91–100 of 168 posts
What is impossible in 2D (e.g. escaping from inside a circle) is possible and trivial in 3D. Is moving faster than speed of light a limitation that can be overcome in a higher dimension? Does it really require a lot of energy or is that only so under certain circumstances? There is a lot we still don't know
Since we have never been visited by aliens, or witnessed time travel, these things must not be possible. It they were, there would be proof and it would be documented. It's as simple as that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd rather predict 3) A spaceship large enough and self-sufficient enough that many generations of society can live and die on the spaceship at sub-light speeds. Not the flashy sci-fi solution, but the most likely.
Oh man, take it from someone who has been in the Navy: that’ll have to be one gigantic and well-functioning spaceship.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd rather predict 3) A spaceship large enough and self-sufficient enough that many generations of society can live and die on the spaceship at sub-light speeds. Not the flashy sci-fi solution, but the most likely.
Oh man, take it from someone who has been in the Navy: that’ll have to be one gigantic and well-functioning spaceship.
How does this solve the causality paradox?
If people confirm those things enable FTL, I think we will see a lot of people trying to reevaluate the General Relativity.
What is impossible in 2D (e.g. escaping from inside a circle) is possible and trivial in 3D. Is moving faster than speed of light a limitation that can be overcome in a higher dimension? Does it really require a lot of energy or is that only so under certain circumstances? There is a lot we still don't know
The 3d equivalent of a circle is a sphere, which is also impossible to escape from in 3d.
This is just an analogy anyway. My main point is, or what I hope science can figure out is whether the speed of light is a true limitation of reality or just a limitation of our own perception/understanding
What is impossible in 2D (e.g. escaping from inside a circle) is possible and trivial in 3D. Is moving faster than speed of light a limitation that can be overcome in a higher dimension? Does it really require a lot of energy or is that only so under certain circumstances? There is a lot we still don't know
If a 2d being escaped their 2d space would the universe disappear from their point of view?
Instead of negative energy this warp drive idea requires 10^30 more energy than the matter contained in Jupiter, so we aren't quite there ;-). The additional issue is whether something going faster than the speed of light violates causality, like a warp drive. I've never understood how to reconcile causality with the fact of so called 'spooky interaction at a distance'. If it's faster than the speed of light, and you…
(Assuming the same assumptions as the Bell tests)
(And assuming things like "measurement" and "macroscopic" have well defined meanings, which Bell had problems with too)
What is impossible in 2D (e.g. escaping from inside a circle) is possible and trivial in 3D. Is moving faster than speed of light a limitation that can be overcome in a higher dimension? Does it really require a lot of energy or is that only so under certain circumstances? There is a lot we still don't know
Why would being able to move through higher dimensions help you travel faster through the 3 we're familiar with?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My feeling is that interstellar travel will be slow and require many generations of travelers -- or not done by human beings at all.
Interstellar travel doesn't have to be slow for the travellers. You could get to Alpha Centauri and back to Earth in a day (at least as far as relativity is concerned), but for those who stayed on Earth, a decade would have passed. That's the twin paradox btw.