revan7189 Posted August 2, 2007 Share Posted August 2, 2007 I,ve been pondering this question for a while now, does anyone think that lightaspeed or hyperspace like that of starwars is possible? Do you think us humans could develop that kind of advanced technology? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Achilles Posted August 2, 2007 Share Posted August 2, 2007 Well, the special theory of relativity tends to support the argument that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. I would say that faster-than-light travel is most likely impossible. EDIT: Here's a link on FTL if you are interested in reading a bit more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted August 2, 2007 Share Posted August 2, 2007 I agree with Achilles... when you can defy physics and flip the bird to relativity... that's when you can do hyperspace. Until then... I wouldn't worry what's possible and what's not, considering that the farthest people have gone to is the moon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JediKnight707 Posted August 2, 2007 Share Posted August 2, 2007 I think that lightspeed is possible, but not faser than lightspeed. When you reach lightspeed, you could live forever, so if you were going faster than lightspeed, you would actually go back in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fredi Posted August 2, 2007 Share Posted August 2, 2007 It can be possible if you are traveling by dimentions.... Like if you travel thru a worm hole or something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Web Rider Posted August 2, 2007 Share Posted August 2, 2007 It can be possible if you are traveling by dimentions.... Like if you travel thru a worm hole or something like that. On the good side, you may only end up detouring to the 2 dimensional planet with 3 crazy old women and encountering a giant brain of ultimate evil. On the bad side, you could take a trip through a hellish alternate dimension and end up somewhere near a blue gaseous planet short a pair of eyes and with a power core of pure evil. But then you're not really traveling faster than light, you're bypassing normal space by folding two points of it together and then stepping from one to the other. You could only be going 5 MPH, and still travel great distances in short time this way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revan7189 Posted August 3, 2007 Author Share Posted August 3, 2007 Well, the special theory of relativity tends to support the argument that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. I would say that faster-than-light travel is most likely impossible. EDIT: Here's a link on FTL if you are interested in reading a bit more. Well, who knows many times things such as reaching the moon have been deemed impossible by people, so maybe one day...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Achilles Posted August 3, 2007 Share Posted August 3, 2007 Well, who knows many times things such as reaching the moon have been deemed impossible by people, so maybe one day...... Yeah, that would be nice. The idea of traveling to the moon seemed preposterous when we didn't yet fully understand all the the things that needed to be understood. Once they were, doing so was reasonable. Unfortunately, it seems as though we have a much better understanding of what would be necessary in this scenario. The theory of relativity does an exceptional job of explaining a great deal about the mechanics of our universe (on a non-quantum scale). In order to accomplish FTL travel, relativity would have to be replaced with another theory that offers just as good, if not better, explanations and doesn't place a "speed limit" on the universe. For whatever that's worth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pho3nix Posted August 3, 2007 Share Posted August 3, 2007 I see we have a new windu6 here. Well, the special theory of relativity tends to support the argument that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. I would say that faster-than-light travel is most likely impossible. I agree, though I'm hoping we can someday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Zionosis Posted August 3, 2007 Share Posted August 3, 2007 I've always thought about this as well, I think that a way may be found out, but perhaps not in my lifetime, but ohhh how one can dream, hehe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Posted August 3, 2007 Share Posted August 3, 2007 I see we have a new windu6 here. NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE! I suspect that something like a space fold is more possible... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Achilles Posted August 3, 2007 Share Posted August 3, 2007 I see we have a new windu6 here. I don't understand what that means. What is a windu6? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted August 4, 2007 Share Posted August 4, 2007 What is a windu6? More like WHO.....he is/was a member of LF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth InSidious Posted August 5, 2007 Share Posted August 5, 2007 *shrugs* Who can say for certain? Who can predict what things will look like in two-hundred, five-hundred, a thousand years' time? a thousand years ago, travelling in the air was impossible. Five-hundred years ago, destroying a city by banging two plates of metal together was preposterous, insane. Just one-hundred years ago, space travel was impossible. fifty years ago, the handheld computer. Who knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoiuyWired Posted August 6, 2007 Share Posted August 6, 2007 Well, time changes, technology changes, but physics does not. Sure the rules can be revisited and refined, but you still cannot grow energy out of nowhere and things like that. And yes, that is precisely the problem with FTL travel. The thing is, you may be able to go from point A to point B faster than a light would beam thru such distances, but you cannot fly/crawl/whatever faster then the light itself by definition. Well, sure there might be wormhole travel and other warping stuff, or somply a hack that changes your coordinates... but that is different from FTL. So yeah, even if you build an Aluminum Falcon it is still not going to bring you 1.5 past lightspeed, but it doesn't mean you can't finish the Kessel Run in less than 13 persecs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Achilles Posted August 6, 2007 Share Posted August 6, 2007 I thought the record was 12 parsecs ...not to mention the slight problem of bodies attaining infinite mass as they reach the speed of light. But I gave up trying to argue the actual physics several posts ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerbieZ Posted August 6, 2007 Share Posted August 6, 2007 To be honest, all these people say it's impossibly but we are on earth at the moment. It's generally very limited and grants us a somewhat linear view on space travel. Only when you get up there does your mind have the chance to expand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spark91 Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 To be honest, all these people say it's impossibly but we are on earth at the moment. It's generally very limited and grants us a somewhat linear view on space travel. Only when you get up there does your mind have the chance to expand. that is true we only know little about the universe and how it works, i bet in the future people will surely find a way to create technologies that will allow us to travel faster througout space, how it will be made i don't know, but it will be made. (unless ofcourse we blow ourselves up) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth