Poll

when do you think FTL travel will happen

10 years
3 (5.9%)
100 years
11 (21.6%)
1000 years
12 (23.5%)
imposible
14 (27.5%)
possible but we will kill ourselves off before we find out how
11 (21.6%)

Total Members Voted: 48

breaking the law

  • 77 Replies
  • 7439 Views
breaking the law
« on: August 01, 2009, 10:20:07 PM »
Do you think that we will ever be able to go between solar systems faster then the speed of light?
If so what way do you think we will accomplish this. i.e. wormholes, warp drive ect..
You can't outrun death forever
But you can sure make the old bastard work for it.

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #1 on: August 01, 2009, 10:45:45 PM »
Yes, through warp drives. We could achieve that probably thousands of years later, when we can finally harness energy equivalent to that of a star to make any apparent distortions in space-time. Now, this is only a guess, and I'm optimistic enough to vote for 1,000.

Physics of the Impossible is a good book.

*

frostee

  • Official Member
  • 3555
  • Posts: 1337
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #2 on: August 02, 2009, 05:36:19 AM »
Yes, through warp drives. We could achieve that probably thousands of years later, when we can finally harness energy equivalent to that of a star to make any apparent distortions in space-time. Now, this is only a guess, and I'm optimistic enough to vote for 1,000.

Physics of the Impossible is a good book.
look what we have done in just 200 years, i think a few hundred years yes
Recently religious due to the impending rapture.

*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12682
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #3 on: August 02, 2009, 06:36:36 AM »
Infinite Improbability Drive

Re: breaking the law
« Reply #4 on: August 02, 2009, 09:01:47 AM »
I am going to guess worm holes. It seems the most possible.
You can't outrun death forever
But you can sure make the old bastard work for it.

Re: breaking the law
« Reply #5 on: August 02, 2009, 10:18:58 AM »
I believe there's already some maths for an 'Alcubierre drive' (essentially a warp drive), but there is no method known to apply this maths practically.
Clothes are proof evolution never happened.

?

Nomad

  • Official Member
  • 16983
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #6 on: August 02, 2009, 10:39:41 AM »
I would guess some kind of working prototype within 200 years, but the breakthroughs will probably occur within the next 100 years.

I'm sure it would end up being something like warp drive, or "mass effect"; using gravity generators to create gravity wells that spacefaring vessels would simply "fall" into and squirt out through space much like squeezing a watermelon seed with your fingers.
Nomad is a superhero.

8/30 NEVAR FORGET

Re: breaking the law
« Reply #7 on: August 02, 2009, 10:56:12 AM »
I wouldn't be surprised if we found a way around the light speed barrier in the next ten years. I think it will take at least 100 years for us to do it outside of labs.
You can't outrun death forever
But you can sure make the old bastard work for it.

?

Nomad

  • Official Member
  • 16983
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #8 on: August 02, 2009, 11:25:05 AM »
Actually, I remember reading about some experiment a while back that had something to do with lasers that were being detected a fraction of a second before they were being transmitted.  I don't remember the specifics, but I think it had something to do with some kind of hyperbaric chamber.

Also, teleportation.
Nomad is a superhero.

8/30 NEVAR FORGET

*

cmdshft

  • The Elder Ones
  • 13129
  • swiggity swooty
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #9 on: August 02, 2009, 11:47:36 AM »
Actually, I remember reading about some experiment a while back that had something to do with lasers that were being detected a fraction of a second before they were being transmitted.  I don't remember the specifics, but I think it had something to do with some kind of hyperbaric chamber.

Also, teleportation.

I heard about the same thing. Had to do with some sort of gas. I can't remember the name of it other than the name began with a "C". Maybe it was cesium? I'm not sure. Technically it's a time paradox, so I am not sure if it's valid, because of causality. If it were true, I would assume that the future of the universe is predetermined. This includes time travel.
« Last Edit: August 02, 2009, 11:50:02 AM by Hara Taiki »

?

Nomad

  • Official Member
  • 16983
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #10 on: August 02, 2009, 12:57:33 PM »
Assuming that the "universe" is one single timeline, perhaps.  I don't believe that's the case though.
Nomad is a superhero.

8/30 NEVAR FORGET

*

cmdshft

  • The Elder Ones
  • 13129
  • swiggity swooty
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #11 on: August 02, 2009, 01:17:38 PM »
Assuming that the "universe" is one single timeline, perhaps.  I don't believe that's the case though.

