Faster than light travel.
- Thread starter oppp7
- Start date
It has been suggested that it would be possible to drive an object along at faster-than-light speeds by contracting the space in front of it and expanding the space behind it (or something). However, this would require negative mass, which we do not have.
The big difference between splitting the atom and travelling faster than light is that splitting the atom is not forbidden by the laws of physics.Lemon Of Life said:
I never really think it would be impossible, but Im pretty sure it would be something crazy like out of an Alastair Reynolds book. Like that ship in Chasm City that was powered by a wormhole into pre-big bang to take fuel from the quark soup, then used that fuel to make wormholes to travel faster through space- which even then, took a LONG TIME to get anywhere
Ya know, I used to believe that bit about having no control over the data sent. It kept the universe sensible. Then a read a host of articles (I'll have to search for them later) showing how that really isn't the case, that we can can control the data. My head popped.kelsyk said:
I believe that the commonly accepted theory is that you can't go faster, but you can make distances shorter. If you accept that, technically yes. Practically, I seriously doubt we will ever travel faster then light, even technically. Make something go faster then light, maybe. But probably not travel. I seem to remember that it would require energy that exceeds the energy in all the stars in the galaxy, or somthing to that effect.
Agreed. Technological ability of the human race over time has shown to increase exponentially. In the past 50 years we've done as much as most of history combined. If we can survive long enough, we will develop ways of FTL travel. Whether by altering space to achieve pseudo-FTL travel or another method.Lemon Of Life said:
ex: IF time travel where possible you could theoretically travel to a different time, travel to your intended destination, and re-enter your original time. This is pseudo-FTL in that you don't really go any distance faster than light, but by warping back immediately after ur departure time u can cover long distances in what seems to any onlookers as a mere instant.
I'm not buying it. One, everyone is a physicist on the net. I'm not trying to denigrate you, just pointing out that from where I sit, how do I really know you are? Two, impossible means you've found that Einstein is the be all end all. What happens when we understand the Higgs field, and then begin to manipulate it? Yeah, I might be waaay off on that point, but the real point is this: At any moment we could make a discovery that throws Einstein 'out the window', as in, his science and math are still right on but for practical purposes we have a new science and math that throw Einstein into a whole new light. Three, photons have mass? What? Source or it didn't happen. Ok, that sounded terrible. Can you link me an article explaining the mass of photons?A13X T3h NubCak3 said:
All the above theories of bending space is the most likely way to travel "faster" than light. Meaning you get there before light does. The real problem with all these theories is we have no idea what would happen if it became possible. The energy needed to accomplish a feat like that would be huge. Unleashing such a force has a chance of ruining where you left or where you are going making it impractical.
I believe that it will someday be possible to travel as fast as light practically. But not faster.
I believe that it will someday be possible to travel as fast as light practically. But not faster.
It is attainable, theoretically, through warp drive. The concept of warp drive is actually quite simple. There is an absolute standard for how fast something is moving and that standard is how fast an object is moving relative to the space around it. (Note: Relativity results from the fact that you can never tell how fast you're moving as you would have to do that from your own perspective.) However, space itself can move and the speed at which it can move has no limit. Imagine swimming though a river. If the water is static you must move against it and hence you can't swim that fast. However, you are moving with the current you can very fast (imagine how fast you'd be moving if you're about to fall over a waterfall!). Note that any object you want to reach in the current would be moving along with the current so you might as well be in static water. However, if you start at one point along the shoreline and want to reach another point along the shoreline this example works great to illustrate the concept of warp drive.
They've been able to reverse the spin on electrons faster than it would take for an EM wave (light wave) to travel between the two particles. As with all cool stuff in physics, they have no idea why/how.
Yes, I believe it's possible, but not with our knowledge of physics at the moment.
Yes, I believe it's possible, but not with our knowledge of physics at the moment.
Actually, this was verified. I can't quote any sources, unfortunately, it was a long time ago, but scientists placed two perfectly synched clocks, one on the ground and one on the fastest supersonic jet then available. They had the jet fly around as fast as it was able (still a ridiculously small fraction of the speed of light) and when they looked at it again, the jet clock was a tiny fraction of a second behind the control clock.Datalord said:
Like I said, it was a long time ago, so I may have fudged some of the details. Anyone recognize this experiment?
They've done this experiment, without even approaching the speed of light.Datalord said:
NASA has taken two clocks, set them to the same time. Kept one on the ground, sent one into earth-orbit on a. Had the one in orbit make several 'high' speed orbits, and then brought it back down. Sure enough it was behind the one on the ground. It even happens in tall clock towers...given it takes decades to have a very small difference, nonetheless it still occurs.