emdrive NASA breakthrough -- the EM Drive actually works!

[Forjo]

no mass can travel at the speed of light, not even the tiniest particle as far as we know

 

Fixed that for you.

 

Or, you could say, "no mass can travel at the speed of light, not even the tiniest particle, without modifications to space/time"

 

-Forjo

[XerXis]

Fixed that for you.

 

Or, you could say, "no mass can travel at the speed of light, not even the tiniest particle, without modifications to space/time"

 

-Forjo

Well ok, as far as we know, as for your second remark, if you change modify the space/time around the object, the object itself would not be travelling at the speed of light (or faster) thus not violating the speed limit

[Guest]

This will amount to low ping gaming between Mars and Earth in the next 500 years.

 

Most practical application ever. Them Dota 2 Martian trolls will calm down finally and stop whining about their pings.

[simplezz]

It would be cool to be able to send out probes equipped with these kinds of drives and survey our galaxy. I don't know how communication would work though. Could this warp-field technology somehow be applied to data transfer over long distances? Perhaps we need a subspace a la startrek

[Forjo]

Well ok, as far as we know, as for your second remark, if you change modify the space/time around the object, the object itself would not be travelling at the speed of light (or faster) thus not violating the speed limit

That's semantics. Speed equals distance over time. If the object gets there faster than light would, it's traveling faster than light.

 

It always amazes me how scientists make the same mistakes over and over. We went through the same things, the disbelief, the pronouncements of impossibility, and in some cases, the character assaults (see the recent Forbes article) for other breakthroughs as well. Remember when the sound barrier was impossible to break (hence, the word, "barrier")? We couldn't break it because we didn't understand WHY it was a barrier.

 

Today, scientists don't understand WHY light has a speed limit. Sure, they have an equation that fits the observation, but they don't understand what is actually happening -- why does mass approach infinity as speed approaches the speed of light? How does motion somehow generate mass? And how exactly does gravity reach out and pull objects (along with the other little-understood strong and weak nuclear forces) when every other force that we do understand, pushes?

 

With so many basic questions of what is actually happening left unanswered and replaced with formulas, I think it's far too soon to say what is impossible.

 

Yet the belief that something is impossible is one of the main criticisms of this research.

 

Sure, they could have missed something that will show up in peer review. But to dismiss this as some have done just because it violates so-called existing laws is shortsighted.

 

-Forjo

[Emn1ty]

That's semantics. Speed equals distance over time. If the object gets there faster than light would, it's traveling faster than light.

 

That's the thing... depending on how you travel then that's actually not the case. When you warp space-time, or in terms of FTL you compress it. You're making it take less distance relative to normal space-time.

 

If each dot is the distance traveled in a light year.

 

Normal space

.     .     .     .     . (5 light years)

 

Warped Space

.....

 

So now, because it's been compressed the distance is of the entire space of 5 light years is less than that of 1 light year (pre-warped space). Since the distance is less, the time is less. The speed can remain the same throughout because you aren't actually going faster, you're just traveling a shorter distance.

[Unobscured Vision]

I'd like to reiterate that the OP I made contains some incorrect information/conclusions and as such needs to be read in the context of "NASA's experimental EM Drive shows promise -- but isn't capable of FTL propulsion just yet!".

 

Just so it's clear.

[Forjo]

That's the thing... depending on how you travel then that's actually not the case. When you warp space-time, or in terms of FTL you compress it. You're making it take less distance relative to normal space-time.

 

If each dot is the distance traveled in a light year.

 

Normal space

.     .     .     .     . (5 light years)

 

Warped Space

.....

 

So now, because it's been compressed the distance is of the entire space of 5 light years is less than that of 1 light year (pre-warped space). Since the distance is less, the time is less. The speed can remain the same throughout because you aren't actually going faster, you're just traveling a shorter distance.

Again, we're arguing semantics. I could appropriate your example as follows:

 

Distance before travel

.    .    .    .    .  (5 light years)

 

Distance during travel

..... (warped space)

 

Distance after arrival

.    .    .    .    .  (5 light years)

 

Distance over time.

 

-Forjo

[Emn1ty]

Again, we're arguing semantics. I could appropriate your example as follows:

 

Distance before travel

.    .    .    .    .  (5 light years)

 

Distance during travel

..... (warped space)

 

Distance after arrival

.    .    .    .    .  (5 light years)

 

Distance over time.

 

-Forjo

 

That's not how it works. When you describe how fast something is going, you are talking about it's own velocity relative to objects around it. If a car is traveling in the same direction as the earth orbits the sun. It drives 30 miles an hour, you don't assume it's actually traveled 66630 miles just because the earth moved, too and therefore it must have actually been traveling 66630 mph. It was still only moving itself at 30 mph. Just because space is bent doesn't mean the vehicle is actually moving at greater speed. The car only traveled 30 miles, regardless of how far the earth moved underneath it.

[Forjo]

That's not how it works. When you describe how fast something is going, you are talking about it's own velocity relative to objects around it. If a car is traveling in the same direction as the earth orbits the sun. It drives 30 miles an hour, you don't assume it's actually traveled 66630 miles just because the earth moved, too and therefore it must have actually been traveling 66630 mph. It was still only moving itself at 30 mph. Just because space is bent doesn't mean the vehicle is actually moving at greater speed. The car only traveled 30 miles, regardless of how far the earth moved underneath it.

Yet C is not a relative speed -- and the believed limit also is not relative. Absolute speed is distance over time. Period.  And with respect to space travel, absolute speed is all that matters when it comes to mass and acceleration.

 

Sorry, but you're still having a semantics argument. I'm not sure why, but you are.

 

-Forjo

[NightScreams]

Is it just me or does this space bubble warp remind you of that Area 51 scientist poser on TV back in the late 80's that used to say alien space crafts worked like this way back then. I guess even if he was a liar, at least he lied correctly now that such is as of now, feasible.