I think relativity would be a good enough reason to assume it's not, however, the timelines of all particles of matter and energy in the universe intertwine and could meld into one "universal" timeline in which it's all predetermined.

I think that the light emerging before it's emission is proof that causality was not violated somehow and is a good indicator that the future is predetermined. I remember reading a book about time travel recently where it's clearly stated that it's very possible for someone to travel back in time and not violate causality. The way it works is like this; Let's say a man wishes to go back and kill his mother before his birth. Now, logic says that if he did go back in time and kill his mother, the man would never have been born. Continuing this logic path, the man could therefore never have gone back to kill his mother, and therefore is born, et cetera. According to the read (I'm sorry I can't give a source as I don't remember the name of the book), the man could travel back in time to kill her, but as stated before if he succeeded, he could never do it and could do it in an endless loop, however, since he was able to actually travel back, a string of predetermined events could prevent him from ever succeeding. Maybe he dies at some point after traveling back, or some other kind of event that prevents it from occurring. Through this predetermined timeline, causality could never be violated while allowing forward and reverse temporal travel. The same may be the reason light was detected before emission, it was predetermined and could never actually violate causality while appearing to do so.

?

Nomad

  • Official Member
  • 16983
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #12 on: August 02, 2009, 02:18:11 PM »
Assuming that the "universe" is one single timeline, perhaps.  I don't believe that's the case though.

I think relativity would be a good enough reason to assume it's not, however, the timelines of all particles of matter and energy in the universe intertwine and could meld into one "universal" timeline in which it's all predetermined.

Only on the face of it it's all "predetermined", definitely.  However you have to consider that there is an infinite number of variations on any time line, so the only reason that it's all predetermined is because basically everything happens anyway.

Which makes me sad to think that there are an infinite number of worldlines where I'm not pretty.  :(
Nomad is a superhero.

8/30 NEVAR FORGET

?

Eddy Baby

  • Official Member
  • 9986
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #13 on: August 02, 2009, 02:23:46 PM »
Assuming that the "universe" is one single timeline, perhaps.  I don't believe that's the case though.

I think relativity would be a good enough reason to assume it's not, however, the timelines of all particles of matter and energy in the universe intertwine and could meld into one "universal" timeline in which it's all predetermined.

Only on the face of it it's all "predetermined", definitely.  However you have to consider that there is an infinite number of variations on any time line, so the only reason that it's all predetermined is because basically everything happens anyway.

Which makes me sad to think that there are an infinite number of worldlines where I'm not pretty.  :(

But an infinite number of universes include a very handsome version of you cutting an ugly verion of you's face off.

?

Nomad

  • Official Member
  • 16983
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #14 on: August 02, 2009, 02:27:01 PM »
You just made me happier ;D
Nomad is a superhero.

8/30 NEVAR FORGET

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #15 on: August 02, 2009, 05:29:38 PM »
I would guess some kind of working prototype within 200 years, but the breakthroughs will probably occur within the next 100 years.

I'm sure it would end up being something like warp drive, or "mass effect"; using gravity generators to create gravity wells that spacefaring vessels would simply "fall" into and squirt out through space much like squeezing a watermelon seed with your fingers.
It's very hard to make any noticeable distortions in space-time or a warp drive. It requires an energy output to that of a star, and physicists had come to that conclusion using the Einstein equations in GR. Now, we have not yet reached the technology level where we can control a Katrina-category hurricane and harness its energy (its output equivalent to several hundred megaton nuclear explosions). We're just starting to figure out how to do that, so I doubt we'll be able to harness the energy of our sun any time soon. If astro-engineering becomes apparent in the future, we may see engineers beginning to layout a blue print for a Dyson Sphere. It just seems a bit too early for that to happen within the next hundred years or so.

However, I don't necessarily disagree with you, as I believe technological advancement grows very quickly.

?

Nomad

  • Official Member
  • 16983
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #16 on: August 02, 2009, 06:04:07 PM »
I don't want to fool myself that we will be living Star Trek in a hundred years, but on the other hand I don't want to fool myself like what has been mentioned various times through the early 20th century that "there will never be a use for computers small enough to fit in your home."

Technology grows extremely quickly, but of course there are some very obvious barriers we will have to overcome.  Power consumption is definitely going to be one of the major obstacles for many of the more complicated dreams we have.  Making nanotechnology abundant, and "warp" type FTL travel are both ones that will be interesting to figure out power wise.

Of course, if all the dudes with the tinfoil hats are right, if we ever crack the mystery of Free Energy, power will never be an issue again.
Nomad is a superhero.

