I have been quite busy, but yea, I was recently reminded of this awesome forum in physics today. I was talking to my teacher, and we got on the subject of dark energy, and how it causes the world to expand, and we got on the idea that that could be a source of antimass. Now, if that were the case, I was thinking, since reletivity makes it so that the more mass you have, the more impossible it is to get to the speed of light, the more amounts of energy you would need.
In a graph of energy vs speed per given mass, it seems as though the energy needed per unit mass to get to a specific speed increases exponentially, reaching an asymptote at the speed of light.
So I came to think, since there should be an antimass for any given mass, the rules should be reversed, since it is the opposite of mass...
given the same kind of rules, it seems to me that antimass should reach a similar asymptote, but on the other side, so the mass would get exponentially either larger or smaller (I wouldnt know how to tell, because it could be convergent or divergent), but either way it comes to the conclusion that antimass would always have to be going at a greater speed than light to be maintained.
so someone (iirc its probably gonna be Eras or Engineer) please tell me if that made any sense