EVE Search

All Channels

Out of Pod Experience

FTL

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2009.12.22 16:19:00 - [31] Originally by: Awesome Possum Will humans achieve it? Not at the rate we're going. We need to commercialize space exploration.. until we can convince the world there's profit up there, we'll be stuck down here. The Space Shuttle was an attempt to pave the road to commercialization. Unfortunately it remains hideously expensive to put something in orbit. There simply is nothing up there that can't be had more cheaply down here. We need some substantially better (and cheap) power sources to even think about it. Antimatter would do it but then a world where antimatter is available is pretty scary (an antimatter bomb sufficient to destroy a city could fit in your pocket). It is also the most expensive* substance on the planet today so misses the cheap mark by light years as of today. Just assuming some nifty and near free way to generate it is found. Quote: * Antimatter is said to be the most costly substance in existence, with an estimated cost of $25 billion per gram for positrons[17], and $62.5 trillion per gram for antihydrogen. -------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
ReaperOfSly Gallente Heavens Gate Consortium Distant Drums	Posted - 2009.12.22 16:26:00 - [32] If you're really inventive with your FTL drive, you can violate causality like you could with a time machine. In fact, the distinction between an FTL drive and a time machine is fairly trivial - if you have one, you have the other. I would imagine this is why the universe is so dead-set on preventing us from doing it. Some joker could go back in time and edit the universe out of existence. ____________________
Abrazzar	Posted - 2009.12.22 17:02:00 - [33] Originally by: ReaperOfSly Some joker could go back in time and edit the universe out of existence. If someone from our future could go back into our past to change events, it would have already happened. --------
ReaperOfSly Gallente Heavens Gate Consortium Distant Drums	Posted - 2009.12.22 17:07:00 - [34] Edited by: ReaperOfSly on 22/12/2009 17:08:06 Originally by: Abrazzar Originally by: ReaperOfSly Some joker could go back in time and edit the universe out of existence. If someone from our future could go back into our past to change events, it would have already happened. From our point of view, yes. From his, not necessarily. Depends on whether he is willing and able to preserve causality or not. ____________________
Elukka	Posted - 2009.12.22 18:32:00 - [35] Edited by: Elukka on 22/12/2009 18:32:35 Space is already pretty commercialized. You don't need anything fancy to make orbit access cheaper. You just need to build more rockets. They're only expensive because we don't build enough of them and don't get the advantages of an economy of scale. A rocket is a hell of a lot simpler than a 747 and there's no particular reason it couldn't also be a hell of a lot cheaper.
Shady Salesman	Posted - 2009.12.22 18:38:00 - [36] Einstein just said that an object cannot accelerate to the speed of light. Tachyons are already going faster than the speed of light. If tachyons can be proven to exist, then yes, I think FTL is possible. Other than that, who knows what happens if you enter a wormhole? If you end up 45.000.000 light years away, and it only takes a second, isn't that FTL?
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2009.12.22 19:00:00 - [37] Originally by: Shady Salesman Other than that, who knows what happens if you enter a wormhole? If you end up 45.000.000 light years away, and it only takes a second, isn't that FTL? I have seen it argued that yes, this is FTL (with causality issues and others supposed by FTL) but I confess I am not seeing it. In this case you are not accelerating to light speed. You are just taking a short cut so, in fact, you are not going FTL. You have just shortened the distance between two points so have arrived sooner (effectively FTL) compared to a photon that takes the long way around. -------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
Xen Gin Silurian Operations	Posted - 2009.12.22 19:05:00 - [38] I don't think anyone has taken FTL (Faster Than Light) to mean actually moving faster than light in a conventional way, but rather getting somewhere faster than light would have, since around about the mid-80s. ## You got that? Right I'll be back in approximately 300 seconds to retort! ##
goodby4u Valor Inc. Cosmic Anomalies	Posted - 2009.12.22 19:30:00 - [39] Can you go faster then light? No, not in this space. Can you somehow "cheat" to multiply your speed? It is possible, einstein if I remember correctly said it might be possible to "warp space". You also have wormholes, hyperspace and all that other scifi mumbo jumbo that hasn't been disproven as of yet, however at our current development it would be by in large impossible to use any of these.