8/30 NEVAR FORGET

*

cmdshft

  • The Elder Ones
  • 13129
  • swiggity swooty
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #17 on: August 02, 2009, 06:40:43 PM »
Assuming that the "universe" is one single timeline, perhaps.  I don't believe that's the case though.

I think relativity would be a good enough reason to assume it's not, however, the timelines of all particles of matter and energy in the universe intertwine and could meld into one "universal" timeline in which it's all predetermined.

Only on the face of it it's all "predetermined", definitely.  However you have to consider that there is an infinite number of variations on any time line, so the only reason that it's all predetermined is because basically everything happens anyway.

Which makes me sad to think that there are an infinite number of worldlines where I'm not pretty.  :(

But that's not necessarily true in some aspects. Think of it this way, every action occurs no matter what. While we have a somewhat conscious choice on what actions we ourselves make, the fact remains that we've made the choice and it was predetermined already, hence why the action took place. Not only that, but we don't have the power to change this at all (which goes back to what I said about causality; Logic says one thing, reality says an entirely different thing based on the Cesium and light paradox which actually occurred). This is heavy evidence in my eyes that while conscious of our universe and our place in it, we are all just puppets who have to act out the motions.

Re: breaking the law
« Reply #18 on: August 02, 2009, 07:25:12 PM »
RAWL!!!
yea, i believe we can "break" the light barrier.
However, i don't see us using it to travel to new and uncharted places anytime soon...

SEE THIS:
http://www.physorg.com/news77821847.html

Thank you Quantum Phys!!!
If scientists can "teleport" [even rudimentary] information, maybe eventually we can break down and reassemble entire human beings using the teleported information.
It's not very efficient for what we wanna do, but it's an interesting step (i don't think this will become a form of transportation tho)

On another note, once we can travel backwards through time we might be able to go faster than the speed of light... kinda...

*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12682
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #19 on: August 04, 2009, 04:10:45 AM »
If you were to go back and, again for the sake of argument, kill your mother wouldn't it simply spawn a new timeline where you never existed but you from the old timeline would still be in this one?

So let's say Bob lives in 2009 in Timeline A, all his life travelling in a straight progression from past to future. Bob uses a time machine to go back to 1970A. Bob kills his mother. From now on, any future time travel Bob will spend in Timeline B.

But if Bob goes back in time he could return to 1970A, prevent himself from killing his mother which would create Timeline C wherein Bob is born and Bobs A and B live their lives because they can no longer return to their own relevant timelines. Not that it would matter much to Bob A because 2009C would look a lot like 2009A

Re: breaking the law
« Reply #20 on: August 04, 2009, 09:30:35 AM »
If you were to go back and, again for the sake of argument, kill your mother wouldn't it simply spawn a new timeline where you never existed but you from the old timeline would still be in this one?

So let's say Bob lives in 2009 in Timeline A, all his life travelling in a straight progression from past to future. Bob uses a time machine to go back to 1970A. Bob kills his mother. From now on, any future time travel Bob will spend in Timeline B.

But if Bob goes back in time he could return to 1970A, prevent himself from killing his mother which would create Timeline C wherein Bob is born and Bobs A and B live their lives because they can no longer return to their own relevant timelines. Not that it would matter much to Bob A because 2009C would look a lot like 2009A
my guess is that it would eventually be possible to jump from time line to time line.
You can't outrun death forever
But you can sure make the old bastard work for it.

?

Nomad

  • Official Member
  • 16983
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #21 on: August 04, 2009, 09:40:02 AM »
Actually, it's more like this, and a hell of a lot more complicated:

Bob lives in 2009 in Timeline A, all his life traveling in a straight progression from past to future.  Bob uses a time machine to go back to 1970, however his very existence in 1970 creates Timeline B, since his older self never existed in 1970A.  So in this new 1970B he kills his mother, which prevents Bob B from ever being born.

Timeline A continues to exist sans Bob and progresses unimpeded, and Timeline B continues to exist with older Bob in an earlier time unimpeded.  2009 A would look a lot like 2009 B, except where Bob A would have had any effect, and aside from Bob nobody would know the difference.  Timeline A branches off into Timeline B where Bob A began to exist in 1970A, so anything that Bob A did during his life never happens in Timeline B and so Timeline A and B vary by that much.

If Bob decides to use the time machine again and decides to return to 1970 in order to stop Bob A from killing Bob B's mother, Timeline B branches off into Timeline C the very moment that he begins to exist again in Timeline B; so now we've got the original Bob A, the second Bob A, and potentially Bob C if he is successful in stopping the original Bob A.

