4 ms·
you mean the drive that if it were used it would annihilate your destination in a immense-burst of gamma energy? Not to mention we have no idea how to effective
by jp555 13y ago
you mean the drive that if it were used it would annihilate your destination in a immense-burst of gamma energy? Not to mention we have no idea how to effectively modify space-time. It is interesting, but the drive is basically "if we had MAGIC, we could do this".
FTL is also exactly the same as time-travel. If you could travel 25,000 light-years in an instant, you could turn a BIG telescope back at earth from your ship and watch early humans hunting mammoths.
- dec0dedab0de 13y agoWell, that is just the light. Does it count as time travel when we look at stars that are thousands of lightyears away?
- jp555 13y agoyes. We see the stars today as they were thousands of years ago. It's thousands of light years away from our perspective, but from the perspective of the photons the trip took zero time as it was a zero distance. SR is weird like that.
- DennisP 13y agoI'm not saying it will ever work, just that those sorts of objections are quite different than "relativity says it's impossible, full stop." Modifications have improved the practicality from the original design, eg. by reducing the energy requirement from Jupiter mass to the mass of a small car. The way to modify space-time would be to use negative energy, which exists in theory but maybe not in any practical way. We don't know.
- jp555 13y agoRegarding negative-energy; I think you mean "nothing in our current understanding prevents something like what we describe as negative-energy from having existed at some time in the life of the Universe". Very different from "exists in theory".
- deletes 13y agoI saw a lecture from the researcher that is working on the project and he explained why there isn't a burst of deadly energy. Also they are working on those experiments, so they have at least some idea how to do it. You should really update your data.
- jp555 13y agowow, someone tell the Nobel people that this guy has experimentally tested space-time modification and shown it does not accumulate bow-energy as it covers distance. I kid, but those that claim the bow-energy problem also have to prove it for it to be a real problem, and your comment seems to indicate the lecture was much more of a grant-money pitch.