Here is a short 7:41 video for you that shows the possibility of the warp barrier could be broken and some technologies that could do it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRn4WpoNAyo As for me, I really enjoyed this video. I have never believed that we can't go faster than the speed of light, only that it very difficult to do so with our level of technology. And I never will accept that we can't go faster than the speed of light. people are always trying to put limits on human development.
We can't go faster than the speed of light, unless everything we know about quantum physics is wrong. Basically speaking, we know (based on observation) that masses increase as we go faster (not really noticeable until we are getting to about .1 of the speed of light). Using Einstein's equations, mass goes to infinity as we approach the speed of light.
Do you have it in written form? I can't stand online videos for information. They are too hard to examine critically--when I see a video as the only source, I figure somebody is lying (usually the maker of the video). The speed of light is impossible to exceed, except for things that never go slower than the speed of light.
Doesn't that person have a written version? If they don't have something in writing, IMHO, they are probably lying or full of it.
The speed of light limit is only valid in inertial frames, and is relative. Simply put, the equations can be "bent", and there may be topological features of spacetime that we haven't discovered yet. For example, there are stars that we see in the sky today that are far enough away that the light that they emit now will never reach Earth. The universe is expanding, and some stars are moving away from us faster than the speed of light. That's possible because neither we nor the observed stars are in an inertial frame. Theoretically all other stars will move far enough away that we'll never see them again and our solar system will be left in utter darkness.
Unless it begins to contract in the future. - - - Updated - - - What is the point in exceeding the speed of light, if one is torn asunder in the process?
There is a lot of good stuff too. You should watch the video before coming to a generalized conclusion about it. By the way, 99% of everything you see in the world is crap. Does that mean people shouldn't go on living? I understand there is some caution, but sometimes, you also have to take a leap of faith in order to grab that diamond in the mud before somebody else snatches it from you.
The energy required to break the "warp barrier" is said to be so high that I don't think humans will ever be able to attempt it, not to mention that I don't see how we would keep our spaceship or whatever from being destroyed during the release of this much energy. Isn't the energy requirement greater than an exploding star? Any interstellar travel would mean a long and slow slog, probably with unmanned ships and colonizing other planets seems pretty unlikely.
Videos are too hard to fact check. I don't waste my time with them. They are, honestly, for the intellectually dishonest to use, and for stupid people to watch.
Hmm, going through life without ever watching a video? Seems rather limiting, but to each his own. My favorite videos are Stanford's videos on physics by Dr. Susskind (on youtube!). I also enjoy Dr. Feynman's lecture videos. I guess I'm stupid for watching those.
I only read stuff on papyrus scrolls........anything other than that is heretical and the devil's works. If you have to turn the page instead of unrolling it then it is lies.......all lies.
I'm sure that you can get the same material in a written form. It's when the video is the only way to get the information that it's usually not intellectually honest. you can get feynman's and susskinds' lectures in written format. They aren't trying to fool people. http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/ http://www.lecture-notes.co.uk/susskind/ Videos are for fun. If it's something that needs special effects, I'm all for them. For gaining scientific information, I'd rather read it. Also, what's the problem? Not a good reader?
I haven't seen the video yet, but my guess is it's describing a theory published in1994 by physicist Miguel Alcubierre, which basically allows for faster than light travel and does not violate any of Einstein's theories. It creates a bubble around a ship and expands space behind it, so the spaceship is stationary and the space around the ship is moving.
I watched the video, it just a bunch of pics of sci fi soaceships with text onthe screen. What it talks about is legit though, it's a theory that I mentioned about earlier a few post back and NASA along with DARPA are researching the possibilities. I think they call it the 100 year plan, as in it might be doable in 100 years. The theory is sound, but the way to make it happen is beyond our knowledge at this point. Pretty cool stuff though.