Lt Forge Pilots From Honour Aeternus.	Posted - 2009.12.22 20:03:00 - [40] If only we hadn't those blasted Dark Ages, or else we would be colonizing space already.
Rainus Max Fusion Enterprises Ltd	Posted - 2009.12.22 20:04:00 - [41] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: Rainus Max Quote: Also, time slows down for the traveller as they approach light speed. At light speed time stops. So, even if you could reach light speed once you did you would never turn off your engines before the universe itself came to an end. Time doesn't slow down for the traveller as time is relative, to him the time in the rest of the universe will speed up (or to an observer of the traveller will slow down in time). A difference without a distinction. Sure the traveler's clock technically keeps ticking but what does that mean? To the traveler the entire universe around them will instantaneously evolve essentially out of existence. A billion years, a trillion, a gazillion years...it's all the same to the traveler. No matter how quickly the traveler tries to turn off his engines there will be no universe left. He is stuck till (if) time itself along with the universe literally cease to exist no matter how long that may take. So, as a practical matter, time has stopped for the traveler. I hate temporal physics its a huge pain, there is a difference though. In the original statement the experience of time changed for the traveller (ie if he looked at his watch and it would take centuries to tick one second), whereas time remains constant for the user regardless of the speed of traveller, how (or even if) the traveller experiences the passage of time is beyond me. Anywho like I say I hate temporal physics. Quote: Quote: From what I remember of my physics its possible to travel at the speed of light, you just need to accelerate instantly in order to get there, which given the laws of physic is extremely difficult (I wont say impossible because its over used and usually wrong) to do without some shortcut (like warping space or hyperspace). Travelling FTL is like any physics constant it can be broken under the right conditions. Conservation of energy is another one that most people think is a constant and can never be broken, but on a quantum physics level it can be broken for an infinitesimally small period of time. No information can be transmitted FTL. Matter = information. So does a signal saying who won the World Cup and so on. That said you can make "things" go FTL without violating anything. For instance shine a bright light on the moon from the earth then pass something (on earth) in front of the light really fast. The shadow on the moon, if done right, could be seen to travel FTL. The shadow is not a tangible thing though and no information is being transmitted FTL so there is no violation. There is quantum entanglement in quantum mechanics which does seem to transmit information at FTL speeds (basically instantaneously). Einstein did not like this and called it "spooky action at a distance". This has been experimentally verified though. However, we cannot exploit this for FTL communication. The universe still conspires to disallow that (more's the pity). IIRC quantum tunneling may also exceed light speed. Not heard the moon shadow thing before. It sorta sounds like the spaceship travelling at the speed of light and lighting a torch, the light of the torch would appear to travel at the speed of the ship + the speed of light, which is wrong (cant remember why but it is). Quantum entanglement doesnt involve the transfer of particles or waves between the two particles that are quantumly entangled so its communication is instant and doesnt suffer from relativistic effects (eve tie in: all interstellar comms are done via quantum entanglement IIRC). Quantum tunnelling is similar the particles dont actually travel at the speed of light they just "move" from a to b. Its all horribly complicated and go against your standard knowledge of the universe around you, its one reason why its buggering hard to understand
Cikulisuy Amarr The Maverick Navy IT Alliance	Posted - 2009.12.22 20:15:00 - [42] its probably possible somehow, if not conventionally. the thing is, 110 years ago. flight was zomgimpossible and now apparently technology is advancing much faster. i have all confidence in human ingenuity, if not always the people that use it~ nub> you cant mine so you kill.
