| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Riski
   |
Posted - 2009.12.22 06:47:00 -
[1]
So what you guys think is it possible to travel faster then light ?That we will be able someday to travel throu space , explore other solar systems and galaxies ?
|
Intense Thinker
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 06:49:00 -
[2]
It is impossible for anything with any mass to even reach the speed of light, let alone pass it
 Originally by: a51 duke1406
The girls just dont understand that sunday is pvp night, not cuddle on the couch watching tv night.
|
Riski
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 06:58:00 -
[3]
I bet that 200 years ago peoples thought the same thing about speed of sound and yet here we are today.
|
Oventoasted
Fleetworks
Primary.
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 07:01:00 -
[4]
yea, I think there is a way around this little theory. Just need some smart guy/gal with a clue on what that is to come around. 
|
Zeredek
Gallente
Red Federation
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 07:01:00 -
[5]
Yes
_________________
rawr |
karma militia
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 07:10:00 -
[6]
well you don't have to travel faster than light if you teleport.
Originally by: Corwain
The human race is going extinct soon and you all ****ing deserve it.
|
Lance Fighter
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 07:15:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Intense Thinker
It is impossible for anything with any mass to even reach the speed of light, let alone pass it
there are certain mathmatical functions that cannot touch certain asymptotes, yet manage to pass them.
OHGODS BELOW THIS LINE IS MY SIG !!!! SRSLY!
Blane Xero > Lance is at -0.9 sec status with a 1 million bounty. Lance is also amarrian. Thats 3 evil points |
Wendat Huron
Stellar Solutions
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 07:23:00 -
[8]
FTL is FTL. Try not to go faster, go around and through you must.
Delenda est achura. |
Marko Riva
Adamant Inc
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 07:43:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Marko Riva on 22/12/2009 07:43:58
/Grabs a pin-up poster from a wall
owner objects
/folds it in half, makes a hole in it
/grabs a pen and pushes it through the hole
owner cringes
-----------
I think, therefore I'm single.
New projectile damage PDF
Alliance creation service |
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 08:10:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 22/12/2009 08:14:51
You cannot go faster than the speed of light (or go at the speed of light). Period. It's the law man!
There is no way around this. A few things happen when you reach the speed of light (if you could) which flat out prevent it.
Notably as you approach light speed your mass increases. If you reached light speed your mass would be infinite. All the energy in the universe cannot accelerate an infinite mass.
Also, time slows down for the traveler 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.
That said you can get arbitrarily close to light speed and for the traveler, since time slows down, the trip may not take long to them at all. To us waiting on earth it would take thousands (or whatever) years but to the traveler might just be a few minutes or days. Consider the Oh My God Particle:
Quote:
v = 0.9999999999999999999999951 c
So taking 3+10^8 metres per second as the speed of light, we find that the particle was traveling 2.9999999999999999999999853+10^8 metres per second, thus 1.467+10^−15 metres per second slower than lightùone and a half femtometres per second slower than light. If God's radar gun is slightly out of calibration, this puppy's gonna be doin' hard time for speeding. After traveling one light year, the particle would be only 0.15 femtosecondsù46 nanometresùbehind a photon that left at the same time.
Object Distance (light years) Perceived Travel time
Alpha Centauri 4.36 0.43 milliseconds
Galactic nucleus 32,000 3.2 seconds
Andromeda galaxy 2,180,000 3.5 minutes
Virgo cluster 42,000,000 1.15 hours
Quasar 3C273 2,500,000,000 3 days
Edge of universe 17,000,000,000 19 days
Thus, if you could accelerate yourself to the speed at which the Oh My God particle was traveling, you'd be able to travel to the edge of the visible universe in a couple of weeks. Unfortunately, even assuming you found a source for the energy it would take and invented a means to accelerate yourself and Intergalactic Vessel Omega Point to this velocity, you wouldn't get far before being disrupted into subatomic goo due to interactions with photons in the ubiquitous cosmic microwave background radiation.
So, pretty messed up for us when it comes to stellar travel. Possible ways around this (if they exist at all) would be Warp Drive (ala Star Trek) which does not require FTL in your local reference frame, Hyperspace or similar travel through a different dimension where distances are much shorter or Wormholes which provide a shortcut point-to-point.
All science fiction so far but one can hope.
--------------------------------------------------
"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!"
|
|
|
Marko Riva
Adamant Inc
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 08:49:00 -
[11]
Theories are FACTS! You know how we got ahead with all the physhics and astronomy? BY KEEPING TO THE STUFF WE KNOW and keep lecturing that. The world is flat etc etc.
-----------
I think, therefore I'm single.
New projectile damage PDF
Alliance creation service |
Jack Airron
Gallente
Setenta Corp
F A I L
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 09:03:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Marko Riva
Edited by: Marko Riva on 22/12/2009 07:43:58
/Grabs a pin-up poster from a wall
owner objects
/folds it in half, makes a hole in it
/grabs a pen and pushes it through the hole
owner cringes
Event horizon ftw
|
Rainus Max
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 09:22:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Rainus Max on 22/12/2009 09:22:59
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).
