/sci/ - Science & Math

>>7446960
An understanding of quantum gravity and the technological ability to experiment with it.

this is a science board kid, not a sci-fi board

Step 1: Be a particle
Step 2: Go really fuckin' fast
Step 3: Enter a medium with a high refractive index

>>7446960
infinite energy

>>7446986
Kek

Go away.

>>7446967
FTL is the only way to travel without needing generations of people to live on one ship. Ur a fool to believe our current technology is as good as it gets.

>>7446966
Um what do you mean? Does that have anything to do with the fabric of spacetime?

>>7446988
Oh is that all.

But that's impossible, isn't it? Like e=mc^2 so there's only so much enegy in the universe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive

I did it

>>7447052
Won't work.

>>7447066
make an argument

We can easily do FTL with current technology.

All you need to do is slow down light. Then travel faster than it.

>>7447088
not OP, but alcubierre drive requires negative energy, which isn't supported anywhere in modern physics

>>7447092
Troll.

>>7447088
Read that page. It's ridled with acknowledgements of impossibility.

>>7446995
> our technology
> laws of physics
get a grip on reality kid. and stop making shit threads like these

>>7447092
>>7447114
Mfw he's right.
>Send light through long diamond.
>Travel next to it.
>???
>Profit

Well, Warp drives might be possible, assuming those new experiments pan out, which is a step up from inherently impossible that we had 5 years ago. But it might be more feasible for sub-light operation than FTL.

I'm leaning towards feeling vague optimism that it does work, but i don't think i'd be disappointed if not.

>>7446997
>hi, I dont know what any of these buzz words mean
>fabric
>spacetime

>this one time I watched discovery channel and..

>>7446995
>Ur a fool to believe our current technology is as good as it gets.

It's entirely possible that FTL is impossible.

And besides, our current technology can't get any kind of space probe anywhere near relativistic speeds, so sure, there's still lots of room for improvement, even if there's no FTL.

>>7446960
anyone plan on seeing this movie? Why does the sky look so blue in this picture, couldn't they take the 5 seconds to make it actual realistic?

We literally don't need FTL.
If we get .5 c drives, we'd be solid.
With dilation, a 14 year trip with take 28 years in earth time and fucking months in subjective time on the ship.
Chances are FTL is impossible, but we don't really need it. Dilation is our friend.

>>7447190
Lulz pop-sci meme

>>7446960
FTL is time travel backwards in time.
If FTL is possible please resolve all of those pesky time travel paradoxes.

>>7446995
>FTL is the only way to travel without needing generations of people to live on one ship. Ur a fool to believe our current technology is as good as it gets.

>tfw people still perpetuate this.

Imagine you're on Earth watching a spaceship setting off from Earth traveling at 0.999c from your perspective. They're traveling to a star 1000 light years away. From your perspective it'll take them approximately 1000 years to finish there journey. But due to length contraction caused by traveling so quickly from their perspective it may only take a couple of seconds.

>>7447052
you know, if that memdrive ends up being for real, specifically that "warping" they see in the center of it..that might just be the ticket to easy negative energy

please be real, memedrive!

>>7447305
>anyone plan on seeing this movie?

Not in cinemas. Even if it's shit, I'm just happy there's some new Mars movie.

>>7446960
As impossible as FTL seems to us, Galilei's postulates seemed to the people of his time.

>>7447000
where did the intial energy to form that matter come from?

>>7447370
>FTL is backwards time travel
>It's possible

Nah.

>>7446960
Why the fuck is that helmet so tall? It's really bugging me.

>>7447371
>String theory says faries
>Big bang theory says ???
>Semantics and philosophy say what is the question?/How would you like your answer?/What specific framework of understanding do you currently lay over everything? or whatever.
>God did it.
>Don't care.
>-no answer-

Pick one. I'm sticking with ??? or no answer, they seem logical.

>>7447108
Read about the Banach Tarski paradox modern science isn't always right

>>7446995
>waves magic wand

LOOK GUYS, IF YOU'D JUST BELIEVE IN MAGIC WE COULD DO THIS

>>7446997
We won't be able to study things like wormholes unless we can create them on a micro scale. In order to do that we would need an understanding of quantum gravity and the ability to experiment with it.

