Technology in the 'verse

POSTED BY: zeke023
UPDATED: Friday, October 31, 2003 03:24
VIEWED: 21912
PAGE 5 of 14

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE

VETERAN

Monday, June 2, 2003 4:19 AM

Quote:
Oh yeah? Well I'd like you to show me the equations that defined the particular law of physics which you claim indicates that faster-then-light travel "must be possible." I don't remember any mention of these laws when I was taking Relativistic Mechanics or Quantum Field Theory in Grad school.

Faster then light travel is only possible if your mass is effectively zero. Otherwise you are bound by Relativity, which clearly states that you cannot travel faster then light, or even at the speed of light.

Man, I'm glad you're out there.

The infinite improbability drive was created by a graduate student who, while sweeping up in the lab one day realized that there must be a finite probablity that there was an infinite improbability drive. He plugged this into a finite probability drive and out popped an infinite improbability drive. Originally it was used to move the undergarments of party hostesses three feet to the left. ...he was eventually hung by a crowd of physicists who decided what they reallyd didn't like was a wise ass, and generally didn't get invited to parties. - Douglas Adams

THEGN

Monday, June 2, 2003 4:30 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Veteran:
The infinite improbability drive was created by a graduate student who, while sweeping up in the lab one day realized that there must be a finite probablity that there was an infinite improbability drive. He plugged this into a finite probability drive and out popped an infinite improbability drive. Originally it was used to move the undergarments of party hostesses three feet to the left. ...he was eventually hung by a crowd of physicists who decided what they reallyd didn't like was a wise ass, and generally didn't get invited to parties. - Douglas Adams

Ha! The Spaceship Heart of Gold, powered by a cup of tea. :D I love Douglas Adams.

-----------
In the Dark Ages, Romano-Celtic Britannia was over-run by Viking-like cultures collectively called the Anglo-Saxons. They were led by warlords called Drytinns, and the greatest warriors among them were the Thegns.

KENWOOD

Monday, June 2, 2003 6:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Thegn:
Quote:
Originally posted by KenWood:
Wrong. If our current understanding of the laws of the universe are correct ( any at least some of it is almost certainly wrong ) "FTL" travel must be possible. The only problem is the energy required and there are theoretical ways around that.
Oh yeah? Well I'd like you to show me the equations that defined the particular law of physics which you claim indicates that faster-then-light travel "must be possible." I don't remember any mention of these laws when I was taking Relativistic Mechanics or Quantum Field Theory in Grad school.

Faster then light travel is only possible if your mass is effectively zero. Otherwise you are bound by Relativity, which clearly states that you cannot travel faster then light, or even at the speed of light. As a massive object travels faster, its mass actually increases. For relatively slow speeds, like those we encounter in our lives, the increase in mass is negligible, but at speeds close to the speed of light, mass begins to increase very quickly with an increase in velocity. With the increase in mass comes an increase in the amount of energy to further accelerate an object. At the speed of light, your mass is essentially infinite, according to Relativity, and you would need an infinite amount of energy to accelerate to the speed of light.

And THAT is what the current laws of physic state.

That would be string theory and hyperdimensional physics. As long as you have access to the Plank energy you can create artifical wormholes to effectivly allow FTL travel ( and time travel also ). Technicaly you are correct this is not traveling faster than light. It is instead avoiding the intervening space altogether, but the effect is for real world concerns "FTL". Of course you do need something like the energy output of the sun to pull this off. Sorta presents some engineering problems there, but again there are some theoretical possibilities. This all assumes superstring theory is correct ( a big assumption ), but it is the leading "theory of everything" right now. Actualy membrane theory but its just a refinment with one more dimension.

A mass of zero only allows travel at the speed of light ( photons ). Only something with zero mass can travel at the speed of light and can only travel at that speed. You need negative mass ( the unlikly tackyons ) to travel faster in "normal" space. Actualy I have reversed cause and effect there but it gets the idea across.

Quantum entanglement does not allow information to be sent FTL. Every thoery and experiment to try to get this to work has died on the vine. It seems the universe just doesn't want it to be.

The trick of getting light to go faster than it should is just that. A trick. It's literaly done with smoke and mirrors. Part of it has to do with the fact that light only travels at the "speed of light" in a vacume and part of it comes from tricks with how you measure the light pulse. The peak of the pulse can be shifted and the rise time altered to create the illusion of faster speeds or even arriving before it leaves. Makes for good press but it has no practical effect so far and probably never will. As far as I know nobody on this world has sent data, messages, music, etc. FTL.

