Hyperspace Travel

[Saint]

I certainly wouldn't want to be the first human test subject to take that ride. You remember what happened to that baboon in 'The Fly' eh. Turned inside out and all.

 

I think that if there ever is a teleportation device it would be impractical and raise too many safety concerns to use a "break down the atoms, reconstruct the atoms" approach. With all the variables that would be involved in properly coverting the mass to energy, energy to mass and reconstructing the person to EXACT specifications (taking into account the variableness of biology) I just don't know if I would trust a computer to do it all. With my luck it would all be powered by Microsoft and the teleporter would cause an illegal operation while putting me back together.

 

I'd feel much safer with a teleporting device that would simply open a hole in space that would completely envelop me and then close. That way I would be able to travel instantaneously while staying in one peace. Also I would think it would be far less limited in its range as it wouldn't be dependant on the machine's ability to transmit energy over a long distance.

[metadigital]

And why stop at atoms? How about the protons and neutrons in the nucleus ? Or the quarks that make up the protons? At least these particles are practically energy, so they conversion would be simpler!

 

No, I can't see it ever working in the Star Trek method. It would be more feasible to build the planet that you are trying to teleport to, from simple chemical rections , after all is said and done.

 

Worm holes are still pretty dangerous, you need an Einstein singularity ring, for a start, so that the transported object isn't crushed before it sets off, and you're gonna need a hell of a catcher's mit at the other end ...

[Musopticon?]

So basically; if we'd like to have fast(and preferably safe) space travel soon, we must either:

 

a) Get a new energy source, something with a sun-like output

 

b) Find Stargates

[Reveilled]

Reassembling of molecyls would be essentially cloning? How would we transport our sentience, or, I dont know, that which makes you you?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You are referring to the mind/brain seperation.

 

I.e. the "brain" is the physical mass of fat, endocrine glands & secretions, and axions & dendrites that make up the corporeal structure including the spinal cord. The "Mind" is the soul or spirit. (Some people suggest that only people have a mind, regardless of the animals that are more intelligent.)

 

Is the Mind a part of the Brain?

 

Knock yourself out: you've just hit the philosophical boundary of experimental neuroscience!

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Or whether the mind is on the hard disc or in the RAM.

[kirottu]

So basically; if we'd like to have fast(and preferably safe) space travel soon, we must either:

 

a) Get a new energy source, something with a sun-like output

 

b) Find Stargates

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Sun-like is old. Cold fusion is the way to go!

 

Finding stargates would probably be easier.

[Musopticon?]

*knocks himself out*

[213374U]

Are you mental?  A black hole isn't just a hole, it doesn't lead anywhere.  At its centre is supposed to be an object of infinite density, hence the massive gravitational force surrounding this collapsed star>> creating the 'hole', dumbo. Any object entering the hole would eventually break up as it neared this object, forming matter to be compacted.

That's only partially true. Since gravitational fields can be considered deformations in the space-time continuum, we don't really know if black holes can indeed be "tunnels" due to the extreme bending that the fabric of space suffers near the singularity. Keep in mind that euclidean conceptions of space don't work very well when applied to that sort of phenomena.

 

 

Super Conductivity occurs in certain new artificial substances at high temperatures (i.e. approx. 100

[Reveilled]

100 K is actually pretty damn cold. Considering that 1K = 1

[213374U]

But relative to the temperatures that superconductivity occurs in natural substances (close to 0K), isn't 100K high?  Like how compared to an electron, a proton is massive, even if it's frickin' tiny compared to anything else.

Well, yes. But considering that the difference between other properties dependant on temperature can be of several thousand degrees, 100

[cewekeds]

If you approch a black hole you would be stretch thin. Its called the spaghetti effect. The gravity is so strong that even inch can effect the pull on a object.

 

All the mass in the black hole is just smash together until its just the samething into a very small space, probably no bigger then a basketball.

 

teleportation probably would be that bad once we get computers that can count and map you atoms 50 times over in a second.

 

Is it possible to travel faster then the speed of light in sci-fi anything can happen. In real life who knows.

 

But don't you travel in time if you go faster then the speed of light? Let say your traveling between two. If you leave point A and could see a clock face at the speed of light it would appear to stand still. However if you are traveling faster then the speed of light you would be getting ahead of the light reflected of the clock face so it would appear to go backwards. If your clock B some thing would be happening you would be ahead of the light before it reaches the clock face making it appear moving slower or forzen?