>>7448911
Fuck off vsauce

>>7447321
Dilation travel would really only be practical if we had to evacuate the solar system. It would still be decades back on Earth, and administrating an interstellar empire would be next to impossible with that kind of delay.

>>7446960
Find solutions for the negative energy and "exotic matter" requirements of an Alcubierre warp drive

We do not need FTL to make interstellar travel possible; we just need to get close enough that time dilation kicks in. While a month would pass on-ship, the rest of the universe would experience 20+ years, making the trip for those actually on the ship fairly quick. Of course, communication with the ship would be impossible since they'd be travelling so fast, but that isn't of much consequence since this IS a colony ship after all.

The only thing required is an exotic energy source. That's literally it. We have the science to do it, but not the fuel to do it.

1. Efficient fusion energy allows us massive amounts of cheap energy.
2. Expedite development cycles for particle physics and research into exotic energy and matter.
3. Develop efficient ways to generate said matter and energy efficiently
4. Develop applications of exotic matter and energy
5. begin human colonization of exoplanets.


It's likely possible but we're hundreds of years off. We'll be lucky to cross #1 off our list in any of our life times.

Just become immortal and it doesnt really matter how long shit takes.

>>7449086
>Wave magic wand
>Just wave an invisible unicorn and it doesn't matter

>>7449068
Who is gonna pay to have it built? How much is it gonna cost?

Interstellar colonization is utterly pointless for the people staying back home.

final answer: going faster than light, if even possible, requires scientific knowledge we flat out don't have. closest we have is the theory of relativity and that's basically skimming the "what" and not the "how or why".

I could fill an entire book with unanswerable pseudo-scientific questions on this kind of shit.

the weirdest shit about this is that technically speaking we might as well be going the speed of light right now. we probably ARE moving at the speed of light. the speed of light is some magical wizard shit that is static no matter how fast or slow you are moving, the only thing changing it's speed being the medium it travels through.

>>7449154
I nominate you /sci/shitposter anon.

Your task is to shitpost daily with pseudoscientific questions.

>>7447188
As of right now we cannot create a warp drive or anything of that sort of matter. We still need to advance 100yrs or so to start getting into it but still not being able to.we need to be a tier 2 planetary(Super advanced tech) system to start manipulating space/time to our will. it does sound scify ish but its true, we couldnt comprehend the start of it right now.

>>7449068

i've never gotten that, if you are moving fast enough for time dilation to go into effect, shouldn't the thing you are moving relative to be the object moving from your perspective, and therefore be suffering the same time dilation phenomenon, again from your perspective?

like if you travel for a bit and go through 1 years worth of time dilation, the object you are moving from should suffer time dilation, from your perspective, of an equal 1 year.

1 year older you is interacting with 1 year younger thing, and 1 year older thing is interacting with 1 year younger you.

isn't that closer to some fucked-up form of time travel?

IRL physicistfag here.

It's really really difficult, but you really can do it. All you need is a poptart and Howard Stern's penis.

>>7446960

>on Mars
>spacesuits are the same color as the surface
>reduces visibility of other crew members

Fucking step up your game Ridley.

>>7447346

Wow kill yourself anytime retard

>>7447108
hawking radiation requires negative energy

>>7446960
3 things
1. the ability to violate causality, the chronological protection conjecture to be true, or relativity to be wrong
2. a theory of quantum gravity
3. the ability to make and control negative energy

or something else we have no idea what that makes FTL possible

Lot's of people are talking about traveling at relativistic speeds. What would you need to get, say, the space shuttle to relativistic speed? Do we have the technology but lack the means/funding? How close are we? Has time dilation even been experimentally demonstrated to function as stated in this thread?

>>7446995
>FTL is the only way to travel without needing generations of people to live on one ship. Ur a fool to believe our current technology is as good as it gets.
Or, you could just get better at biology.

We only discovered there was a speed of light a few hundred years ago, but we unraveled DNA less than a century ago.

Anyone who says either isn't possible, is suffering from the delusion that we know everything, while ignoring all the stuff we've managed to do that we've previously said were impossible, and the fact that we've turned the standard model of the universe on its head four times since we discovered DNA. Never mind that we already have several theoretical models for FTL and immortality.