This isn't a physics paper here, spelling may be off and liberties have been taken with definitions and some concepts for brevity. It's close enough for government work.

Later,

ME.

Don't look back, som'thin' might be gainin' on ya.
Who let the pigs play poker?
Evo Shander was right!

KENWOOD

Monday, June 2, 2003 6:46 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by christhecynic:

We have seen anything in Firefly to suggest FTL, if River could be frozen, so could everyone who got off earth, it could well be 500 years in the conscious future, and the time in transit wasn’t counted because everyone was asleep. Would be interesting when people woke up and found that their loved ones had died hundreds of years ago because the next ship over hit a meteor.

Yeah, I thought about this one. They have some sort of cryo/suspended animation so it could have been done that way. If so it would make sense to not count the "lost" years. Just for the psych effect if for no other reason.

Here's another thought I had: Maybe the comonly accepted history in the FF 'verse is a lie. That would account for the awful short time for terraforming and haveing all these populated core worlds. We debate today over the "facts" of history from 50 years ago. With a centralized computer database the "history" of 500 years ago would be very maliable. Just because the main characters in FF believe history went a certain way doesn't make it so.

Later,

ME.

Don't look back, som'thin' might be gainin' on ya.
Who let the pigs play poker?
Evo Shander was right!

CHRISTHECYNIC

Monday, June 2, 2003 7:03 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Thegn:
Verified does not mean repeated. Verified means that it has been shown to be true.

I understand that you may have trouble believing this, but nothing (when referring to laws of physics) has ever been proven to be true. Not one thing. Zip.

That’s because things can’t be proven to be true, if were able to somehow find out the speed of everything in the universe, and find out all of the speeds that had been and would be, there would still be no way to prove that the speed of light couldn’t be passed. You could say that it never had been or would be, but you couldn’t prove that it was impossible. Something is a law of physics if it is never proven wrong, NOT if it is proven true, because it can’t be proven true.

ver·i·fy
tr.v. ver·i·fied, ver·i·fy·ing, ver·i·fies
1. To prove the truth of by presentation of evidence or testimony; substantiate.
2. To determine or test the accuracy of, as by comparison, investigation, or reference:
3. To confirm
4. To affirm

sub·stan·ti·ate
tr.v. sub·stan·ti·at·ed, sub·stan·ti·at·ing, sub·stan·ti·ates
1. To support with proof or evidence; verify

con·firm
tr.v. con·firmed, con·firm·ing, con·firms
1. To support or establish the certainty or validity of; verify.
2. To make firmer; strengthen

af·firm
v. af·firmed, af·firm·ing, af·firms
v. tr.
1. To declare positively or firmly; maintain to be true.
2. To support or uphold the validity of; confirm.

Note that the main idea is to support with evidence. If you want to show something to be true, how about show that the world is flat. That can be shown to be true, it isn’t true, but it can be shown to be true. If you want to talk about something being verified in a scientific sense it means that experimental results were repeated that showed that in this instance the theory or hypothesis is an accurate predictor of whatever is being tested.

Quote:
Originally posted by Thegn:
Ha! The Spaceship Heart of Gold, powered by a cup of tea. :D I love Douglas Adams.

-----------
In the Dark Ages, Romano-Celtic Britannia was over-run by Viking-like cultures collectively called the Anglo-Saxons. They were led by warlords called Drytinns, and the greatest warriors among them were the Thegns.

It was a powered by the Infinite Improbability Drive, the Gold Bail, part of the Wicket Gate. The power of it had nothing to do with a cup of tea. Read the damn books.

The cup of tea was used in the creation of the Infinite Improbability Drive, not the powering of the ship. There are people who haven’t even read the books who know that.

SERGEANTX

Monday, June 2, 2003 7:30 PM

Quote:
I'm kind of wondering why the question even needs to be asked. Am I just dumb and don't get all you people's space talk?

What a spoiled sport. Don't you realize the 'gravity' of this argument? Establishing the internal consistency of the Firefly universe is of utmost importance. Without that, all we're left with is a bunch of stories about a group of people riding around in a boat. Get with the program!

SergeantX

"..and here's to all the dreamers, may our open hearts find rest." -- Nanci Griffith

ZEKE023

Monday, June 2, 2003 7:49 PM

Keep in mind that there ins't going to be a scientific explanation for all of this. It's science-fiction If we invent a lot of technobable to explain evything we'll end up with heisenberg regulators and inertial dampeners. Let's not go there.

The question was meant to be practicle - not technical. I don't think Joss really expected there to be a technical or scientific answer to all of these questions.