[Plano Skywalker]

But don't you travel in time if you go faster then the speed of light?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'm sure someone else can get you a more detailed answer but I think you bring up a good point: if you could travel faster than light, you would also be time-travelling.

 

Yet another reason to think of hyperspace travel as manipulating the folds in the fabric of space, rather than going as fast or faster than the speed of light.

[Oerwinde]

I asked my physics teacher about this a few years ago and he said the current theory about faster than light travel is based around another dimension where everything is composed of particles called tachyons that all move faster than light. I figure if we ever develop some sort of interstellar rapid transit system it will either involved that, or spacefold, and will require jumpgates.

[Kaftan Barlast]

I'm sure someone else can get you a more detailed answer but I think you bring up a good point: if you could travel faster than light, you would also be time-travelling.

 

 

No. For that to be true then lightspeed would have to be the absolute speed*, which it is not. It is simply the fastest speed something with mass is believed to be able to attain.

 

 

*the absolute speed is when you arrive at the precise moment you start.

[Jad'en]

I do not know if this has been stated but things can easily travel at the speed of light in space... even man made objects... without crumbling.

 

It is the acceleration which would destroy the object...

 

If there was some way to slowly accelerate to 3x10( (think solar sail technology) then its completely plausible

[jedipodo]

Seriously, does anybody at this forum have sufficient knowledge of physics? (I don't think so... )

[213374U]

I'm sure someone else can get you a more detailed answer but I think you bring up a good point: if you could travel faster than light, you would also be time-travelling.

That's pure speculation based on wrong assumptions. The theory that provides the relation between time flows in reference systems moving at relativistic speeds is called Lorentz's transformations. They are just an improvement over Galileo's standard relativity equations for inertial observers.

It turns out that Lorentz built his equations with two premises in mind: to respect lightspeed as the fastest possible speed, and to take into consideration time and space dilation predicted by Einstein.

 

Thus, any conclusions drawn from applying Lorentz's equations outside the parameters they were designed to work within are not reliable.

 

 

No. For that to be true then lightspeed would have to be the absolute speed*, which it is not. It is simply the fastest speed something with mass is believed to be able to attain.

 

 

*the absolute speed is when you arrive at the precise moment you start.

According to Lorentz's transformations, time dilation is given by:

 

In which t' is the time factor for an object moving at relativistic speeds from an observer for which a time t passes.

As you can see, if we are talking about the speed of light, no time passes for the object that moves at the speed of light, regardless of how much time passes for the "static" observer. Which is not to say that time doesn't flow for the object travelling at the speed of light.

 

The wonders of Relativity.

[metadigital]

But don't you travel in time if you go faster then the speed of light?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm sure someone else can get you a more detailed answer but I think you bring up a good point: if you could travel faster than light, you would also be time-travelling.

...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Just to back Mr Numbers, this is a relative time passage. Another example:

A pulsar is one of the most distant objects we can see from here (very, very bright in the radio spectrum -- some people have theorized these are the tailpipes of space ships travelling away from us!). They are upwards of 12 billion light-years away; that means the light we see from them is 12 billion years old (because that's how long it's taken to reach here). If you could travel faster than the speed of light, you could arrive before the light was leaving, and therefore have travelled back in time.

I asked my physics teacher about this  a few years ago and he said the current theory about faster than light travel is based around another dimension where everything is composed of particles called tachyons that all move faster than light. I figure if we ever develop some sort of interstellar rapid transit system it will either involved that, or spacefold, and will require jumpgates.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Just a bit more on Tachyons, I confess to only knowing summary information about them; but I did hear of a preliminary experiment (must have been the Crough-Clay one referred to, below) when the experimenters set up the environment and recorded some tachyon particles before the test had begun.

 

Reading the wikip

[PhantomJedi]

I was thinking alot about this idea and I think that hyperspace travel is impossible... although i havent researched anything (yes sorry) I think it would be impossible because how can you maintain a hyperspace route (im guessing a straight line cutting through space to your destination)? You'd have to make sure that the path would be clear of any debris or anything that you would crash into in high speed right? Because space is ever changing how does someone make sure that every kilometre of the route is clear? Just a thought...

 

Yes, yes... I know. History tells us that nothing is impossible.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well, here's the optimistic, anything's possible view from a basic physics standpoint:

 

Conventional travel through space at a speed faster than light is impossible; it is a fundamental idea of Relativity, which, for the most part, has turned out to be very true. Very simply nothing can travel faster than pure energy in a vacuum; to even match its speed, matter needs to be converted to energy (a stream of photons, in this instance).

 

HOWEVER, there is increasing evidence from quantam mechanics that space-time (yes, it is a real term that describes the fact that an object can occupy the same space twice, but never at the same time or at two different places at the same time; think of a function on an X-Y plane to get a rough idea) is not as solid as we think. Relativity backs this up, telling us time is a very relative idea (no pun intended). Thus it stands to reason that space as we know it in three dimensions, is not so out of reach. And we find this true in large gravity sources, such as red giant stars or black holes. The potential energy created by gravity alters time, and also space. Using a pseudo-image, imagine a flat surface, and call it space. A huge, dense gravity source such as a black hole would create a dent in that flat surface, drawing objects towards it. Thus space is altered, effected by that large energy source.

 

Now this is where it starts getting into the sci-fi realm... if space can be bent, and space-time is really not that solid, then why can't space be bent to pass through space-time? While there is both science that indicates this is imposible and possible (think worm holes), if one could pass through space-time and emerge at another location at the same time, then infinte travel across this universe could be possible. However, this is all highly theoretical...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I think it works a bit like this. Say space is a sheet of paper. It's not, but say it is. Stick a moderately heavy ball on it, and it makes a dent. This dent represents a distortion of gravity, which is affected by mass. A white dwarf has a large mass, so it forms a steeper dent. A black hole has infinite mass, so it has an infintely deep dent. However, the immense gravity of a black hole doesn't affect energy (which has no mass) and this is why black holes emit X -rays and other electromagnetic radiation as the superheated gas which surrounds a black hole breaks apart under the gravity of the black hole.

 

Of course, space is in 4 dimensions, so my example probably doesn't work.

 

Faster than light travel is technically impossible because as speed increases so does mass. Therefore, at the speed of light you have infinite mass. There are, however, several different theories how to bypass this. Wormholes are one, while Alcubierre's Drive (where space is contracted in front of a ship and expanded behind) is another idea. Hyperdrive is indeed meant to be faster-than-light, as it would be impossiible to cross the galaxy without it (which is done numerous times - Darth Mauls trip from Coruscant near the center of the galaxy to Tatooine in the Outer Rim, for example).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Like that episode of the Simpsons when Homer comes to our plane of existance.

 

My solution: increase the spead of light so that we can travle at the current spead of light. :D Problem solved!

[jaguars4ever]

i know something it is possible we just don't have the technology or something like that to reach past the speed of light without crumbling

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Without crumbling...er, yes - that's it. "

[metadigital]

Like that episode of the Simpsons when Homer comes to our plane of existance.

 

My solution: increase the spead of light so that we can travel at the current spead of light. :D Problem solved!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's funny that physics hasn't found many barriers, many absolutes; absolute zero, the temperature at which no further energy may be extracted (−273.15

[213374U]

Of course one answer might be to have the destination accelerate towards the beginning, if they both approach the Speed of Light velocities, then maybe their vector addition will mean the traveller will superluminal ...  "  (because Newton, Maxwell and Einstein were wrong) or even Michelson & Morley, et alia were all barking up the wrong tree (and Ernst Mach with his pesky Logical Positivism needed to have more faith): there really is luminiferous

[metadigital]

Of course one answer might be to have the destination accelerate towards the beginning, if they both approach the Speed of Light velocities, then maybe their vector addition will mean the traveller will superluminal ...  "  (because Newton, Maxwell and Einstein were wrong) or even Michelson & Morley, et alia were all barking up the wrong tree (and Ernst Mach with his pesky Logical Positivism needed to have more faith): there really is luminiferous

[213374U]

I thought Heliocentrism was pretty valid, or were you being ironic? I mean, the Earth does revolve around the sun, don't you agree? 

Er... my mistake. I was actually referring to the "old" heliocentric conception in which the Sun is the centre of the Universe.

[cewekeds]

Its possible to make light travel faster then it does.

 

http://www.sciam.com/askexpert_question.cf...EB7809EC588F2D7

[metadigital]

Oh wow, the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (-Bohm) phenomenon. That is a cool concept for theoretical quantum cryptography.