WARP propulsion promises a lot. Actually the speed of an object depends by the system of reference of the observer, more than by the physical conditions of the object itself. In fact, if we reduce a system just to the object, even if it's a photon moving [as it's natural!] at the speed of light, the object will "think" to stay firm [!]. So, when we say that WARM propulsion can allow a spaceship to travel "faster" than the speed of light, we make reference to our space-time. While the ship will travel through its own variable space-time and in that space-time it will travel to a speed [even no that great, it's not necessary]. It will be this particular space-time to "transport" a kind of bubble through our proper space-time, so that, from our perspective, the ship will cover a distance of 12 light years in a month [1/120 = 120 times the speed of light]. How is this possible? [Will, now it's impossible]. * From our perspective: 12 light years in a month = speed of the ship = 120 times the speed of light. * From the perspective of the crew in the WARP bubble. - Behind the ship the WARP system will extend the space-time [literally pushing the vessel towards] - In front of the ship the WARP system will contract the space-time [literally attracting the vessel towards] The real perception of space-time [and so of speed] of the crew on the vessel will depend on the distortion created by the WARP system. Greater will be the distortion and more little will be the distance to cover in the variable space-time of the ship, so that they could even record a speed of 100,000km/h to cover a distance of 12 light years in a month!!
Going faster than the speed of light is still not possible nor can we concieve how. The whole idea of space warp or other ideas is not to go faster than the speed of light but to go around it. With a space warp your actually travel speed is less than the speed of light of light you simply warp space so you travel over a greater distance at that speed. This idea obviously inspired a lot of the imaginary technology in star trek. Another idea inspired the method used in star wars which is hyper space. Rather than warping space in our universe one would open a door or wormhole to another dimension presumably where the laws of physics are different. You travel there for a while perhaps faster than light then emerge back into this dimenstion at your intended destination. Technology has been a big obstacle for both ideas and still is. But the biggest obstacle is energy. It has always been estimated by physicists that the amount of energy needed to warp space would be greater than all total combined output of all the stars believed to exist in the known universe. Creating a hyperspace gate way or door would be similarly energy prohibited. Obviously such an energy source is unknown and uncontrollable if we did know about it. Also if we could use such an energy source we probably would not need to build spacecraft. The video is good and describes some recent work by a few physicists who are suggesting that the energy calculations for achieving a spacewarp may wrong and we could achieve it with far less energy. In other words it may be doable. The consensus among some scientists still seems to be doubtful but who knows? The beauty of science is that many people always disagree or find away around what consensus teaches. Like all boys who grew up watching Star Trek and Star Wars I dreamed ( and still do ) about exploring space in a craft. I still hope humans continue to do that as technology becomes more advanced. In alllikley hood however we are still centuries away from manned exploration of interstellar space. It may take another century just to get men to other planets here in the solar system. Our best bet is obviously unmanned craft and in fact the most extraordinary achievements and accomplishments seem to come from such craft ( voyager I and II, keplar, Hubble, Mariner, Viking, Gallileo ). Long before we can get a manned spacecraft out of the solar system we will likely have the ability to send thousands of small craft to other stars with the ability to explore gather images and data and send it back. This will allow us to learn, discover and see more than ever before ( albeit very slowly with a lot of long gaps caused by slow communications over light year distances ). The manned flights will likely go to places we have already partly explored with such craft. You are right that sometimes people try to put limits on human development. Just as often however it is nature placing limits on us.
If you could do the research....... The main part of a Ph.D. is the dissertation, not classwork. You also can't get a Ph.D. from watching online lectures.... Sitting in on lectures doesn't teach you much. It's the interaction with the material--studying, answering questions, being tested, writing papers.
144 times the speed of light. (12 light years in a month t x 12 months a year= 144 times the speed of light)
Exact, I wrote 10 and then I corrected it in 12 thinking, so "it's more visible" ... but then I haven't corrected the multiplication. There is a reason I am a manager ... someone else checks!
That's not entirely true. http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblo...n-light-space-travel-a-2013-most-popular.html Excerpt: Note: this is something else Star Trek predicted.