Timeline A continues to exist sans Bob A and progresses unimpeded, and Timeline B continues to exist without either Bob A or Bob B and progresses unimpeded, while Timeline C now hold Bob A1 and Bob A2, and potentially Bob C.

However, you must consider that the moment that Bob A departed from Timeline B, it automatically became a new timeline itself; if Bob A had stayed, timeline B would be totally different from a timeline B where Bob left.  So what do we call this new timeline, the Timeline B without Bob A?  Does that then become Timeline D?

Then you have to consider that every single instance where something happens--ANYTHING--right down to a pebble randomly tumbling down a cliff, there an infinite number of variations on that happening and thus an infinite number of timelines branching off into an exponentially infinite number of timelines.  The only difference is that in our Bob scenario, we have an observer, observing three separate instances of similar events, so it looks like three individual and specific continuums.

It's a very heady concept.  I like to think that I have a grasp on it, but it's kind of like what they say about Quantum Mechanics; if you think you understand String Theory, you don't understand String Theory.
Nomad is a superhero.

8/30 NEVAR FORGET

Re: breaking the law
« Reply #22 on: August 04, 2009, 09:43:11 AM »
yes I know about that, for simplification we are only considering the time lines created by time travel. Otherwise it gets to complicated to be useful
You can't outrun death forever
But you can sure make the old bastard work for it.

?

Nomad

  • Official Member
  • 16983
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #23 on: August 04, 2009, 09:46:50 AM »
No, all of these infinite variations of timelines exist simultaneously already.  We do not "create" any of them any more than we create our future if you deal with Causality.  We're merely observers in one specific worldline.
Nomad is a superhero.

8/30 NEVAR FORGET

*

cmdshft

  • The Elder Ones
  • 13129
  • swiggity swooty
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #24 on: August 04, 2009, 09:54:03 AM »
That would require time to be three dimensional, as well as the existence of the multiverse. Neither of which can be proven or disproved to be true.

However, I think that in the case of the light and cesium experiment, causality was not violated (although according to the one timeline theory this should have effectively wiped out our little section of space-time for logical violation of causality), so either there are multiple timelines and universes or the timeline is predetermined.

Re: breaking the law
« Reply #25 on: August 04, 2009, 01:48:18 PM »
No, all of these infinite variations of timelines exist simultaneously already.  We do not "create" any of them any more than we create our future if you deal with Causality.  We're merely observers in one specific worldline.
you can't say they are all happening simultaneously. simultaneous says they are all happening at the same time. which is not the case. you are making use of a new time outside of normal time. which you can't do. that would be like saying that if I had a metal bar all the parts of it were at the same place.
Second saying that we don't create them would be like saying that we don't create anything because it already existed in the future.
You can't outrun death forever
But you can sure make the old bastard work for it.

?

Nomad

  • Official Member
  • 16983
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #26 on: August 04, 2009, 02:00:21 PM »
That's exactly what I'm saying, actually.  And you can't say I can't say it, because I just did!  Lern2stringtheory

Just because we're observing it in a certain pattern doesn't mean that it hasn't already happened.  We just "choose" in which order it happens.  You really, really have to think outside the box to get it.
Nomad is a superhero.

8/30 NEVAR FORGET

Re: breaking the law
« Reply #27 on: August 04, 2009, 02:26:19 PM »
That's exactly what I'm saying, actually.  And you can't say I can't say it, because I just did!  Lern2stringtheory

Just because we're observing it in a certain pattern doesn't mean that it hasn't already happened.  We just "choose" in which order it happens.  You really, really have to think outside the box to get it.
I know what you are saying, but stuff has not already happened because of the definition of already happened deals with time. again that would be like saying that everything exists at one point. that is not true. I mean I know what you are trieing to say but you terms make it not true. so yes I could create a new time line. even if that time line always existed.
You can't outrun death forever
But you can sure make the old bastard work for it.

?

Nomad

  • Official Member
  • 16983
Re: breaking the law
« Reply #28 on: August 04, 2009, 02:41:51 PM »
You would observe a new timeline.  Not create it.  How can you create something that already exists?
Nomad is a superhero.

8/30 NEVAR FORGET

Re: breaking the law
« Reply #29 on: August 04, 2009, 02:58:25 PM »
You would observe a new timeline.  Not create it.  How can you create something that already exists?
again that would be like saying nothing is created because it exist in the future.
You can't outrun death forever
But you can sure make the old bastard work for it.