Talk:Faster-than-light travel

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon science.svg

This science related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Steelbrain.png

This is the first page I ever started on RW. I will expand it in increments. Please feel free to critique me.— Unsigned, by: EricB / talk / contribs

Hi Eric. OK good start. First off, though please remember to sign your talk comments. Then what would be nice for this article is some example of a loon somewhere claiming that FTL works for some reason or another. Don't forget to give it a category. And the name of the article should be bold. I've not done these two formatting things so that you can have a go. But if you would like me to so that you can see how it's done please ask. Cheers. Keep up the good work!--Bobbing up 12:34, 21 July 2008 (EDT)

Tachyons[edit]

Please note that Special Relativity does not rule out faster than light travel. Hypothetical particles that are capable of such travel are called tachyons, and while they travel faster than light, they would not be able to travel at light speed or slower. This is just plausible enough to venture outside of the realm of pseudoscience and into unlikely theories of science. 65.37.15.186

Mmm. I know they (tachyons) are mentioned somewhere (cos I dun it) don't remember where though. Found it:Speed of light "The existence of some faster-than-light particles, such as tachyons, has been suggested. Tachyons, if they existed, would be confined to the "other side" of the light-speed barrier; they would be restricted to speeds faster than the speed of light." This message brought to you by: Toastrespondand honey 05:47, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Cherenkov radiation[edit]

Actually, in some circumstances, the speed of light can be surpassed in a non-vaccuumous setting in an effect known as Cherenkov radiation, so the part of this article that says light can't be surpassed in given circumstance is a bit untrue. Lord Goonie Hooray! I'm helping! 23:30, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Neutrinos[edit]

I'm not a physics major and could be spreading false facts, but hasn't it recently been discovered that neutrinos can travel faster than light, with duplicated results? Woodgod (talk) 18:33, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Found it on Wikipedia: wp:OPERA neutrino anomaly -- Nx / talk 18:37, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Alcubierre drive power requirments[edit]

it is no longer thought that the Alcubierre drive requires such a tremendous amount of power http://www.space.com/17628-warp-drive-possible-interstellar-spaceflight.html it does have other problems but it is unclear if they can or cannot be over come, only more experimentation will tell us.— Unsigned, by: 173.70.112.202 / talk / contribs 20:50, 9 May 2014‎ (UTC)

I will point out that the power requirements are still tremendous. The mass-energy of Voyager 1 (stated in the article to be the rough quantity still necessary to power the drive) is about 6.5 x 1019 Joules, which was roughly the amount of electricity generated on Earth in 2008. This is still a fairly ridiculous power requirement, though admittedly one we can feasibly reach. We'll see whether generating negative mass density is actually something we can do. - Grant (talk) 21:02, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

thank you friend, I'm not a scientist and from what I read it seems like much work needs to be done to even know if it is possible but I thought it was worth mentioning that it seems less impossible then it used to, someone mentioned that they may have figured out how to reduce the power requirements even more but its in this long video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLc-sKvFqJw once more thank you for the fast response--173.70.112.202 (talk) 00:38, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

It's an interesting problem. Even if we forget about the power requirements, the requirement that we find some way to "unfold" space inside the ring is troublesome. While it's generally true that most formulations of relativistic quantum mechanics don't disallow negative mass (nor does general relativity), it's still something we have no guarantee we'll ever find or even be able to find. - Grant (talk) 15:31, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Possible Addition: Breaking Causality?[edit]

Just wondering if it'd be a good idea to put in a new section on why FTL is equivalent to time travel and can be used to break causality.Onychoprion (talk) 22:44, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Thought experiment[edit]

Ins some strange universe on the other side of the speed of light, there is a RW-equivalent page on slower-than-light travel. Anna Livia (talk) 17:34, 4 December 2017 (UTC)