InSidious Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 Well, time changes, technology changes, but physics does not. Sure the rules can be revisited and refined, but you still cannot grow energy out of nowhere and things like that. 200 years ago, you couldn't destroy a city by banging two plates of metal together. Physics could be turned on its head in the next fifty years. Or it could not. Making absolute statements in regards to theory is a little unwise, don't you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Achilles Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 200 years ago, you couldn't destroy a city by banging two plates of metal together. Sure you could have. Just because human beings lacked sufficient knowledge to do it doesn't mean it wasn't possible. The atomic laws were all right there the whole time waiting to be discovered. We didn't get there until the late 19th/early 20th century, but the laws didn't change just because we eventually discovered them. Physics could be turned on its head in the next fifty years. Or it could not. Indeed, our understanding could change. Making absolute statements in regards to theory is a little unwise, don't you think? Again, I think we all need to be on the same page re: scientific use of the term "theory". Gravity is a scientific theory, electricity is based entirely upon principles that are theoretical, etc, etc. The theory of relativity is just as sound as electron theory and gravitational theory. Don't let the word "theory" fool you. If they theory of relativity were simply based on a few mathematical models, then I might be inclined to think that it's perch is unstable. However it, like all commonly accepted scientific theories, has the ability to make predictions and has is confirmed when evidence is found that corroborates those predictions. Therefore until another theory can explain the mechanics of our universe as well as, if not better than the ToR and do so without identifying a cosmic speed limit, it is reasonable to consider FTL travel so improbable as to be impossible. As others have already pointed out in this thread, the much more realistic alternative is to devise a way to bend space-time and travel at speeds which are attainable to far-off destinations that have been moved much closer to us. Thanks for reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spark91 Posted August 8, 2007 Share Posted August 8, 2007 I would lke to think that faster then light travel would be possible in the future, because if you think something is possible then there is a change that one day it might come true, but if you say it's impossible then you give no hope for that to happen. And beside we can't even travel at the speed of light yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth InSidious Posted August 8, 2007 Share Posted August 8, 2007 Sure you could have. Just because human beings lacked sufficient knowledge to do it doesn't mean it wasn't possible. The atomic laws were all right there the whole time waiting to be discovered. We didn't get there until the late 19th/early 20th century, but the laws didn't change just because we eventually discovered them. I said "you couldn't", not that "it was impossible". Again, I think we all need to be on the same page re: scientific use of the term "theory". Gravity is a scientific theory, electricity is based entirely upon principles that are theoretical, etc, etc. The theory of relativity is just as sound as electron theory and gravitational theory. Don't let the word "theory" fool you. If they theory of relativity were simply based on a few mathematical models, then I might be inclined to think that it's perch is unstable. However it, like all commonly accepted scientific theories, has the ability to make predictions and has is confirmed when evidence is found that corroborates those predictions. Therefore until another theory can explain the mechanics of our universe as well as, if not better than the ToR and do so without identifying a cosmic speed limit, it is reasonable to consider FTL travel so improbable as to be impossible. As others have already pointed out in this thread, the much more realistic alternative is to devise a way to bend space-time and travel at speeds which are attainable to far-off destinations that have been moved much closer to us. Those are still just theories, and evidence, as well as results of the theory, being phenomenal, are largely irrelevant. Gravity may exist or may not. No one can say for certain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoiuyWired Posted August 8, 2007 Share Posted August 8, 2007 Well, but the "result" that we call gravity do exist. This can be proven by simply dropping an apple from the top of a building in a crowded city... you can even hear a loud "OUCH!" sometimes. Point, I think "going faster" is not a effective idea for travelling between long distances of Point A to Point B. Instead things like wormholes, teleport, warpping, etc should be looked into. Its like trying to make the fastest tricycle so we can travel from Seattle to New York within a day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Achilles Posted August 8, 2007 Share Posted August 8, 2007 I said "you couldn't", not that "it was impossible". My apologies for the preemptive hair-split. Those are still just theories, and evidence, as well as results of the theory, being phenomenal, are largely irrelevant. Gravity may exist or may not. No one can say for certain. *sigh* You and I have been here before and it clear to me that I lack the requisite skill to illuminate the flaws in this kind of thinking. I'll give you credit though for maintaining a rather eccentric collection of philosophies . Point, I think "going faster" is not a effective idea for travelling between long distances of Point A to Point B. Instead things like wormholes, teleport, warpping, etc should be looked into. Its like trying to make the fastest tricycle so we can travel from Seattle to New York within a day. In all fairness, wormholes and bending space-time are still largely hypothetical and in some cases, science-fantasy. "Going faster" is something tried and true. The problem is the race against time. Our closest star is about 26 trillion miles away (or ~5 light years). Even if we could attain the speed of light, it would take us 5 years to get there...and that's just our closest neighbor. Even with light-speed we would have to send ship-colonies, capable of sustaining life and reproducing over several generations, just to see other parts of *this* galaxy. Again, completely ignoring the whole "infinite mass" thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth InSidious Posted August 8, 2007 Share Posted August 8, 2007 My apologies for the preemptive hair-split. Apology duly noted, accepted, filed, lost, found, buried in peat bog for three months, dug up, re-filed and lost in the floods of 1967. *sigh* You and I have been here before and it clear to me that I lack the requisite skill to illuminate the flaws in this kind of thinking. Or possibly that you cannot find any flaws? The phenomenal, being phenomenal, cannot be said with certainty to be noumenal without investing an element of faith in it. That is both evidence and the products of theory. And any theory without evidence is unsubstantiated and therefore unworthy of being supported. I'll give you credit though for maintaining a rather eccentric collection of philosophies . I never said I believed this junk. If I weren't a theist, and if I consequently, and I'll admit that this is a very slim chance, had not declared myself supreme deity and enslaved half the Earth, I would probably hold this position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.