that it would continue to accelerate from 0-400kph, 0-500kph etc at the same ratio. Use this below as a guide.

(b) How many gears would be needed?




http://www.bugatti.com/en/super-sport/technology.html

Limerick Bandit

It was worked out years ago, the answer is 48.

rotinaj

With speed increasing at 100kmph per 2seconds it would take 312 days to reach the speed.

You would need 18204264 gears

JerCotter7

LIGHTNING wrote: »

We will need a few assumptions and take a few shortcuts right?

A) The car will have to have an infinite amount of fuel
b) assuming the car will be in a vacuum free of all material as even a speck of dust travelling at .5% of c impacting the car would make an awful mess
c) since its in a vacuum we will assume it wont need air for combustion
d) An infinite stretch of straight road
c) use its 0-100km/h as its constant for uniform acceleration
d) ignoring the fact that none of the components could do it.

And that the tyres would last more than 12 minutes at the full speed. Or I might be getting mixed up with the fuel.

homer90

My head hurts....

Guy:Incognito

homer90 wrote: »

My head hurts....

Travelling at 1,079,252,849 km/h will do that to a guy.

langdang

LIGHTNING wrote: »

b) assuming the car will be in a vacuum free of all material as even a speck of dust travelling at .5% of c impacting the car would make an awful mess

all of the above and... even a veyron doesn't have the power to reach that speed outside of a vacuum due to drag..

Limerick Bandit

LIGHTNING wrote: »

We will need a few assumptions and take a few shortcuts right?

A) The car will have to have an infinite amount of fuel
b) assuming the car will be in a vacuum free of all material as even a speck of dust travelling at .5% of c impacting the car would make an awful mess
c) since its in a vacuum we will assume it wont need air for combustion
d) An infinite stretch of straight road
c) use its 0-100km/h as its constant for uniform acceleration
d) ignoring the fact that none of the components could do it.

A) Where will we store this?
b) pledge, its great for dust!
c) A non combustion engine - tell me more?
d) Dublin to cork, sure what more do you need :pac:
c) will do!
d) your round

ashleey

On a positive note your twin brother will be older than you when you get out of the car, assuming you come to a halt in less time than you took to reach c.

qz

You all need to have more sex.

ashleey

If I could get my wife away from private practice on the telly...

unkel

LIGHTNING wrote: »

We will need a few assumptions and take a few shortcuts right?

Yep.

LIGHTNING wrote: »

c) use its 0-100km/h as its constant for uniform acceleration

Nope, not that one. The whole point of the exercise is that the acceleration is NOT constant.

The price here is for the person who can show how long it will take the Veyron to reach the speed of light using the function that generates the data for the time it takes the car to reach 100, 200 and 300km/h.

unkel

And a quick Excel simulation shows that even to reach a mere 6000km/h based on those acceleration figures it would take something like 100 billion years

So I don't think we can compute how long it will take for it to reach the speed of light

Absurdum

an Octavia can do it in 180 seconds

langdang

Absurdum wrote: »

an Octavia can do it in 180 seconds

A GT TDI would tear the fabric of spacetime itself and do it 120seconds. It's a little known fact that the CERN facility is run off a GT TDI ticking over...

tomaschonnie

unkel wrote: »

The price here is for the person who can show how long it will take the Veyron to reach the speed of light using the function that generates the data for the time it takes the car to reach 100, 200 and 300km/h.

Exactly! thanks

Midnight_EG

langdang wrote: »

A GT TDI would tear the fabric of spacetime itself and do it 120seconds. It's a little known fact that the CERN facility is run off a GT TDI ticking over...

A VRs does 0-100,000kmh in 4.3 seconds I heard >.>

tomaschonnie

Midnight_EG wrote: »

A VRs does 0-100,000kmh in 4.3 seconds I heard >.>

Enough of the penis-measuring! :rolleyes:

Midnight_EG

tomaschonnie wrote: »

Enough of the penis-measuring! :rolleyes:

You must not own an Octavia

tomaschonnie

LIGHTNING wrote: »

Its a moot point in any case as in order to reach the speed of light the Veyron mass must equal zero.

Lets assume it does.

Midnight_EG

tomaschonnie wrote: »

Lets assume it does.

Well then we don't really have a veyron do we...we then have 'light' :P

langdang

Midnight_EG wrote: »

Well then we don't really have a veyron do we...we then have 'light' :P

whoa whoa, slow down ...

unkel

LIGHTNING wrote: »

Yes a poor choice of words on my behalf, I mean we use the 0-100km/h as our acceleration value if you know what i mean.

You made it clear what you meant!

The sole interesting thing here though is not the 0-100km/h acceleration, but the decrease in acceleration when the speed goes up. The first acceleration up to the first 100km/h takes 2.5s. The second acceleration up to the second 100km/h takes 4.2s. The third acceleration up to the third 100km/h takes nearly 8s. See the pattern? Put it in a simple mathematic model and stick the figures in Excel and it becomes quite clear the answer to the OPs question is: FOR EVER

kona

Making the Assumption that everything is linear, and that the vehicles weight stays the same and there is no drag. I can be worked out but since I suck at writing macros and programming Id be here all day.

Otherwise its a simple UVAST equation.

I worked the Distance needed to be

4.055 x10^12 Km (thats 5,267,909 round trips to the moon )

The time to be:

7515 hours or 313 days

It would probably be more accurate to work out the losses in acceleration between 0-100,200,300.
The car would need a serious Co-eff of friction as well as heat shields haha its all abit silly the more you think of it lol.

mickob16

If I could just find the bloody keys to my Veyron i could answer this once and for all:D

Hotwheels

If ye manage to get it worked out, I need a lift to Andromeda, only 2.5 million light years away...

JerCotter7

For a car to reach that speed it would have to have 0 mass and no drag or rolling resistance. So basically jack it up off the ground. And in that case it will take as long as it takes to rev the car to the limiter. So about 1/2 seconds.

congo_90

n

Absurdum wrote: »

an Octavia can do it in 180 seconds

nah mate, you want a gt tdi red. i once saw one doing it in 78 seconds in reverse!

what would happen if the veyrons foglights were swithched on at the speed of light?

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Let take something as cool as a veyron and make it as uncool as possible....hell what about how many veyrons would fit inside the death star.:rolleyes:

Hermy

Limerick Bandit wrote: »

It was worked out years ago, the answer is 48.

Don't you mean 42?:pac:

Saruman

Hermy wrote: »

Don't you mean 42?:pac:

Pretty sure 42 is correct... yep just checked and it is correct.

The real question is, what unit of measurement is 42? I vote for years and that is being optimistic.

pajo1981

Saruman wrote: »

Pretty sure 42 is correct... yep just checked and it is correct.

The real question is, what unit of measurement is 42? I vote for years and that is being optimistic.

I also came up with 42, but only if a secondary red tdi - which kicks in at the higher speeds - is installed.

edit: rear fogs should be switched on in the case of light space fog.

Also, the fuel tank should only be 3/4 way filled, to minimize fuel evaporation losses.

And using non garage supplied tyres greatly increases the rick of a blow-out.

projectgtr

Saruman wrote: »

Pretty sure 42 is correct... yep just checked and it is correct.

The real question is, what unit of measurement is 42? I vote for years and that is being optimistic.

The answer to EVERYTHING is 42




or +1,0 or -1 as i learned in maths