No. At least, all available evidence seems to indicate that it is not possible to transfer matter, energy, or information faster than the speed of light.
The speed of light is not limited in a vacuum - the speed of light is fastest in a vacuum. But that is what Einstein called the "Cosmic Speed Limit" - nothing can move faster than the speed of light in a vacuum, or even quite asfast.
no
The index of refraction, defined as the ratio of the speed of light in a vacuum to the speed of light in a medium, cannot be less than 1 because light travels fastest in a vacuum. If the index were less than 1, it would imply that light travels faster in the medium than in a vacuum, which contradicts the fundamental principles of physics. Additionally, this would violate causality, as it would suggest that information could be transmitted faster than the speed of light.
About 2/3 its speed in a vacuum.
The speed of light is 186,000 miles per second in a vacuum.
No.
According to the theory of relativity, it is not possible for anything with mass to travel faster than the speed of light in a vacuum.
According to current scientific understanding, nothing can travel faster than the speed of light in a vacuum.
According to current scientific understanding, nothing can travel faster than the speed of light in a vacuum.
According to the theory of relativity, nothing with mass can travel faster than the speed of light in a vacuum.
According to the theory of relativity, nothing with mass can travel faster than the speed of light in a vacuum.
According to the theory of relativity, nothing can move faster than the speed of light in a vacuum.
According to the theory of relativity, nothing can travel faster than the speed of light in a vacuum.
The speed of light is not limited in a vacuum - the speed of light is fastest in a vacuum. But that is what Einstein called the "Cosmic Speed Limit" - nothing can move faster than the speed of light in a vacuum, or even quite asfast.
* The speed of light in a vacuum, * The speed of sound,
No, it shouldn't. And it isn't.
no