|
If, from the passengers point of view, the trip took one week then the train couldn't have travelled at c. If travelling at the speed of light the trip would seem instantaneous for the passengers, so if a week passed then the speed must have been a bit lower than c, but that's probably just a journalistic error.
Regarding the fuel then it would be tempting to say that since time itself pass more slowly on the train then the fuel is also consumed at a slower rate so only one weeks worth should be necessary.
But in the extreme case of the train actually travelling at c, and the trip therefore being instantaneous for the passengers, the fuel consumption would thus have to be zero. That would be a bit of a paradox, so I'd say the fuel consumption is always the same in both frames of reference. Therefore I vote for loading the train with 100 years worth of fuel.
Interesting question by the way.
|