Avago Earo
Banned
General / Off-Topic Faster Than Light Impossible?
- Thread starter Avago Earo
- Start date
Avago Earo
Banned
It's not an article as such. It's a YT video compiling some footage of the very idea you mentioned with some experimental evidence of negative energy being produced in a vacuum so the resulting 'positive' (I'm no scientist) energy surrounding that space is forced towards the space where the negative energy is. The closest thing to describe this from the depth of my uneducated brain is that it's bit like osmosis but not really. Then again if I was scientific I wouldn't be using primary school type words on this subject. There is also footage of NASA working on a warp drive and arguing that it may not be that out of reach.
A bit impartial to the laws of physics... pretty arrogant bunch those who claim something is absolutely right and its limits cannot be broken. FTL in one form or the other, IMO, will be possible - and who knows, someone might find a fundamental flaw in current claims and equations which will make Einstein look like a fool in the end (he btw didn't like quantum theory a tiny bit as it doesn't really cope well with his mindset).
Last edited:
Krauss says "not impossible" meaning it is possible.
We all know that nothing can travel trough space faster than light yet space itself can propagate much faster than that. Fun fact: apart from spaceships as seen in Star Trek with their warp drive, artificial gravity and teleport - all other things are already discovered. I remember my late father used to say when we were (both fans) watching the series and he said "It will never be possible to touch a glass and make it work like a button. But it is fun to watch the show!". Look us today with all those touch screen tablets and phones! At the time we watched the show, there wasn't even mobile phone as we know it today!
I think even FTL will come to reality before it was prophesied by the show. Even though in show ship zap from one point to another - this is possible with the theory of Alcubierre Drive.
We all know that nothing can travel trough space faster than light yet space itself can propagate much faster than that. Fun fact: apart from spaceships as seen in Star Trek with their warp drive, artificial gravity and teleport - all other things are already discovered. I remember my late father used to say when we were (both fans) watching the series and he said "It will never be possible to touch a glass and make it work like a button. But it is fun to watch the show!". Look us today with all those touch screen tablets and phones! At the time we watched the show, there wasn't even mobile phone as we know it today!
I think even FTL will come to reality before it was prophesied by the show. Even though in show ship zap from one point to another - this is possible with the theory of Alcubierre Drive.
Avago Earo
Banned
I know what you mean. There are some people who guard theories as if it's religious dogma. Defeats the point of scientific curiosity if there is a refusal to be flexible. There are many scientists, however, who accept that they don't know yet and whilst Einstein's theory doesn't so far explain things on the sub atomic level, it does appear to agree with everything else. These are the sort of people who are still looking for answers and may one day find a solution that unifies everything.
Speed of light could be archived with different methods.
The shortest connection between two points is zero so if we could bend the Space so the two points would lie one above the other, the travel time from point a to point b would be zero.
acording to the ernergie conservation law we could transform matter into energy and guid it trou our spaceship behind the spaceship it would be transformed into matter again .
the resulting motion would be the speed of light would also make a nice weapon against planets XD (in a closed system).
The main problem is that you must always use these abstract theorems because according to Einstein in normal space nothing can be faster light that has a mass.
other possible ways?
Witchspace
Dimension portal
Warp bubble
Wormholes
unlimited energy source (would only arcive lightspeed to be faster the energie output has to be n+1)
hyperspace
Magic
all of those have not been proven to be real or doable by now. only thing is proven nothing can be faster than light in normal space. Tachyons have not been proven yet
sorry for my bad english
The shortest connection between two points is zero so if we could bend the Space so the two points would lie one above the other, the travel time from point a to point b would be zero.
acording to the ernergie conservation law we could transform matter into energy and guid it trou our spaceship behind the spaceship it would be transformed into matter again .
the resulting motion would be the speed of light would also make a nice weapon against planets XD (in a closed system).
The main problem is that you must always use these abstract theorems because according to Einstein in normal space nothing can be faster light that has a mass.
other possible ways?