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2009.12.22 20:55:00 - [43] Originally by: Cikulisuy its probably possible somehow, if not conventionally. the thing is, 110 years ago. flight was zomgimpossible and now apparently technology is advancing much faster. i have all confidence in human ingenuity, if not always the people that use it~ The difference then was we all knew flight was possible. Plenty of birds around to prove that. Heck, DaVinci was inventing flying machines in his day. We just had to wait for a power source compact and powerful enough to fly ourselves. Light speed is different. We do not see things moving FTL in the universe. More, we have done experiments which show why light speed is a hard limit and not something to be overcome with more powerful engines. Note this does not necessarily preclude wormholes and such for travel (although they have their own problems). Just that you cannot strap a rocket engine to your ass and ever expect to reach light speed...no matter how big the rocket is. -------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2009.12.22 21:07:00 - [44] Originally by: Rainus Max I hate temporal physics its a huge pain, there is a difference though. In the original statement the experience of time changed for the traveller (ie if he looked at his watch and it would take centuries to tick one second), whereas time remains constant for the user regardless of the speed of traveller, how (or even if) the traveller experiences the passage of time is beyond me. I am not sure there is any meaning left to the traveler's ticking watch. Prior to light speed you can say 1 second for the traveler = 1,000 years for someone left on earth (or whatever). Once the traveler reaches light speed though 1 second = infinity years for someone on earth (not that the earth would even be around anymore). 1 nanosecond = infinity years. 1 hour = infinity years. Take your pick. What does that mean? It is essentially meaningless to talk about his watch at this point and for all practical purposes the traveler has had time stop. Quote: Not heard the moon shadow thing before. It sorta sounds like the spaceship travelling at the speed of light and lighting a torch, the light of the torch would appear to travel at the speed of the ship + the speed of light, which is wrong (cant remember why but it is). Quantum entanglement doesnt involve the transfer of particles or waves between the two particles that are quantumly entangled so its communication is instant and doesnt suffer from relativistic effects (eve tie in: all interstellar comms are done via quantum entanglement IIRC). Quantum tunnelling is similar the particles dont actually travel at the speed of light they just "move" from a to b. Its all horribly complicated and go against your standard knowledge of the universe around you, its one reason why its buggering hard to understand The shadow can move FTL because it is not a tangible "thing" (not a physical object) and no information is being transmitted FTL. There are many such things which could be constructed to make the appearance of FTL movement without violating anything (for instance a spin on superluminal scissors could make the point where the blades meet appear to move FTL). Who knows what info quantum entanglement entails? Somehow two separated particles convey information to each other about their state and changing the state of one instantly changes the state of the other. Somehow they are talking to each other FTL. Unfortunately, as mentioned, we cannot exploit this for FTL communications for ourselves. Quantum Tunneling may be a bit of a fudge to say it is FTL...not sure it belongs here (even if I did bring it up). -------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
Carniflex Fallout Research Fallout Project	Posted - 2009.12.22 21:47:00 - [45] FTL travel in any form that allows you carry over information (ie yourself) at speed that exceeds the speed of light is unlikely at best. You might as well find a way to reverse entropy in closed system (ie perpetum mobile). There is various other fancy ideas floating around but well ... paper can take a lot more than reality. Take it that way - Nature is the tought you are trying to describe in the language of mathematicks. You can twist the words in many ways for one particular tought, but that does not change the tought, even if you talk the black into white. From the other hand if majority of science happens to agree that saying it 'that way' for 'that tought' is the best way it does not mean that some day people do not find a better way to say 'it' that more accurately nails 'the tought' or well the nature.
Rainus Max Fusion Enterprises Ltd	Posted - 2009.12.22 22:22:00 - [46] Quote: I am not sure there is any meaning left to the traveler's ticking watch. Prior to light speed you can say 1 second for the traveler = 1,000 years for someone left on earth (or whatever). Once the traveler reaches light speed though 1 second = infinity years for someone on earth (not that the earth would even be around anymore). 1 nanosecond = infinity years. 