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.
|
Tallaran Kouros
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 10:13:00 -
[14]
I don't think it's possible to travel faster than light, but it's not outside the realms of possibility that we may find other ways to travel vast distances; maybe warping space, artificial wormholes etc etc
I wish I could believe that I will see some of the above in my own lifetime, but I really doubt it.
|
Canis Aurum
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 10:15:00 -
[15]
I won't try to say anything really complicated, because even if you know it or not, you still come off like a jerk ass.
I think tommy lee Jones put it best:
"Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow."
Also, the law's of physics are not something that you hold as sacrosanct and fear the change off. They are there as a mathematical means of prediction. They are not meant to trap or enclose our ability to understand. I have a paper I co-authored coming out soon here, I'd post it if anyone was interested, but the finding's would have been impossible if we strictly stuck to what people previously had laid down. That is the nature of progression though, should something prove inadequate, it must either be improved upon, or discarded so a working example can take its place.
|
Rolk Anderson
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 10:56:00 -
[16]
Can't say I know much more than extremely basic mechanics but following the simple F=MA formular would it not be impossible to decelerate from light speed even if you acelerated instantly?
|
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 11:22:00 -
[17]
Macroscopic tunneling maybe? Getting from one point in space instantly to another one and skipping the space between. Guess the issue would be to have all sent out particles assemble again at the destination the way it was sent of and not as a incoherent cloud of subatomic particles. 
--------
|
Alexeph Stoekai
Stoekai Corp
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 11:25:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Riski
I bet that 200 years ago peoples thought the same thing about speed of sound and yet here we are today.
The thing is that our entire modern model of the laws of physics is based on the speed of light being constant and insurmountable (because Einstein pointed out that Time was a lousy universal constant). That said, I'm quite sure there are ways around it.
Unless someone manages to disprove c as a universal constant, there will be no acceleration up to and past the speed of light. However, I hope that we will eventually find a shortcut method to overtake light.
-----
|
Rainus Max
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 11:33:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Rainus Max on 22/12/2009 11:33:52
You cant use F=MA whilst travelling near the speed of light, pretty much every value in that formula goes out the window. As you approach light speed mass and time tend towards infinity and length tends towards 0.
Its all so fun.
|
Intense Thinker
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 11:55:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Rainus Max
F(How hard you push it)=M(It)A(the distance it goes)
Is that it or did I totally botch it? 
Originally by: a51 duke1406
The girls just dont understand that sunday is pvp night, not cuddle on the couch watching tv night.
|
|
|
Rolk Anderson
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 12:07:00 -
[21]
Thats what I was thinking mass = inf so to decelerate you would need inf*A force resulting in minus inf force
|
Toshiro GreyHawk
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 12:38:00 -
[22]
Speed Of Light.
Orbiting vs. Kiting
Faction Schools |
rotweiler
Gallente
Sarz'na Khumatari
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 12:39:00 -
[23]
Fart is FTL easily
They say Thought is faster than light or at least similar
But when a Fart is coming, I think to withhold it yet it is expelled before I even finish my thought
Yup future is smelly
|
Glassback
Body Count Inc.
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 12:47:00 -
[24]
I just want a holodeck..
|
Rainus Max
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 12:55:00 -
[25]
Quote:
Is that it or did I totally botch it?
Thats right but at the speed of light it doesnt work
Wiki probably explains it better than I can, its been years since I covered this lot.
to quote wiki again "To accelerate an object of non-zero rest mass to c would require infinite time with any finite acceleration, or infinite acceleration for a finite amount of time."
|
Rolk Anderson
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 13:12:00 -
[26]
Quote:
F(How hard you push it)=M(It)A(the distance it goes)
F= Force
M= mass
A= Acceleration
|
Elukka
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 14:21:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Elukka on 22/12/2009 14:23:39
Edited by: Elukka on 22/12/2009 14:22:21
Originally by: Riski
I bet that 200 years ago peoples thought the same thing about speed of sound and yet here we are today.
That is a fallacy, and wrong. I don't really know what "people" thought, but from what I know of our knowledge of physics back then, there was no theory that stated one could not travel faster than sound.
Regardless, just because traveling faster than sound is possible, it doesn't imply that traveling faster than light is also possible. They are completely separate things and have nothing to do with each other.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 14:33:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Intense Thinker
It is impossible for anything with any mass to even reach the speed of light, let alone pass it
Actually, as I recall it, there's nothing in the maths to stop you going faster than light, only from going as fast as light. Oddly enough, once you exceed lightspeed, your "kinetic" energy actually decreases in symmetry with the increase from 0->c. The lowest energy tachyons are the fastest.
|
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 15:52:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 22/12/2009 15:57:28
Originally by: Rainus Max
Edited by: Rainus Max on 22/12/2009 09:22:59
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.
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.
--------------------------------------------------
"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!"
|
Awesome Possum
Imperium Signal Corps
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 15:58:00 -
[30]
Is it possible? There's probably a way around it.
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.
♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
|
|
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] |