I know that Einstein doesn't think so; but, with the new theories of membrane theory, string theory, etc., is there serious consideration among the scientific community as to whether one day this technology could be implemented?
2006-09-02 18:23:00 · 13 answers · asked by 15fsg546rge1rrheljh45hjr90459ty3 3 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Physics
No.
It is widely accepted - even in string theory (which is completely unproven) - that the speed of light reprensents an absolute upper limit to the transfer of matter, energy or even information through space.
Consequently all attempts to theories about getting around our somewhat cubmersomely large universe at anything approaching a useful rate concentrate on shortening the effective distances though space between two points. This is theoretically possible because spacetime is not flat and immutable but curves in response to mass and energy (or specifically in repsonse to stress-energy).
However, the amount of mass required to curve space even a tiny bit is collosal. For instance, one calculation shpwed that to obtain a useful effect you would have to rapidly rotate a massive disk the diameter of our galaxy - not a practical recipe for a technology.
String theory introduces additional - and as yet entirely hypothetical - dimensions which introduces the possibility of achieving useful curvature without resorting to spinning the entire galaxy on its head. But we are still not talking star ship enterprise.
2006-09-03 00:21:03 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm not a mathmetician, nor in the "scientific community", but the string theory describes 10 dimensions. If you can somehow project yourself into one of the extra dimensions- (over 4), you can beat Einstein and fold space. You are not limited by what Einstein has said and been proven true (based on the 4 dimensions), and can travel great distances (distance is relative also) by somehow manipulating the continum of "space".
2006-09-02 19:17:42 · answer #2 · answered by Scotty 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
E=mc^2. At speeds greater than c, matter would become infinitely massive. Some scientists have theorized that it might be possible to open a wormhole to another dimension of space/time, which could be used as a "matter sink" to store the infinite mass until sub-light speed was restored. This theory cannot be disproved right now and so is not really scientific. I would say that speed>c is not possible.
2006-09-02 19:11:14 · answer #3 · answered by Lo 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
'The faster you go, the heavier you become. If you reached the speed of light, your mass would become infinite.
To move an object of infinite mass would take an infinite amount of energy. A lot of energy might get you close to the speed of light, but there simply is not enough energy in the whole universe to accelerate you all the way up to light speed. That's why it's impossible for anything to ever travel at the speed of light.'
2006-09-02 20:15:57 · answer #4 · answered by Emily K 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nothing is faster than the speed of light. It is highly unlikely that anything can approach the speed of light because the faster you go the larger you become. At 1/2 the speed of light you (well me anyway- I'm 6"5") will become over 15 ft. tall.
2006-09-02 18:40:33 · answer #5 · answered by Re Fined 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Have you watched the movie EVENT HORIZON ? It has an interesting theory. Rather than traveling the distance, why don't we try to fold the universe so both the embarking point and the destination point meet. Cool idea, it beats light speed travel.
2006-09-02 18:27:50 · answer #6 · answered by papadaddy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
unless alternate means of energy are invented such as some sort of free energy it doesnt seem likely. in order to travel at teh speed of light for any sustained amount of time it would require an amount of fuel 1million times the weight of the payload. so with that in mind the fuel itself would be to heavy to ever propel itself, let alone any payload.
one alternate method i have concieved would be firing the payload from a cannon, they ignited rockets which would drop off after being consumed and then find a way to pick up fuel from space as it is being consumed. kinda of like a drive by gas station.
another method maybe traveling on a mag lev rail so you can consume electric that would be provided by the track and not require it to be on board. but of coarse you would eventually outrun the electrons in the rail.
all in all it doesnt seem likely in the near future. seriously, is traffick that bad where you live?
2006-09-02 19:08:57 · answer #7 · answered by hondacobra 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Theoritically "faster than light travel" has been proven.
But it might be technically impossible [ or if we have 1000 einsteins born together working as a team, might create something in another 1000 years ]
Hope i am proven wrong !!!. I really really do.
2006-09-02 19:48:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
We see purely the mild that ends its existence by ability of reacting with the pigments of our retinal cells. mild going everywhere else is thoroughly invisible to us. Scientists have in basic terms at the instant found out a thank you to 'see' mild with out extinguishing it, below some very specific situations. This seems to be a very useful skills. -- Regards, John Popelish
2016-11-06 08:00:45 · answer #9 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
if you could go faster then the speed of light you would catch up with yourself... this is a great question when you think about it
2006-09-02 18:39:59 · answer #10 · answered by wizard 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