1 hour = infinity years. Take your pick. Should probably of put "how (or even if) the traveller experiences the passage of time for the rest of the universe is beyond me" but if both earth person and the traveller are in the same frame of reference (same speed etc) the 1 sec for the traveller will be 1 sec of the earth person. Upon approaching light speed each person in their frame of reference will still measure 1 sec as 1 sec but when you compare the two frames of reference 1 sec can equal anything depending on the velocity of the traveller, you are right though at the speed of light time is infinite. Quote: What does that mean? It is essentially meaningless to talk about his watch at this point and for all practical purposes the traveler has had time stop. According to relativity thats not true, the traveller will continue to experience time at a normal rate Quote: The shadow can move FTL because it is not a tangible "thing" (not a physical object) and no information is being transmitted FTL. There are many such things which could be constructed to make the appearance of FTL movement without violating anything (for instance a spin on superluminal scissors could make the point where the blades meet appear to move FTL). Who knows what info quantum entanglement entails? Somehow two separated particles convey information to each other about their state and changing the state of one instantly changes the state of the other. Somehow they are talking to each other FTL. Unfortunately, as mentioned, we cannot exploit this for FTL communications for ourselves. Quantum Tunneling may be a bit of a fudge to say it is FTL...not sure it belongs here (even if I did bring it up). Wink You say its not a tangible object which is true, but its a lack of light, therefore to move the shadow you need to remove the light which can only move at the speed of light. The superluminal scissors is a good example of real world mechanics not working in a relativistic environment, nice little read there. As for Quantum entanglement and tunnelling, lets just agree to sweep them under the carpet (hopefully they wont tunnel out)
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2009.12.22 22:43:00 - [47] Originally by: Rainus Max You say its not a tangible object which is true, but its a lack of light, therefore to move the shadow you need to remove the light which can only move at the speed of light. Has to do with angles and the distance. As you pass your hand in front of the light at a (relatively) low speed the shadow on the moon moves much faster. You can try this at home with a flashlight. You will not get FTL movement but you can see the shadow you cast moves faster than your hand in front of the light. -------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
Benco97 Gallente Shadow Veil Industrial	Posted - 2009.12.23 01:03:00 - [48] I have actually discovered teleportation, the only drawback is that it's very short ranged. All you have to do is try to move LESS than one planck. ______________________________________________ Originally by: P'uck You're a DUMBASS - bold italic underline at the VERY LEAST.
Carniflex Fallout Research Fallout Project	Posted - 2009.12.23 09:10:00 - [49] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: Rainus Max You say its not a tangible object which is true, but its a lack of light, therefore to move the shadow you need to remove the light which can only move at the speed of light. Has to do with angles and the distance. As you pass your hand in front of the light at a (relatively) low speed the shadow on the moon moves much faster. You can try this at home with a flashlight. You will not get FTL movement but you can see the shadow you cast moves faster than your hand in front of the light. Same cane be done by crossing laser beams so the crossing point will have 'speed' that exceeds light speed. This will not allow you to really carry information at the speeds that exceed lightspeed tho. Something must reach the 'destination' first at the lightspeed or below before you can use those effects to some extent. Or the famous coupling of quantum particles on what in scifi many extravagant communication models are based. As far as moon and shadows go. The photons your hand is blocking vs those that are passing it (ie shadow) will still need to reach the moon. That just happens to happen at lightspeed. So if your target is lets say 2 lightseconds away the shadow do not appear there until 2 seconds after you have put your hand in front of your flaslight.
Karma Vortex Incorporated	Posted - 2009.12.23 12:35:00 - [50] personally I'm more interested in speed of thought.
Wendat Huron Stellar Solutions	Posted - 2009.12.23 12:41:00 - [51] Originally by: Abrazzar Originally by: ReaperOfSly Some joker could go back in time and edit the universe out of existence. If someone from our future could go back into our past to change events, it would have already happened. How do you know this doesn't happen every day? Delenda est achura.
Rolk Anderson	Posted - 2009.12.23 12:46:00 - [52] TBH once we can jaunte the whole FTL point will be moot anyway.
Magnus Nordir Caldari	Posted - 2009.12.23 12:53:00 - [53] Edited by: Magnus Nordir on 23/12/2009 12:54:19 No, FTL is nothing like breaking the sound barrier. People have been braking the sound barrier without even knowing it since the first whip was cracked. Besides, the "sound barrier" is simply an arbitrary velocity relative to the medium, that exceeds the speed of soundwave propagation in that medium. The speed of light in vacuum is a universal constant that's used to define much of the SI unit system. Before even addressing the violations of causality, special relativity, etc that would inevitably occur should someone discover a "TAKE THAT, every physicist since 1850!" law that allows FTL travel, consider this: If you were to travel faster than light, from your point of view, you would arrive before you left. That's because when you travel at c, travelling any distance would seems instantaneous to you, because of the time dilation effect of special relativity. EDIT: Yeah, I didn't notice this thread had a second page. --------------------------- Only those who surrender are lost

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.