There's always another way to skin a cat.

>>7449244
>the ability to violate causality, the chronological protection conjecture to be true, or relativity to be wrong
Relativity actually predicts causal violations are possible, as does quantum physics. If causality violations can't happen *then* relativity is wrong, no the other way around.

>>7449172

> it does sound scify ish but its true

k

>>7449175
when you leave earth, you are accelerating therefore you are no longer in an inertial frame of reference therefore you no longer experience time dilation during that period, general relativity ends up proving that the person travelling is indeed younger

>>7449172
Shittiest post of the thread -award goes to you, which is quite an achievement considering the quality of discussion here.

Only way to theoretically travel faster than light is to manipulate gravity to an absurd extent since its the only one of the fundamental forces that heavily distorts space-time. Call me when scientists find out and confirm what gravity even is.

>>7449267
Wikipedia is your friend. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar_travel

>>7449277
Source for this?

>>7449365
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1401.0167v1.pdf

>>7449267
Move an 82 ton object (sans fuel) to relativistic speeds by conventional means? Oh, we'd only have to convert the whole planet to energy somehow, or some such. Even with a photon drive, more fuel than you could ever hope to gather, really. But there's some semi-conventional drives that hope to do something along those lines one day, such as Earth bound grazers, hydrogen scoops, and a few others.

Needless to say, most FTL, or even sub FTL, theoretical engine designs do not entail actually doing anything of the sort, and are unconventional, or "cheating", in some way. Nonetheless, there are those that show promise, and at least two, at the moment, that seem to sorta-work, but we don't know why, thus, more testing... And others where the theory is sound enough, but the application stage requires, well, money, in addition to more scaled testing, before they can hope to get said money.

>>7449277
>Relativity actually predicts causal violations are possible,
No, GR doesn't have a problem with causal violations, but it certainly doesn't predict them.

There is literally no reason to go FTL
If you go at lightspeed you already get everywhere in your trajectory instantaneously.
Going even an appreciable fraction of light speed means that the occupants of the vessel will only experience about a month of time.
Of course everyone you've ever loved will be dead when you step off the ship, but who gives a heck, you made it to space.

>>7446960
£25

>>7449239
Do you have a black hole on hand you aren't telling anyone about?

>>7450053
no, absolutely not, why would we have one of those?

>>7446986
Step 4:???
Step 5: profit

More scientists that work until something is discovered
probably less pop artists, niggers and distractions and a world wide project so they get all their crazy ideas funded, that way alongside the FTL we will discover lots of things

>>7446995

Actually with time dilation and theoretical torch ships we could colonize the Local area in reasonable timeframes...for the passengers.

>>7446997
>Fabric of spacetime
>SciFi buzzwords trying to sound intelligent

>>7446960
Not possible if everything I've ever learned.

Then again, fuck logic right?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPsG8td7C5k

>>7447346
Lenght contraction applies to the moving object dumbass

>>7450225
Yeah that would really only be practical if Earth was doomed and we had to abandon the solar system anyway. Unless we have FTL communication, keeping in touch with our colonies will be just about impossible.

>>7449045
so seriously.. wtf qualifies as "exotic matter" anyways? what is it like the Chilean boricua of the universe's matter?
I have yet to get off my ass aND read definitions of it which I'm about to do now but, still... is it the properties required from the matter needed to allow for function what constitutes "exotic"? or is it just gold in color like destiny's exotic equipment?

>>7446960
>what they need to know to make FTL possible
A quantum theory of gravity, at the least.

Though to be quite honest, FTL is probably not possible.

>>7449166
>>7449154
seriously I'm sure our understanding of the speed of light and relativity are both twisted in the wrong way. when you think about it, combining the universe's expansion speed, galactic orbit speeds, galactic cluster motion speeds, and system orbit speeds, let's not forget planetary orbit speed plus the rotational orbit speeds... I'm sure that you are literally traveling through space in excess of the speed of light at this very moment, but because it's not technically when relative to your point of observation suddenly everything is normal and no "laws" are broken, because we're discarding all of those other speeds.

>>7453574
Sorry, but the speed of light has nothing to do with the expansion of the universe.

