Semi-OT: We will go to Stars.

[oleg]

Almost universaly, Star travel in Sci-Fi. involves some sort of Faster-Than-Light travel. Warp drive, Worm holes, Star Gates, etc. Good (read popular) literature reflects the real life and up to a point, SF books tell what we want or at least fantasise about - would't it be nice to travel to stars and still have time to enjoy romance, political intrigue and peacefull retirement. Unfortunately, FTL is likely to be a sweet dream and nothing else. We must confine ourself to at least dozens of years of star travel. Even taking into account the relativistic time dilation, the changes back on Earth make star travel unappetising.
However, this is a dull perspective of a sentient being with about 100 years of life span. But how universall is it ? Now, imagine some extraterrestial life form with life expectancy of , for example, an equivalent of 500 Earth years. It is nothing extraordinarly even by Earth standards and could be possible in slightly different conditions and biology background that favor longer longivity. For such beings, 50 year travel to Alpha Centauri at 0.1c can be perceived as 10 yearsfor us - two election terms only and about the duration of Galileo mission to Jupiter. We are planning a mission to Mars. It will take several years at least but there will be no shortage of volunteers. Similary, for longer living ETs, dozens or even hundreds of years of inter-star travel is no problem at all. It is just our perception of time needed to travel relative to our life span put brakes on our imagination.
In summary, there is no need for FTL to make space exploration attracive. The only problem is our pitifull life span. Progress in Medical science and Genetic engineering should surely solve this, right ?

[narf poit chez BOOM]

Lizards would have the advantage. Why? no need for cyro-research. You freeze a snake, you thaw a snake, the snake wriggles off. Saw it once.

[Gandalf Parker]

(DISCLAIMER: the following is based on a purely non-religious viewpoint which the author does not necessarily share.)
Humans are actually one of the worst designed possibilities. They are something like 95% water with a small amount of minerals holding together like a SLIGHTLY less jelly-like Version of some big blob amoeba. Our aging process which we are talking about here is actually oxidation of the iron in our bodies caused by the oxygen we breath.

The chance that some other planet will randomly develop along a long line of forking possibilities to end up as a life form whose requirements are its demise would seem slim.
(on the other hand the new quantum threories bring up some interesting space-drive story plots)

[Makinus]

i once posted in the starfury forum about some holes in the classical physics theory that can (in a very far fetched way) allow FTL, my explanation in the starfury forum was most complete but the theory is the follow:

1. According to the classical physics theory nothing can travel faster than light, even light can´t travel fast than itself.

2. Pay attention in the "faster than" part, because velocity is only a constante of a object in relation of another object, an object, in itself, don´t have any velocity, it only have speed in relation with another object.

3. So, according to the classical theory, nothing can travel, in relation to any other object, faster than light.

4. But consider a light particle (i know that the light is sometimes a wave and sometimes a particle, but lets consider it a particle for this discussion) that is emmited in a particular direction (lets call this particle Photon A), now, another particle is emmited in th exact opposite direction of the first particle (let´s call the second particle Photon B).

5. According to the classical theory, Photon A can´t travel in relationto Photon B more faster than light speed but, since light can´t travel in any other velocity than the velocity of light (obvious this) them Photon A is traveling, in relation to Photon B, at twice the light speed...

6. Bingo, you have somethin traveling at FTL speeds, and at the same time we found a hole in the classical physics theory...


Othe theory, called "Quantum Entanglement" involves quantic particles that allow comunication in FTL speeds, and what happens is the following:


1. Create in a accelerator 2 quantic particles identical with one another, its alwo important that the 2 particles be created at the same time by the same event (i.e. in the same atomic collision).

2. Separate the 2 particles by a loong distance, a distance where you can measure light speed (you don´t need 300.000 kms because our actual instruments can measure quantum alterations in less tha a secont, something like 30.000 km is more than enough)

3. Now, change the state of the first particle (this can be done with another collision against the particle, but you will need several tries and particles because the majority of the collisions don´t change the particle state but instead create new particles).

4. At the same instant that the first particle changes state, the second partcile also changes, no matter how distant from the first, and, at the exact same instant, like the particles had some kind of FTL communication among themselves...


I know that the 2nd example only demonstrates FTL communication, and no FTL travel, but its a start....

[oleg]

See what I mean ? No ! No ! No ! Einstein was wrong, FTL is possible !

Makinus, please go to a decent college and take a course in physics. Both your questions have been raised and discussed many many times before. The consencus is still the same. FTL is impossible.

But back to my point: It is completely irrelevant. Inter-star travel is in fact very short but not for the life of some very-short-lived and puny infestaion on the surfacy of a tiny rock hurled in the space.

Our urge of FTL only underlines the restrains of our transient nature. Mind over body, that's the challenge.

Live LONG and prosper

[ July 19, 2004, 20:18: Message edited by: oleg ]

[se5a]

yes, I have wonderd about that also Makinus...
what IS not moveing? the speed of light ralitive to what?

[Makinus]

ole: can you point to me where i can get more information about the theories i mentioned? i read them somewhere on the net and they looked pretty solid theories, but if i´m wrong i want to know why i´m wrong...

i really believe that someday we will be able to create a way to travel with FTL speeds, and the main reason that i believe this is because what everyone said when some loonies told that breaking the sound barrier was possible...

what they told? They told that it would be "impossible".

Never underestimate human inventiveness.... even if our gran-gran-grandchildren don´t do it, it will be done someday...

[sachmo]

Faster than light may be impossible, but I don't see how anyone can know that absolutely.

[Alneyan]

Ah, but the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy provides with the perfect answer to this problem. Let's see: there is nothing faster than light, save for bad news, whose speed is subject to completely different laws (*). Such are the words of wisdom contained in the Guide.

Therefore, a vessel powered by bad news would be able to travel at a unpareled speed. Alas, this cannot be tested in practice because of the effect of such an energy source on the crew; depression occurs too early, as nobody can watch such a flow of bad news without losing all faith in the universe.

(*Feel free to provide the actual quote from the Guide about the speed of bad news)

[oleg]

Well, I was educated on Landau & Liftschich Physics course. For English speakers I can only recomend Feinman course on physics - it is quite solid.

As to idiotic comparison of Sound and Light barriers - this is really sickening. No physist ever objected to traveling faster than sound - bullets and shells did it 100 years before that. It was an engeeniring problem, not theoretical. FTL is different. Please do not make cheep and idiotic comparison.