Witchspace
Dimension portal
Warp bubble
Wormholes
unlimited energy source (would only arcive lightspeed to be faster the energie output has to be n+1)
hyperspace
Magic
all of those have not been proven to be real or doable by now. only thing is proven nothing can be faster than light in normal space. Tachyons have not been proven yet
sorry for my bad english
Indeed. And if we listened to them, we wouldn't have telephones or aeroplanes.
Well that is only part true the people claiming nothing can move faster that a horse (train example) had no proven therorie no mathematics behind them thats why they were wrong but Einsteins theorie is clear about that.
Every thing with a mass above zero can not archive spped of light.
And as of now this has not proven wrong and i highly doubt it will be proven wrong in normal space.
Every thing with a mass above zero can not archive spped of light.
And as of now this has not proven wrong and i highly doubt it will be proven wrong in normal space.
I am pretty sure mathmatics have shown that the closer to the speed of light you get, the more energy it requires to go faster. So reaching the speed of light is not possible as the amount of energy is far to high for any kind of object with mass to achieve.
But we should one day be able to reach a very high % of the speed of light.
But we should one day be able to reach a very high % of the speed of light.
Yea, but as it goes, it's just a theory - he couldn't factually prove he's right or wrong, albeit the math strongly hints toward the right - but as it is, until solidly proven, nothing in science is a "fact".
All respectable scientists know that todays "facts" might be proven false in the future, but until then we must work with what we can assume for practical buisness.
Einstein might have disliked quantum theory, but was in fact one of the main contributors to its foundation. He honestly believed that it couldnt be true, and that hes own theories must have been flawed/incomplete. No matter the case, Einsteins will never be considered a fool. Remember that Newton explained gravity and the mathematics behind it that we still use today, yet his idea of what gravity is seem completely wrong.
The old astronomers of ancient greek made great discoveries about the planets, the sun and the moon, yet they didnt even know what they are.
FTL, within everything we know so far, is impossible (and if proven otherwise it would impair several of todays experimentally provent concepts such as time dilation) but there are ways around this allowed without breaking physics. The alcubierre drive is such, you arent actually moving at all but space around you is compressed/extracted.
It's not "just" a theory. A theory is the highest form of knowledge in science, a working and predictive model of reality that is supported by sufficient evidence to be considered correct until proven otherwise. And it is one of the fundamental aspects of a theory that, yes, of course new evidence can prove a theory wrong, and then it is either replaced with or changed into a better theory.
And so far, there is no evidence that would prove relativity wrong, but plenty that works out just as the theory predicts.
I know what you're getting at. I remember something published in NASA research maybe, It's effectively a pendulum effect in energy displacement or something, that warps the local space, and small amounts of energy added on each parabola will swing the disruption that bit further each time, giving you effectively what ED has in SC....
You cannot have momentum that results in velocities faster than the speed of light. An extreme analogy: as you gain momentum your mass increases, tending toward infinity at the speed of light. I.e. When travelling at the speed of light you have infinite mass. From high school science you know that a = F/m (acceleration equals force divided by mass). Thus, as you approach the speed of light you need more and more energy in order to accelerate. The final infinitely small amount of acceleration would require an infinite amount of force to have an effect. This is not exactly the reason, but is a suitable analogy.
A very important word in that whole lot is "momentum." The Alcubierre drive is a momentumless drive. You never gain momentum from your own frame of reference. Thus you have effectively found a loophole in the laws of the universe.
The laws of thermodynamics are.
A very important word in that whole lot is "momentum." The Alcubierre drive is a momentumless drive. You never gain momentum from your own frame of reference. Thus you have effectively found a loophole in the laws of the universe.
The laws of thermodynamics are.
Last edited:
Empiricism, the only empire worth following. I would love to witness the launch of humanity's first interstellar craft, but given the state of the world and how long I have left to live I'm not holding my breath.
Can we travel faster than light?
According to current thinking, probably not.
Can we get somewhere else faster than light could?
According to current thinking, probably yes.
According to current thinking, probably not.
Can we get somewhere else faster than light could?
According to current thinking, probably yes.