Topic: Is faster than light travel possible?
Anonymous A started this discussion 15 years ago #5,929
Not talking about just moving things, or people, but information too.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 20 seconds later[^] [v] #102,867
Possibly.
Flapjack !!vHCjY3yik joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 24 seconds later, 44 seconds after the original post[^] [v] #102,869
One day.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,871
According to relativity it's impossible since the faster one goes the more mass they have and at light speed they have infinite mass and so would need infinite energy to move past light speed... therefore there is not enough energy in the entire universe to power even one atom past light speed.
Quantum physics is looking promising to find ways around that though.
Quantum physics is looking promising to find ways around that though.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 48 seconds later, 3 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,873
@102,869 (Flapjack !!vHCjY3yik)
This isn't a normal barrier...
The sound barrier was thought to be too difficult to accomplish, but we knew of things that could move at the speed of sound, it was just that we didn't have the technology until later.
With the Speed of light, it's possible that no matter how technologically advanced we are, the laws of physics will stop us.
If you had a giant rocket that put out a shit ton of energy, it would approach the speed of light and then just start getting heavier. So it's not energy alone, nor something that could withstand the forces of the speed of light that is stopping us.
This isn't a normal barrier...
The sound barrier was thought to be too difficult to accomplish, but we knew of things that could move at the speed of sound, it was just that we didn't have the technology until later.
With the Speed of light, it's possible that no matter how technologically advanced we are, the laws of physics will stop us.
If you had a giant rocket that put out a shit ton of energy, it would approach the speed of light and then just start getting heavier. So it's not energy alone, nor something that could withstand the forces of the speed of light that is stopping us.
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,876
@previous (A)
There have been some interesting experiments which suggest information could be transferred faster than the speed of light. I think one such study was done by ibm a few years back.
There have been some interesting experiments which suggest information could be transferred faster than the speed of light. I think one such study was done by ibm a few years back.
Flapjack !!vHCjY3yik replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 8 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,882
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 15 seconds later, 8 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,883
@102,876 (B)
How would it be done? Doesn't need to be totally be feasible even, since this is theoretical. Unlimited funding and whatnot.
Since all information is transfered (atm, and historically) through matter...
How would it be done? Doesn't need to be totally be feasible even, since this is theoretical. Unlimited funding and whatnot.
Since all information is transfered (atm, and historically) through matter...
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 12 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,894
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 16 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,903
Anonymous B double-posted this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 19 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,907
@102,883 (A)
http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-04/quantum-teleportation-breakthrough-could-lead-instantanous-computing
http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-04/quantum-teleportation-breakthrough-could-lead-instantanous-computing
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 33 seconds later, 19 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,908
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 38 seconds later, 20 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,910
@previous (D)
...it's not exceeding c because it is defined as c
check out the refractive index...
...it's not exceeding c because it is defined as c
check out the refractive index...
(Edited 13 seconds later.)
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 22 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,914
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 24 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,916
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 30 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,922
@previous (B)> That wasn't what you were talking about
What the fuck are you talking about yes it was
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 31 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,924
@previous (D)
> If you reduce vacuum energy I believe that light has been shown to exceed c.
... ... ...
and for the record, it's vacuum pressure, not energy. at least get the terms straight.
> If you reduce vacuum energy I believe that light has been shown to exceed c.
... ... ...
and for the record, it's vacuum pressure, not energy. at least get the terms straight.
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 32 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,928
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 54 seconds later, 33 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,930
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 36 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,931
@previous (B)
Yes of course I know what black body radiation is. What does that have to do with the Scharnhorst effect or vacuum energy?
In fact, you know what, fuck off and drown. I'm not talking to you nay more.
Yes of course I know what black body radiation is. What does that have to do with the Scharnhorst effect or vacuum energy?
In fact, you know what, fuck off and drown. I'm not talking to you nay more.
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 37 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,936
@previous (D)
Looking up random terms on wikipedia doesn't make you seem intelligent. Go back and finish your elementary school physics homework, son.
Looking up random terms on wikipedia doesn't make you seem intelligent. Go back and finish your elementary school physics homework, son.
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 43 seconds later, 38 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,938
@previous (B)
It's funny because you implied I didn't know what black bodies were when that's not even relevant.
It's funny because you implied I didn't know what black bodies were when that's not even relevant.
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 40 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,942
@previous (D)
It's funny because if you actually understood what it was, you'd see ho it disproves your point... and you bring up the Scharnhorst effect to try and bail you out of not understanding basic refraction LOL
It's funny because if you actually understood what it was, you'd see ho it disproves your point... and you bring up the Scharnhorst effect to try and bail you out of not understanding basic refraction LOL
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 48 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #102,957
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 14 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #102,988
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #103,003
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 39 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #103,005
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 42 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #103,007
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 43 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #103,010
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 20 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #103,012
@previous (B)> That wasn't what you were talking about. Don't change the subject.
