Any science freak out there can answer that?

[loonygloss]

Quantum physics only applies in incredibly small scales of around 50 microns (Very small, can't remember the exact thing) and even then the object discussed would have to be near the absolute Zero in temperature (aka 0-1 Calvin degrees).
[right][snapback]70787[/snapback][/right]

No. 50 microns is not small. Nor is it small emough for quantum effects to occur. Near absolute zero temperatures are also not required. Perhaps what you are thinking about is the superfluidity of helium at those temperatures, which is a quantum effect.

Quantum physics say that if an object doesn't leave a sign in his path (aka touched something etc') it can be in two places at once and that's why the small scale and low temperature, the smaller it gets the less chances of said object to interact with any other atom in the air and thus leave no sign.
[right][snapback]70787[/snapback][/right]

I think what you're talking about here is Quantum entanglement, which Einstein called "spooky effect at a distance". This is where it is possible to have two particles (unobserved) which are linked such that when the wavefunction of one is collapsed by being observed (touched) the state is equivalent to the other particle. There is a lot more to quantum mechanics that this. Such as the Bohr model of the atom, and the photoelectric effect.

As for the vessel converted into light, I'm very skeptical about that, Einstein's Theory of Relativity still applies and in order to create energy from mass I believe you'll need to travel at the square value of the speed of light (E=MC^2) and Occhi's explaination as to what would happen are far more likely, although you can say if it was in a vacuum or some material was found that could stand such high temperatures then such a thing won't happen and at least this obstacle is removed.
[right][snapback]70787[/snapback][/right]

All you need to do to convert mass into light is to annihilate it with antimatter, or any nuclear reaction converts mass to energy. Neither of these require travelling any higher than the speed of light. As for a material the would survive the energy levels here, it's rather fanciful. Atoms and even nuclei should break down under the vast quantities of energy required to accelerate matter to this speed. Even should the materials not hit anything(unlikely, as space is not a true vacuum), the mass increase would gravitationally crush the material under its own mass.

But yeah, Cerenkov radiation is the only real example of this sort of thing, and it does behave rather sonic boomish-ly.