I dig the whole tech debate - but really all I wanted was enough to run a game on - not enough to write a Physics book.

Anyone got any insight on how communication works yet?

THEGN

Monday, June 2, 2003 8:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by christhecynic:
I understand that you may have trouble believing this, but nothing (when referring to laws of physics) has ever been proven to be true. Not one thing. Zip.

That's very convenient for you, isn't it? So now you can sit and babble on about any speculative prattle at the outskirts of accepted theory and claim it to be verified because in the midst of it all, you have decided that ultimately nothing can be proven. But the reality is that many things in physics have been proven, just not the stuff you're going on and on about. You can't throw out a 100 years of Relativity because you've decided that's not the way you want the universe to work. Relativity and quantum theory have been far more verified then anything you're talking about, and that is fact.

And thank you for looking up "Verify" for me and proving that it does not mean repeated, but rather it means exactly as I said, "shown to be true." String Theory, M Theory ... none of it has been verified. It's all based on wishy washy mathematics that seems to change with the month.

And like I said, if you want to prove me wrong, simply show me the papers that demonstrate that it is possible to travel faster then light. That's all you have to do. So if you're done looking up definition in the dictionary to support my opinion, then post these papers that verify that Relatively is wrong. Otherwise, I can look up my own words in the dictionary. Thanks, anyway.

-----------
In the Dark Ages, Romano-Celtic Britannia was over-run by Viking-like cultures collectively called the Anglo-Saxons. They were led by warlords called Drytinns, and the greatest warriors among them were the Thegns.

CHRISTHECYNIC

Monday, June 2, 2003 8:43 PM

Wait, lets see if I got this straight. Einstein, Newton, Hawking and the like were all wrong, except where it agrees with you? How convenient. So when they all said that science couldn’t be proven they were wrong, but when Einstein, our pal here, put forth relativity that is correct, despite the fact that it doesn’t always hold true (look at very small and high gravity)?

You explain that one to me.

Wait. I got it. You’re god here so everything you say goes and all of science that came before is flat out wrong if you say so. Hang on, let me bow down before you.

Shall I sacrifice a lamb? How about a goat?

THEGN

Monday, June 2, 2003 9:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by zeke023:
Keep in mind that there ins't going to be a scientific explanation for all of this. It's science-fiction If we invent a lot of technobable to explain evything we'll end up with heisenberg regulators and inertial dampeners. Let's not go there.

The question was meant to be practicle - not technical. I don't think Joss really expected there to be a technical or scientific answer to all of these questions.

I dig the whole tech debate - but really all I wanted was enough to run a game on - not enough to write a Physics book.

Anyone got any insight on how communication works yet?

Actually, we seem to have gotten sidetracked on the feasibility of faster then light flight. :) I guess one of my pet peeves is when people start throwing around so-called "proof" of faster then light travel. No such proof actually exists. It is all purely speculative.

There isn't really supposed to be a technical or scientific answer to what we see in Firefly. That's why they call it science fiction instead of science.

Well, I guess it depends on what kind of communication you're talking about? If you are referring to Firefly, then I have no clue, like you said, it's not meant to be real. If one assumes that they are using current laws of physics, then we might assume they are using some kind of radio or microwave signal. These kinds of signals have been used to successfully communicate as far as the outer planets (Neptune, Uranus). So it's quite possible to communicate the length of a solar system quite successfully. If you get into communication further then that, you run into the same barrier as in travel. Light only moves so fast. A communication to another star system would take years for a reply. Although there is some interesting work being done using something called quantum entanglement, in which particles are said to be "entangled" so that an examination of one reveals some identity of the other. For instance, if you took a photon and broke it up into two equal photons, sending one to Mars and the other to Earth. When you, on the Earth, received the particle with a certain polarization, you would know instantly that the particle that arrived at Mars would have an opposite polarization. This is often pleaded as faster-then-light communication, but it really is not. The best way I know to explain it is that if someone took a square piece of paper, cut it in half and sent half of it to you and the other to your brother, when that piece of paper arrived, you would instantly know the shape of your brother's piece if you know that the paper was initially square. There have been some interesting experiments beginning with Aspect and Bell's Inequality, and I'm curious to see what's going to happen in this field. It might be possible that this could be used to produce some kind of instantaneous communication, but this is quite speculative.

-----------
In the Dark Ages, Romano-Celtic Britannia was over-run by Viking-like cultures collectively called the Anglo-Saxons. They were led by warlords called Drytinns, and the greatest warriors among them were the Thegns.

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE