Warp Drive
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Estonia
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FTL
Basically, I do not feel you need FTL for interplanetary travel. Interstellar is another matter.
Warp drive would, however, be interesting as a kind of reactionless drive.
Stopping at 0,99c is essentially the reverse of accelerating - if you can accelerate, you have the way, in principle, to stop.
If you have FTL, you get into problems with speed relative to ether...
What would you do as aerospace engineer with a reactionless drive?
Warp drive would, however, be interesting as a kind of reactionless drive.
Stopping at 0,99c is essentially the reverse of accelerating - if you can accelerate, you have the way, in principle, to stop.
If you have FTL, you get into problems with speed relative to ether...
What would you do as aerospace engineer with a reactionless drive?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 42
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I have a theory that'll blow all your minds!
I believe that the speed of Dark is faster than the speed of light!
Why you may ask?
Well quite simply no matter how fast light travels there's always darkness ahead of it isn't there??
On a serious note though, I'm no Engineer but I do find this all deeply fascinating.
I believe that the speed of Dark is faster than the speed of light!
Why you may ask?
Well quite simply no matter how fast light travels there's always darkness ahead of it isn't there??
On a serious note though, I'm no Engineer but I do find this all deeply fascinating.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: north
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
chornedsnorkack
and at 0.99c, you're racing forward in time as well.
It's hard enough to undertstand when it's explained over and over again so how did Einstein imagine it in the first place?
Awesome.
and at 0.99c, you're racing forward in time as well.
It's hard enough to undertstand when it's explained over and over again so how did Einstein imagine it in the first place?
Awesome.
Join Date: Feb 1998
Location: Formerly of Nam
Posts: 1,595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I canna change the laws of physics captain!" - Scottie
PhilM your refering to a hyperspace 'wormhole', an offshoot theory from Black Hole studies. Warp theory is the compression of space ahead of the spacecraft and expansion of space behind it, maintaining a speed less than C relative to the local space in which the craft is moving, but measured greater than C by an observer outside it. Both Wormhole and Warp math is there and both workable but we are trapped engineeringly in the 21st century just as Galileo was trapped in the 15th with his aviation designs and didnt have a Lycoming.
Even if Warp Speed in real time could be achieved the next major engineering difficulty would be old man Newton's Law of Inertia - accelerating to 1/2C (relative to local space) in seconds would crush the occupants to a pulp as well as the craft structure. I think the Star Trek writers dreamed up on-board "inertial dampers" to conveniantly exclude Newt and his annoying physics.
As for Mars in 3 hours Id have to see the numbers first.
Even if Warp Speed in real time could be achieved the next major engineering difficulty would be old man Newton's Law of Inertia - accelerating to 1/2C (relative to local space) in seconds would crush the occupants to a pulp as well as the craft structure. I think the Star Trek writers dreamed up on-board "inertial dampers" to conveniantly exclude Newt and his annoying physics.
As for Mars in 3 hours Id have to see the numbers first.
Last edited by Slasher; 12th Mar 2006 at 09:42.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by L Peacock
chornedsnorkack
and at 0.99c, you're racing forward in time as well.
It's hard enough to undertstand when it's explained over and over again so how did Einstein imagine it in the first place?
Awesome.
and at 0.99c, you're racing forward in time as well.
It's hard enough to undertstand when it's explained over and over again so how did Einstein imagine it in the first place?
Awesome.
And, regarding the hypothesis of "warping" the universe to place an intended destination physically more close to you, thereby decreasing the "distance" to that point ... Here is my 2 cents ...
I'm sure many, if not most, of you know, reaching the speed of light is nigh-on to being impossible if I understand physics correctly. As I understand Dr."E's" equation, as you accelerate something toward the speed of light, the mass of that something grows exponentially, toward infinity. This would necessitate a growth in the force necessary to act on that growing mass to continue the acceleration, and would require a growing energy function; likely at a rate greater than the increasing mass. Certainly there is little doubt that an infinitely powerful force would be needed to move an infintely large mass, let alone accelerate it to light speed -- so it is likely that one would need a force greater than an infinitely large one to achieve the necessary force to do this. Sorry folks. This is where I get off. I don't know how to multiply an infinite number -- what could the anser be? What is 6 times infinity? Infinity? Wait! I just multiplied that number by 6, what happened? And so the argument goes.
All of this is to say that I would think it would be a lot easier to generate enough "umph" (energy) to travel at close to the speed of light (let alone exceed it) than it would be generate the force, let alone the control, that would be necessary to "bend the known universe" (with all of its mass and space and distance) in such a way as to bring two distinct points in that universe (which as you also know are also moving away from each other at a pretty good clip themselves) into close proximity to one another so as to allow sub-light speeds to be sufficient to get from one to the other in anything that approaches a "reasonable" length of time (no pun intended).
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You folks might find this interesting. The paper comes from a mainstream source part funded by the ESA..
http://www.arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0603/0603033.pdf
The interesting bit...
If confirmed, a gravitomagnetic field of measurable magnitude was produced for the first time in a laboratory environment.
http://www.arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0603/0603033.pdf
The interesting bit...
If confirmed, a gravitomagnetic field of measurable magnitude was produced for the first time in a laboratory environment.
Join Date: Feb 1998
Location: Formerly of Nam
Posts: 1,595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Warp 1 Mr Sulu
AirRabbit, its only if you try to accelerate to C locally, ie relative to the local space around you. Imagine you standing still on a travellater (your local space) which is moving at 10km/hr. Relatively your speed is zero. Walk along it at 7km/hr and your speed relative to an outside observer is 17km/hr.
If you travel at say .9C relative to the local space your in (which is what Bert E meant) whilst simultaneusly compressing the space ahead and expanding it behind, it "appears" (in terms of spacetime) to be faster than C from an outside observer.
Indeed Nature has proved that quasars at the remote outer edge of the observable Universe actualy move faster than light relative to us. Relative to its own space, a quasar moves sublight, just as Earth relative to its own is moving sublight. But relative to each other it is C+ because the space between the bodys is continually expanding and the rate of space expansion increases the nearer to the edge of the Universe. For the tech-minded some outer quasars have been measured as infinitely red-shifted.
If you travel at say .9C relative to the local space your in (which is what Bert E meant) whilst simultaneusly compressing the space ahead and expanding it behind, it "appears" (in terms of spacetime) to be faster than C from an outside observer.
Indeed Nature has proved that quasars at the remote outer edge of the observable Universe actualy move faster than light relative to us. Relative to its own space, a quasar moves sublight, just as Earth relative to its own is moving sublight. But relative to each other it is C+ because the space between the bodys is continually expanding and the rate of space expansion increases the nearer to the edge of the Universe. For the tech-minded some outer quasars have been measured as infinitely red-shifted.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Over the horizon
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, something is up
WRT. the speed of light, researchers have found, that subatomics particles, in certain pairs, even when seperated by considerable distances, can each instantly know, what the other is doing. In 1997 physicist sent photons seven miles in opposite directions and demonstrated that interferring with one provoked an instantenous repsonse in the other.
Secondly, in the world of atoms, scientist are starting to get away from the theory of electrons spinning around the atom, but instead it appears and disappears only to show up at another location without actually passing through the space in between. IOW being everywhere and nowhere at once.
It appears that on the subatomic level, the laws of physics, well at least as we understand them, does not apply.
WRT. the speed of light, researchers have found, that subatomics particles, in certain pairs, even when seperated by considerable distances, can each instantly know, what the other is doing. In 1997 physicist sent photons seven miles in opposite directions and demonstrated that interferring with one provoked an instantenous repsonse in the other.
Secondly, in the world of atoms, scientist are starting to get away from the theory of electrons spinning around the atom, but instead it appears and disappears only to show up at another location without actually passing through the space in between. IOW being everywhere and nowhere at once.
It appears that on the subatomic level, the laws of physics, well at least as we understand them, does not apply.
