Faster than Light and wormholes

[Richie Smash]

If the concept of a wormhole is like folding a piece of space-time like a piece of paper, for near instantaneous travel faster than light, what is keeping us back right now?

I am aware that it's really complicated and far beyond my scope of understanding right now, however I am fascinated by anything to do with discovery and what's out there, so I always wonder what are the prospects of faster than light travel?

 

[ZapperZ]

If the concept of a wormhole is like folding a piece of space-time like a piece of paper, for near instantaneous travel faster than light, what is keeping us back right now?

I always think that maybe there is some super technology being hidden from us, what are the prospects of faster than light travel?

You seem to not be able to distinguish the difference between something that exists merely as a "concept", versus reality.

Wormhole has not been verified. This is a crucial piece of the puzzle in ANY science. It is also has many untested speculation, not to mention, tremendously difficult to create based on some of the parameters that are required. Your post made it sound as if this is a piece of cake, and we should just go ahead and do it.

Zz.

 

[Dale]

what is keeping us back right now?

The unavailability of any material with a negative mass

what are the prospects of faster than light travel?

You would do much better to buy a bunch of lottery tickets.

 

[purnachandra behera]

is it something like cherenkov phenomena in space? i have no idea

 

[Drakkith]

is it something like cherenkov phenomena in space? i have no idea

No, it's completely different. A wormhole is a geometrical phenomenon, meaning that it's a result of a particular way the geometry of spacetime is set up. Cherenkov radiation is the result of charged particles traveling faster than the electromagnetic waves they themselves generate in a medium.

 

[russ_watters]

You seem to not be able to distinguish the difference between something that exists merely as a "concept", versus reality.

Wormhole has not been verified.

Yeah, even further: The OP says "holding us back". From what? Making one? Using one? Even for things proven to exist, we can't necessarily make or use them! The moon exists, but that doesn't mean we know how to build our own!

 

[sophiecentaur]

is it something like cherenkov phenomena in space? i have no idea

The effective speed of light through any medium is less than c. Cherenkov works when a fast (but sub-c) object enters a material with a sub-c propagation speed. And, of course, the object slows up even more!

 

[Vanadium 50]

The moon exists, but that doesn't mean we know how to build our own!

Good point. Bad example, at least since 1957.

 

[Mister T]

I am aware that it's really complicated and far beyond my scope of understanding right now, however I am fascinated by anything to do with discovery and what's out there, so I always wonder what are the prospects of faster than light travel?

You might find it more interesting to study the implications of slower-than-light travel. For example, at a speed of $\frac{999}{1000}$ the speed of light it would take about 2 months to travel to a star system that's located 4 light years away!

Studying that would be far more practical, since it's the stuff everyday modern life instead of the stuff of science fiction.

 

[Drakkith]

You might find it more interesting to study the implications of slower-than-light travel. For example, at a speed of $\frac{999}{1000}$ the speed of light it would take about 2 months to travel to a star system that's located 4 light years away!

For those confused by this, do note that the 2 months is the duration of the time on the ship. Those of us on Earth would see the ship take just over 4 years to arrive.

 

[BWV]

You might find it more interesting to study the implications of slower-than-light travel. For example, at a speed of $\frac{999}{1000}$ the speed of light it would take about 2 months to travel to a star system that's located 4 light years away!

Studying that would be far more practical, since it's the stuff everyday modern life instead of the stuff of science fiction.

Only if you could instantaneously start and stop. A constant 1G acceleration / deceleration would take about 3.5 years of ship time and you would ‘only’ get to .95c. However, in about 30 years you could get to the Andromeda Galaxy

 

[Sean Nelson]

Using the math regarding the acceleration and decelerate of this trip. Does this take into account the relativity of time slowing as you are reaching the speed of light. Likewise as you are slowing time speeding up as you decelerate.

Thanks

 

[BWV]

Using the math regarding the acceleration and decelerate of this trip. Does this take into account the relativity of time slowing as you are reaching the speed of light. Likewise as you are slowing time speeding up as you decelerate.

Thanks

Yes, there are a number of calculators for this on the web, for example

http://nathangeffen.webfactional.com/spacetravel/spacetravel.php

 

[Sean Nelson]

Thank you

 

[phinds]

Using the math regarding the acceleration and decelerate of this trip. Does this take into account the relativity of time slowing as you are reaching the speed of light. Likewise as you are slowing time speeding up as you decelerate.

Just to be sure you are clear, those things you say are happening are frame dependent and none of them are happening in the local frame of the object making the trip.

 

[Sean Nelson]

Yes thank you. I am referring to the observer and not the participant in the local frame

 

[Sean Nelson]

Yes, there are a number of calculators for this on the web, for example

http://nathangeffen.webfactional.com/spacetravel/spacetravel.php

Thank you,

I used the calculator. Very helpful. I am looking to see how as the passenger on board you can actively look at say a watch on your arm, and actually see your real time on the ship. Not the projected passage of time from start to finish.

 

[PeterDonis]

The OP question has been addressed. Thread closed.