What the fuck are you talking about yes it was
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 40 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #103,013
@previous (D)
> If you reduce vacuum energy I believe that light has been shown to exceed c.
... ... ...
and for the record, it's vacuum pressure, not energy. at least get the terms straight.
> If you reduce vacuum energy I believe that light has been shown to exceed c.
... ... ...
and for the record, it's vacuum pressure, not energy. at least get the terms straight.
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #103,023
Nexus !jNexusRe/. joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #103,034
Faster than light? Its impossible. see: @102,871 (D)
Now an Einstein-Rosen Bridge or an Morris-Thorne wormhole, thats theoretically possible, just very impractical.
Now an Einstein-Rosen Bridge or an Morris-Thorne wormhole, thats theoretically possible, just very impractical.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 41 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #103,052
It is impossible for an object to travel faster than the speed of light because of relativity. We all get that. But there are some theories that would allow us to travel as if we were traveling faster than light.
One is wormholes. Some scientists believe we might be able to travel large distances instantaneously through wormholes, but some believe that even if it's possible you would also travel through time as if it were speed light travel. In other words, if you were to enter one wormhole and exit another 500 light years away, it would seem instantaneous to you but 500 years will have passed when you exit the other wormhole.
Then there's also warp technology. The idea is that you warp bubble in front of a space ship that warps the space in front of it so that the distance traveled is shortened. The ship would be moving at a speed much slower than the speed of light, but the warp effect might allow us to travel distances in a time frame that would require faster than light travel without the warp effect. The problem with this is that the warp bubble has to be causally disconnected from the ship. You might be able to solve this problem by building a warp tunnel, but then to travel 1 light year, you'd need to build a warp tunnel 1 light year long. This tech still might only allow us to approach the speed of light easier, and not break it.
One is wormholes. Some scientists believe we might be able to travel large distances instantaneously through wormholes, but some believe that even if it's possible you would also travel through time as if it were speed light travel. In other words, if you were to enter one wormhole and exit another 500 light years away, it would seem instantaneous to you but 500 years will have passed when you exit the other wormhole.
Then there's also warp technology. The idea is that you warp bubble in front of a space ship that warps the space in front of it so that the distance traveled is shortened. The ship would be moving at a speed much slower than the speed of light, but the warp effect might allow us to travel distances in a time frame that would require faster than light travel without the warp effect. The problem with this is that the warp bubble has to be causally disconnected from the ship. You might be able to solve this problem by building a warp tunnel, but then to travel 1 light year, you'd need to build a warp tunnel 1 light year long. This tech still might only allow us to approach the speed of light easier, and not break it.
Smegma !J5VkSmegmA joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 7 hours later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #103,339
In Star Trek, a ship's engine creates a stable bubble of normal space around the ship while simultaneously warping space around it.
That's the only FTL system I can think of that's [loosely] based in science.
A ship from the Stargate series slips through normal space into hyperspace, where rules apparently don't apply.
I believe that's the same concept that Star Wars played off of.
Battlestar Galactica's jump propulsion technology was never really explored in any great detail. I would assume that it is somewhat similar to Star War's and Star Gate's.
Welp... I put more into that post than I intended, and only 1/3 of it is at all related to the thread.
That's the only FTL system I can think of that's [loosely] based in science.
A ship from the Stargate series slips through normal space into hyperspace, where rules apparently don't apply.
I believe that's the same concept that Star Wars played off of.
Battlestar Galactica's jump propulsion technology was never really explored in any great detail. I would assume that it is somewhat similar to Star War's and Star Gate's.
Welp... I put more into that post than I intended, and only 1/3 of it is at all related to the thread.
Smegma !J5VkSmegmA double-posted this 15 years ago, 41 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #103,340
<-- Warp propulsionNumbSkull joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 14 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #103,917
@OP
> Not talking about just moving things, or people, but information too.
Three known methods:
1. Alcubierre Drive
2. Krasnikov Tube
3. Traversable Wormhole
All require a enormous quantities of a substance barely allow to exist by quantum physics -- exotic matter.
source: The Physics of Stargates
> Not talking about just moving things, or people, but information too.
Three known methods:
1. Alcubierre Drive
2. Krasnikov Tube
3. Traversable Wormhole
All require a enormous quantities of a substance barely allow to exist by quantum physics -- exotic matter.
source: The Physics of Stargates