Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Warp Drive May Be More Feasible Than Thought, Scientists Say

news.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 186 posts

Re: Warp Drive May Be More Feasible Than Thought, Scientists Say

#61

Post by nessus42 »

dhughes wrote: post #55
nlh wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not the down-voter, but I think you were likely down-voted because this article/discussion is not about time travel. And your first statement is that "you can't have faster-than-light travel..." is precisely what this paper discusses -- that with certain loopholes in physics (and consistent with General Relativity), faster-than-light travel is at least theoretically possible.

I think the "faster than light" part wording seems a bit off since from what I gather the point is not to go fast to get to a location but to get there through warped space-time. I imagine a 100 km long and 1km high brick wall, you're in the middle but want to get to the other side of the wall. Option #1 is to travel as fast as you can 50km to one end and then 50km back to the spot on the other side. Option #2 tunnel…

That's not the scenario described in the OP. The FTL drive described in the OP is a traditional "warp drive", that allows you to travel faster than light by moving the space around you faster than light, while you continue to travel slower than light within your rapidly moving space bubble.

You're still effectively traveling faster than light, however, and you'd still be able to use this to travel backwards in time.

Re: Warp Drive May Be More Feasible Than Thought, Scientists Say

#63

Post by nessus42 »

Evbn wrote: post #56
nessus42 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Faster-than-light travel allows you to travel backwards in time. This is an essential part of Special and General Relativity. Those who don't understand this and who are not ready to address its consequences, should refrain from speculating on what is and isn't possible.

Is FTL the same as warping space? what happens in a (reduced dimensions for intuitiveness) scenario where a universe is like a line segment, and gets bent into crossing itself, allowing jumps from one point to another? Then there is a long way and a short way to send a message, kind of like travelling through vacuum is faster than traveling through water.

FTL is not the same thing as warping space in the same way that speeding is not the same thing as driving a Maserati. But if you can warp space at your will to give you the power to effectively get from point A to point B faster than a beam of light would, then you will also be able to construct "closed time-like loops", which will allow you to travel backwards in time.

Re: Warp Drive May Be More Feasible Than Thought, Scientists Say

#64

Post by nessus42 »

enraged_camel wrote: post #59
nessus42 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are not correct. If anything with information travels faster than the speed of light, then there are frames of reference in which that information arrived at the destination before it left the origin. Furthermore, unless your FTL drive is limited in ways that would make it utterly useless, any FTL drive can be used to make "closed time-like loops", which would allow travelers to meet up with their own past selves…

>>You are not correct. If anything with information travels faster than the speed of light, then there are frames of reference in which that information arrived at the destination before it left the origin. No. If you send a radio signal to Mars, and then warp to Mars to find yourself there 0.1 seconds later, you are still 0.1 seconds after the moment on which you sent the signal from the point of origin. You are tra…

Nothing you just said contradicts my statement, which was, "there are frames of reference in which that information arrived at the destination before it left the origin."

I suspect that you don't know anything at all about Special Relativity, in which case, there's not much more I can tell you except to go educate yourself.

Re: Warp Drive May Be More Feasible Than Thought, Scientists Say

#65

Post by stcredzero »

MBlume wrote: post #37
hooo wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Uh, no. The "only problem" is that the concept relies on exotic matter, a hypothetical matter with 0 evidence for its existence (so far). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exotic_matter There are multiple routes here though. They could also find an "exotic spaceship" that already has a warp drive.

Find one with a halting oracle on board and you're set.

How to fake an "almost" Halting Oracle. For one thing, it's not a Halting Oracle, it's actually an "oracle" that tells you if you have an unspecified bug. The "oracle" doesn't answer "trivial" questions, for an unspecified definition of trivial. In reality, the "oracle" just uses heuristics to determine if the program is complex enough, that any experienced developer would tell you that there's probably a bug somewhere. The "oracle" will only answer questions about systems that are really Production systems. The "oracle" will not answer questions about systems that use Formal Methods.

If the above criteria are met, the "oracle" waits a random interval of time, flashing lights in complex patterns, then simply answers, "Yes."

Re: Warp Drive May Be More Feasible Than Thought, Scientists Say

#66

Post by indiecore »

MBlume wrote: post #37
hooo wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Uh, no. The "only problem" is that the concept relies on exotic matter, a hypothetical matter with 0 evidence for its existence (so far). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exotic_matter There are multiple routes here though. They could also find an "exotic spaceship" that already has a warp drive.

Find one with a halting oracle on board and you're set.

That'd be a good day.

Re: Warp Drive May Be More Feasible Than Thought, Scientists Say

#67

Post by Ygg2 »

huffman wrote: post #31
ceejayoz wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seems more likely to me, and at least hypothetically possible, that they've been in space as long or longer than us. Statistically, that's a near certainty. In the timeframes of galaxies and evolution, the chances that all the other intelligent species are also just a few hundred years into the industrial revolution is essentially zero.

Are you trying to tell me that Stargate has been lying this whole time?

Yes, rules of cinematic narrative outweight the need to tell a faithful story. I.e. in Stargate universe it would be really boring if the Goa'uld just came, slaughtered everyone and take the rest prisoners for experiments within the first 5min-1hr.

Re: Warp Drive May Be More Feasible Than Thought, Scientists Say

#68

Post by indiecore »

biot wrote: post #46
rbanffy wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a space faring species encounters non-space faring species Any non space faring species either lives on a very boring neighborhood (one where rocks never fall from the sky and other kinds mass-extinction events never happen) or is extinct and we may find their fossil remains.

As far as we know, dolphins, cockroaches, and platypuses are not space faring species. Whether their neighborhood is boring is a matter of opinion, of course.

They've also got a space faring race (well sort of) generally looking out for them.

Re: Warp Drive May Be More Feasible Than Thought, Scientists Say

#69

Post by fungi »

MBlume wrote: post #37
hooo wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Uh, no. The "only problem" is that the concept relies on exotic matter, a hypothetical matter with 0 evidence for its existence (so far). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exotic_matter There are multiple routes here though. They could also find an "exotic spaceship" that already has a warp drive.

Find one with a halting oracle on board and you're set.

seems unlikley.

if only we had some kind of improbability engine.

Re: Warp Drive May Be More Feasible Than Thought, Scientists Say

#70

Post by indiecore »

ceejayoz wrote: post #27
andrewflnr wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're assuming the other species is non-spacegoing. It seems more likely to me, and at least hypothetically possible, that they've been in space as long or longer than us. And probably if you can bend space enough to make a warp drive, deflecting an incoming piece of matter isn't that hard. But I agree we're more likely to end up at war with each other.

> It seems more likely to me, and at least hypothetically possible, that they've been in space as long or longer than us. Statistically, that's a near certainty. In the timeframes of galaxies and evolution, the chances that all the other intelligent species are also just a few hundred years into the industrial revolution is essentially zero.

There is of course the (admittedly astonishingly unlikely) chance that we're first. I mean someone has to be the first ones up, and since life on other planets is looking more and more factual other intelligent life should be around and other intellegent life if it was more advanced than us should be MUCH more advanced and we'd see evidence of them changing the galaxy. Since we don't well, maybe we're first.
Post reply on HN