>>7453561
In general relativity, this usually means matter with negative energy density.

>>7449506
quit being a pussy and use an Orion Drive

>>7453590
okay sweet, saved me stopping reading this thread and hitting up the search engine. that makes a lot more sense. why don't they just call it negative matter?

>>7453584
how do we know it's not just the galaxies moving physically? have we observed space-time itself expanding in a... warp bubble since that is what is implied though not said?

>>7453610
>how do we know it's not just the galaxies moving physically?
Their behavior can't be explained by movement.

Think of it like spots on a balloon. If the distance between all of them is increasing, it can't be because the spots are moving; it must be due to the expansion of the balloon's surface (due to it being inflated or something).

>>7453636
that sounds like saying that matter from an explosion in space cannot be moving just from them moving due to the momentum and energy from the explosion, but rather that the dimension in which they are travelling has witnessed the explosion and determined a need has arisen for the dimension to expand to accommodate the explosion without the mass physically moving.
it's a cop out explanation IMO and doesn't fit with even simple logic analysis.
especially when you confine it with the last theory of big bang. if everything is moving away from a single point, it's likely due to the theory being relatively correct. maybe what appears to be faster rate of expansion now is the reletavistic effects of expansion to the train spotter where as the passenger sees contraction and thus slower acceleration apparent

>>7453661
It appears you don't actually know what you're talking about. Have you really studied general relativity? If not, then don't try to refute the analysis that actual physicists have done. If yes, then you probably didn't study it properly.

>>7453690
I havent, the shit just doesn't make sense. it just appears to me to be another variant of models and theories applied that work for many things but are not accurate for all that they are applied to.

which seems simpler?
>space itself is ballooning and matter isn't flying away from some common center
or
>shit can actually travel faster than light and we don't have an accurate understanding of how or why

>>7447161
how can we slow down light? harness a black hole? I know what I say sounds stupid, but it has to sound that way to respond to what you just said.

>>7446960

How about instead of thinking about some Star Wars crap that's probably 500 years away we would first try to make travel at 0.90 light speed possible?

>>7453610

It's not just the galaxies physically moving. The space itself between even atoms is expanding, this is offset of course by gravity. So at least everything up to our local super group is stable whilst most everything else is redshifting away from us. Due to dark energy or what have you

>launch 2 different objects in opposite directions
>have them go near the speed of light
>their velocity relative to each other is faster than light

>>7454202
no its not

>>7447092
>slow down light
>>7447161
>Send light through long diamond.

Is the light actually slowing down, or is it just bouncing around between atoms?

>>7446960
just be yourself

if FTL is physically impossible would that explain why aliens haven't contacted us yet?

>>7454281
Light is merely vibrations in the aether.

>>7446960
just make a warp drive. everyone in this thread is a pseudo intellectual

>>7446960
Don't assume that going FTL is the key for practical super long distance travel. Circumvent the law if you want freedom from it.

The human mind can already connect stuff between dimensions.

>>7455391
no it would not

>>7449239
It requires virtual negative energy which doesn't exist before it interacts with the black hole.

>>7455415
Pre-1905 physicist pls go.

>>7456138
lold fucking hard at this comment

>>7449239
It doesn't require negative energy; the energy becomes negative after passing through the event horizon because the time axis gets flipped with a spacial axis (this shows why we have to consider spacetime as a single object, because these axes can mix), so the momentum of the particle in the "inwards" direction gets exchanged with the momentum in the time direction, i.e energy.

>>7446960

Why are we even thinking about FTL drive right now?

What we need is achieving speed close to light and FTL communications. That should be the goal for the near future. True FTL drive is centuries away.

>>7456364
FTL communication isn't any different than FTL travel. We have the technology to travel at near light speed. We could get to Alpha Centauri in about 20 years.

>>7447321
wut? with .5c a 14 year trip(earth view) would be 12 years for the ship.

>Go at speed .99c
>In your perspective it's a lot faster becouse of lenght contraction
>?????
>Profit

>>7457196
this is pretty much true. though you'd probably have no earth to come back to if you want to travel any meaningful distance using relativistic length/time.

>>7447305
how is that blue?
which movie btw?