3 ms·

I was referring to sub c speeds and what happens by using real confirmed physics. I didn't realize you were talking about warp drives in that case. As far as I

by w0000t 11y ago

I was referring to sub c speeds and what happens by using real confirmed physics. I didn't realize you were talking about warp drives in that case. As far as I understand from popular science, warp drive doesn't actually move the occupants of the vehicle, it moves the space around the ship so in that case there is no time dilation. It takes the same amount of time for people, in and outside, the ship. If your warp drive is limited to 20c then yes it is a problem, but I don't see why would it have to be limited in the first place. Make it go 10^10c and the problem is solved.

zamalek 11y ago
> I was referring to sub c speeds and what happens by using real confirmed physics. That much so much more sense. In addition to the velocity there would also be time spent completely outside of a gravity well. However, the article is really talking about warp. > Make it go 10^10c and the problem is solved. Too much energy. From what I understand it's exponential - i.e. more energy would be used getting to Alpha Centauri at 10^10c than at 20c. We don't know exactly how to get to 1c in the first place, but we do know that if we could then e.g. 100c would likely be something that would be out of reach. Keep in mind that before White optimized the Alcubierre metric, getting to Pluto (AFAIR) with a warp drive would have required the mass of Jupiter. Getting to Alpha Centauri would have required the mass of the observable universe (which is now down to something with "the mass of Voyager 1"). That's the amount of energy we are talking about even at a pitiful 20c.
- w0000t 11y ago
  > Too much energy. Right, you would need those rare, stable, dilithium crystals.
  - zamalek 11y ago
    > Right, you would need those rare, stable, dilithium crystals. The spice must flow. All of this stuff is a massive longshot, whether or not we can do it it's still interesting.

by w0000t 11y ago

zamalek 11y ago

> I was referring to sub c speeds and what happens by using real confirmed physics. That much so much more sense. In addition to the velocity there would also be time spent completely outside of a gravity well. However, the article is really talking about warp. > Make it go 10^10c and the problem is solved. Too much energy. From what I understand it's exponential - i.e. more energy would be used getting to Alpha Centauri at 10^10c than at 20c. We don't know exactly how to get to 1c in the first place, but we do know that if we could then e.g. 100c would likely be something that would be out of reach. Keep in mind that before White optimized the Alcubierre metric, getting to Pluto (AFAIR) with a warp drive would have required the mass of Jupiter. Getting to Alpha Centauri would have required the mass of the observable universe (which is now down to something with "the mass of Voyager 1"). That's the amount of energy we are talking about even at a pitiful 20c.

w0000t 11y ago
> Too much energy. Right, you would need those rare, stable, dilithium crystals.
- zamalek 11y ago
  > Right, you would need those rare, stable, dilithium crystals. The spice must flow. All of this stuff is a massive longshot, whether or not we can do it it's still interesting.