Alternatives to Hyperdrive?
June 16, 2019 9:58PM
edited June 2019
Many years ago when the CUSWE encyclopedia still existed on the Force.net they had an entry where scientists were called upon to find alternatives to the hyperdrive for faster than light travel. I know that the Gossam had the Tumbledrive and you can always use hypergates or wormholes; but what could a scientist use in place of a hyperdrive to move FTL? A warp drive is Star Trek and believe it or not; sometimes in Star Wars Legends; the hyperdrive was refereed to as a warp drive (no joke).
0
- 52.3K General Discussion
- 8 Developer Q&A Archive
- 1.7K New Players
- 27.2K Arena and Character Strategy
- 2.3K Individual Events
- 5K Guild Events
- 4.5K PVP and Rivalry
- 43.8K Guild Recruitment
- 609 Art and Media
- 3.8K Off Topic
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Replies
Their Talking about Star Wars, Star Trek, and Portal(s).
Bistromathic Drive. Operates on the principals of Bistromath, which holds that the act of splitting the bill after lunch with friends is so complex that it opens a rift in space-time. When the bill is finally sorted, you may find yourself in a completely different location or indeed time than what you expected. Activating a bistromathic drive and designing a trajectory consists of ordering items on a menu and other lunch-related activites. One lunch is finished, you find you have arrived at your destination.
RIP Douglas Adams
Wouldn’t they have to have predefined routes and controlled/constructed worm holes/speed tunnels to do this?
You have to read OPs old threads about the book he's writing.
Quantum Entanglement doesn't need any of that as it is not needed by the nature of itself.
Quantum Tunneling basically only needs a straight line as you can't collide with anything. It's like traveling in absolute vacuum, your speed can become 'infinite' in theory.
But your mass also increases.
Quantum tunneling like Neutrinos have been proven to not be FTL
Quote from Wikipedia:
"Theoretical physicists Gian Giudice, Sergey Sibiryakov, and Alessandro Strumia showed that superluminal neutrinos would imply some anomalies in the velocities of electrons and muons, as a result of quantum-mechanical effects. Such anomalies could be already ruled out from existing data on cosmic rays, thus contradicting the OPERA results. Andrew Cohen and Sheldon Glashow predicted that superluminal neutrinos would radiate electrons and positrons and lose energy through vacuum Cherenkov effects, where a particle traveling faster than light decays continuously into other slower particles."
This means that it is - in theory - possible to have particles that can travel faster than light. It would be just destructive to itself. Maybe his scientist can do research on a way to make it stable. Don't forget we're limited to our knowledge and resources, that mustn't be true for him.
Here's the full article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light_neutrino_anomaly
As my highschool teachers would say after reading that statement "everything else is worthless to read after reading that."
Is this supposed to be funny or not? Wikipedia is a great place for knowledge even if not the best for stuff like that. And i'm no scientist at all, that's just a hobby but i find it interesting.
I may not be in school any more, but the reason we were given for not being allowed to use wikipedia was the fact that it is a peer edited source, so anything can be changed. But I would like to bring up Tosh.0. Our buddy Danny had his viewers chance the official Tosh.0 wiki page to whatever they wanted, and within a short time, the page was corrected and locked from further edits.
I do think it's very accurate and i haven't changed anything there just to make a thought experiment more plausible for sure.
So those neutrinos doesn't exist for what we know right now. But that can't be the end, i don't think it is. Humans are an amazing race, look what we've achieved in such a short time. A hundred years ago we barely could fly in the air, now we're talking about colonizing Mars.
If something exists that's FTL we will find it. If it doesn't exist i'm pretty sure we will develop something that is, even if we need to break existence on it's own.
Not being a theoretical physicist myself, I wouldn't know. But I only bring up Tosh.0 to give an example of how something on wiki could be made factually incorrect and how it is changed, didn't mean to imply anything else. Personally I thought it was absurd to prevent Wikipedia being used as a reference.
My issue is that everything measured is on a subatomic scale. How would that translate into something larger, such as a space shuttle? The idea behind faster than light travel would be to transport cargo and passengers extremely large distances and I know I don't fit into an atom. lol.
But how are they measured? It seems like anything can be proven mathematically if you sit and play with the numbers enough. Myself I have difficulty with theoretical math. I have to have something tangible for me to truly grasp the concept. Like trig, didn't do well in high school but when I got into a field that I had to apply it, I got it.
Wow! I understood that explanation. Thanks for that.
They shoot these neutrinos through solid rock? Why not a vacuum or air? It seems a bit weird to be testing if faster than light speed is possible by doing the experiment with some other medium than what we would be traveling through. Perhaps it's to contain them?
Interesting. Perhaps for the next phase of experiments, use the moon. For a math wizard, it shouldn't be hard to factor in all the variables. Looks like the first job for the Space Force!