B Any Feasible Faster-Than-Light Interstellar Travel?

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ascendant0
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Interstellar travel
Ascendant0
Messages
175
Reaction score
38
TL;DR Summary
As our technology advances and based on what we know to exist now, is there any feasible way to bend space-time to the point where interstellar travel comparable to say Star Trek is one day possible?
I'm not talking sci-fi, not talking "10yrs to the next solar system" speeds, and not including things we don't even know actually exist (like exotic matter). I'm talking interstellar travel like star ships, speeds one day comparable to what you see in sci-fi now, such as Star Trek?

While my knowledge in physics is only at 3rd year college level, I of course know our technology isn't nearly there yet. I also know that bending space to the extent where you could travel the vast distances between solar systems would take an energy source greater than a few of our suns. But, what I'm asking about is in hundreds (or maybe thousands) of years from now, is there any way based on our resources and technological advances that we could travel the stars at speeds where we could visit multiple solar systems in a lifetime?

If so, what technology or other resources would it require? How far off do you feel we are from getting there?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ascendant0 said:
TL;DR Summary: As our technology advances and based on what we know to exist now, is there any feasible way to bend space-time to the point where interstellar travel comparable to say Star Trek is one day possible?
No
Ascendant0 said:
I'm not talking sci-fi, not talking "10yrs to the next solar system" speeds, and not including things we don't even know actually exist (like exotic matter). I'm talking interstellar travel like star ships, speeds one day comparable to what you see in sci-fi now, such as Star Trek?
No
Ascendant0 said:
While my knowledge in physics is only at 3rd year college level, I of course know our technology isn't nearly there yet. I also know that bending space to the extent where you could travel the vast distances between solar systems would take an energy source greater than a few of our suns.
Uh ... you are WAY low on that estimate. If we COULD do it, which we can't, I think it would take a lot more energy than that.
Ascendant0 said:
But, what I'm asking about is in hundreds (or maybe thousands) of years from now, is there any way based on our resources and technological advances that we could travel the stars at speeds where we could visit multiple solar systems in a lifetime?
Highly unlikely
Ascendant0 said:
If so, what technology or other resources would it require? How far off do you feel we are from getting there?
I seriously doubt we will EVER get there.
 
Feasible? No, not at all. The closest thing would be the Alcubierre drive, but since that requires 'negative mass' (something not believed to exist) it's not within the realm of 'feasible'.

Ascendant0 said:
But, what I'm asking about is in hundreds (or maybe thousands) of years from now, is there any way based on our resources and technological advances that we could travel the stars at speeds where we could visit multiple solar systems in a lifetime?
Thanks to time dilation and length contraction you can feasibly visit many star systems within one lifetime of a passenger by traveling at near-c speed, but from the POV of a 'stationary' observer in one of the star systems a person is limited to visiting perhaps a handful of nearby star systems within the 'stationary' observer's lifetime.

FTL travel simply isn't possible according to science as we currently understand it. It is always possible we'll discover something new in the future that will allow it, but I doubt it.
 
Our best current understanding of the laws of physics is that FTL travel is impossible.

Thread closed.
 
@Ascendant0 The argument against faster-than-light travel is not based on technical limitations. It's not like the old "man will never fly" arguments put forth in the 19th century when no one imagined that the power-to-weight ratios achieved by 20th-century internal combustion and jet engines would remove all sorts of technical limitations.

The argument that we cannot get from point A to point B faster than a flash of light is more like the argument that we will never find two integers ##a## and ##b## such that ##(a/b)^2=2## - if we assume that is possible we encounter logical contradictions. For an example of the difficulties that arise you might try googling for "tachyonic antitelephone".
 
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top