Yeah, but wouldn't this cause at least a localized distortion of the space-time continuum?
Posted on 01/06/2006 10:07:57 AM PST by epluribus_2
You're = your. I'm so stupid.
Because the mass of an object increases the faster it goes. This is not a big issue for the slow speeds that we travel at, even the space shuttle is slow. But as you go faster, your mass gets bigger, so you need more thurst to push you faster, but more thrust equals more fuel which equals more mass. So you just can't win. Supposedly, if you *could* reach the speed of light, your mass would be infinite and thus you would need infinite energy to push you.
IMHO there are several different ways to travel FTL, some are faster than others.
Folding space or using a "gravitationally stable" Einstien Rosen bridge is plausible from going to point A to point B using a worm hole through the fabric of quantum space, which inherently is faster than light travel...though you're not really traveling faster than light speed. But, again it's all theoretical.
However the Germans are taking the viewpoint there could be as many as 11 dimensions in Space Time (or more depending on your take on String Theory and or Loop Quantum Gravity), as opposed to the 4D (four dimensions of space time we experience 3 linear, 1 time) it's in these extra dimensions of space where light (or photons)presumbaly travel Faster than they do in 4D...accessing these dimensions of space has always been problematic because of the energy necessary to render space time. (think of using an electron microscope to proble the sub microscopic world but now using the power of a galaxy to probe the ultramicroscopic world)
No one knows because the lab equipment necessary to make a controlled observation just inst powerful enough...ha there is no known supercollider with the power of a galaxy. That is where astronomical observation comes into play...there are forces in the universe which are speculated to contain such energy...such as black holes...but again that is problematic...because it is only speculated by theoritcal physicists as to what powers those. Many believe, like Dark Matter, Exotic Matter Exists...which is the energy reaction which drives a Black Hole...and that has been given further credence because it has been proven that black holes to radiate energy...disproving a long standing theory of Hawkings.
Science it is a beautiful but scary thing...and the more you know, the less "unlikely" certian things seem.
In Hoc.
The article reports that the spacecraft would drop into another dimension when the drive was engaged and return to normal space when it was disengaged. For this to occur, I suppose that the gravity field generated somehow modulates normal space. Since physics as generally accepted has not yet worked out how gravity and quantum mechanics relate to each other, it is probably more accurate to say that the supposed new space propulsion mechanism has not been demonstrated than to say that it is impossible.
"Let me guess - it runs on dilithium?"
LOL -- my nod for "post of the day"...
e = ENERGY
M = MASS
c = SPEED OF LIGHT
^2 = (SPEED OF LIGHT x SPEED OF LIGHT)= HUGE NUMBER Re-Arranging the formula mathematically proper:
c = Sq Rt[ E / M ] So, in order to achieve c, the Speed of Light, Energy (e) must be humongous, while Mass (m) must be very, very small.
IOW, the Energy required to accelerate a grain of sand to the speed of light would require the energy output of a small star........If I remeber right.......
"How come nothing can travel faster than light?"
Essentially, light acts as an absolute speed limit (usually referred to as the constant "c"). The apparent mass of a particle with a nonzero rest mass increases asymptotically as its velocity approaches c, and would reach inifinity if it did achieve c. Long before it reaches c, the particle masses so much that it is inside its own Schwarzschild limit and becomes a black hole.
We used to think humans couldn't travel faster than sound. We knew light travelled faster than sound.
How come nothing can travel faster than light? "
"Because of the equivalence of energy and mass( E=mc2 ), the energy a body has due to its motion will add on to its mass, i.e. makes it harder to increase its speed further. At 10% of the speed of light, an object's mass increases by 0.5%. However, at 90% c, its mass increases by more than 200%. As the speed approaches c, its mass approaches infinity so it takes infinite amount of energy to get it there. For this reason, all bodies with an intrinsic mass is confined by relativity to move at speed slower than that of light." -- source
No, none at all. Darwinism teaches us that the machine will be created at random with no pre-initiating intelligence whatsoever. Just like us!
All we have to do is just...wait.
In the 4D space we experience, the universal speed limit is 186,000 miles per sec...Einstien's general and special theory of relativity always hold true.
However, quantum theory contridicts Einstien when taking into account extra dimensional space. (And has been mathematically proven) Such that space at the ultramicroscopic level (quantum) is vastly different than the 4D we experience. Which has been the ultimate question that theoretical phsycists have tried to answer for decades..."How can we link the two theories?"
It is the belief that in other dimensions the speed limit of light (186,000 miles per sec.) is much higher.
The only observable inclination to believe this to be true is that of what some astronmers have seen by looking out into the universe, and evidence of what "space" was like post Big Bang...it's speculated that post big bang space resembled that of what quantum space is considered to be...and there is some observance that light did travel faster then. (i.e. when taking into account the calculated distance between certain stellar objects and when the big bang was considered to have ocurred). This theory is considered to run somewhat counter to Inflation theory of universal expansion, but some think they could run hand in hand.
As a side note, inflation theory, and light being faster than it is now at the time of the big bang...are theories generated to answer the astronomical question of:
"If the universe is only 14.5 billion years old...and light only travels at 186,000 miles per sec and has always been the universal speed limit...then why are there objects farther away from the epicenter of the big bang then they could possibly be if the fastest and object could go was the current speed of light?"
I should have added post big bang for about 300,000 thousand years or so, after that the universe started to cool...stars et. al. started to form. etc. So, for only a minute amount of time was post big bang space similar to quantum space.
And he's been drinkin'!
The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new dark age.
That passage reads remarkably familiar. Very True.
H.P. Lovecraft. Bin Ladin probably loves his sick but compelling stories... (IAA! IAAA!)
LOL! Yeah, and he has a really warped sense of humor when he ties one on.
Do you have a nice, hot cup of tea?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.