Could Warp Speed ever be possible?

Mark Mag Gloade · **Mon Aug 18, 2003 6:51 pm**

i heard that at air cadets they said if they harnest the power of a sun or the power of a lazer they could go light speed but because of molecules and no way to defend from they you would be instantly vaporised to dangerous at this point

species8472vsborg · **Wed Aug 20, 2003 5:46 pm warp**

I don't think we'll reach warp but there are wormholes, and the old theory of tesseracts (bending points in space time), but to go at warp we would have to see the future in order to plot our courses..see dune..(Frank Herbert, yes I'm old)..

blood_mage · **Sat Aug 23, 2003 7:53 am**

it would take about maybe 70 years to make one

Mark Mag Gloade · **Tue Sep 16, 2003 7:01 pm**

perhaps
but if the military was to be here they would find us and brainwash us for you saying that(lol only joking)but i doubt we would use 2 small stars

Dax Orien · **Wed Oct 08, 2003 7:22 am**

Whitehero · **Wed Oct 29, 2003 6:05 am**

I believe that warp speed will be achieved within the next 50-60 years or so. I also think that in order to prevent the deaccelerated aging process, the warp field was created.

EnsignParis · Lieutenant Commander Joined: 07 Sep 2001 Posts: 257

Ok, how to explain this...

ah yes.

YOU NEED INFINATE ENERGY OR ZERO MASS TO GO LIGHT SPEED.

Now, since it is impossible for matter to exist and have zero mass, that cancels that out.

And well, since infinity isn't a quantity, but a concept, you cant have "infinity" therefore you can't have an infinate amount of energy.

Therefore, it is impossible to ACCELERATE up to light speed using a rocket or an ion engine or whatever.

You need to BEND SPACE to travel at Star Trek speeds, and that sure isn't going to happen in the next 50-60 years. I mean hell, the Russians are still using the same exact chemical rockets they were using 40 years ago, and the Americans are still only using slightly improved chemical rockets.

The next step is to either create a fission engine, a fusion engine or an ion drive, not to create a superluminal starship, because frankly, we have no idea how to do it or even begin.

It might not even be possible.

davecenter · **Fri Oct 31, 2003 10:00 am**

Actually as you get faster and faster your mass increases, and your size decreases. When you hit the speed of light, you would have no size, and infinite mass, and you would turn into a black hole.

Starfleet #327 · Captain Joined: 27 Aug 2003 Posts: 526 Location: Australia

If anyone has the Star Trek 4: The Voyage Home Special Edition DVD (Which I do) it has an awesome special feature about Warp travel and if its possible. It also explains things such as aging inside and outside the ship.

If you have the DVD I suggest you watch it. I would answer all of your questions.

EnsignParis · Lieutenant Commander Joined: 07 Sep 2001 Posts: 257

ketchup · Ensign Joined: 12 Nov 2003 Posts: 59

The only way faster-then-light travel is attainable is if you created a vehicle that could make a portable wormhole, somehow creating a black hole whenever it wanted to go faster than light. BUT, once you created a black hole, it would pinch off into a singularity this stopping you from going through. to overcome this, you would need some kind of "negative" matter to curve space-time the other way, and opening up the passage to another part f the universe. Believe me, I know this kind of stuff.

EnsignParis · Lieutenant Commander Joined: 07 Sep 2001 Posts: 257

I see what you're saying...

But...

A - that wouldn't be faster than light travel, it would be merely taking a shortcut. It's like saying you can run 300 mph because you can cut through someones back yard.

B - Getting through a singularity wouldn't be the primary concern. Reaching the singularity without being destroyed would be the tough part.

C - Wormholes are theoretical

ketchup · Ensign Joined: 12 Nov 2003 Posts: 59

webtaz99 · **Fri Nov 14, 2003 6:27 pm lightspeed**

The Bad News:

Particle accelerators have shown that as you increase a particle's speed towards C (the speed of light), it takes more and more force to get the same acceleration. This indicates that you need infinite force to achieve the speed of light.

The Good News:

Nothing bigger than an ion has ever been accelerated near C, and it has been clearly proven that individual subatomic particles and bulk mass behave differently. We won't really know until we try it.

GhostOfAMemory · **Sun Nov 16, 2003 1:01 am**

GhostOfAMemory · **Sun Nov 16, 2003 1:15 am**

I am now reading the "think like einstein" link someone posted on here...

So they claim that time goes faster for those inside the train? Than why hasn't this been proven? Why is it whenever I get on a plane and fly somewhere their watches say the exact same thing as mine when I get off? Why do the cars move the same speed they always did? This seems really stupid. And even if it IS right, the question hasn't been answered as to why the ball goes faster but light doesn't. So they're saying that velocity is a constant but time is not? That time is affected by velocity? That doesn't sound right...

Okay, now that I think about it more I can grasp the concept... but it only works with light. Nothing else. The ball would still move faster.

So what is so special about 186,000 MPS that we supposedly can't go that fast? So it happens to be the same speed light travels... *shakes head* man, I'm glad I'm not a scientist

janeway9 · **Sun Nov 16, 2003 1:19 am**

I think that something that is like Warp speed will someday be invented..but the warp that is shown on the startrek series is not really possible. I mean yes it is very likely that someone will try it...but for us I don't think it would happen. I think that somethin Like it will be invented but the real thing like on the shows...No.. its just not physically possible for us b/c of our bodys and the way humans they have in the labs workin think.

Now if we were in there workin I think we COULD DO IT!

webtaz99 · **Sun Nov 16, 2003 12:19 pm Time vs Speed of light**

Experiments using both airplanes and satellites have provided data which prove time does slow down at higher velocities. Some physicists still doubt the data, because the speeds involved were a tiny fraction of C.

There is, however, absolutely no evidence to show that time stays the same or speeds up as C is approached.

NASA is developing a new rocket technology (the plasma engine) which should be able (over several years) to approach a significant fraction of C. Hopefully at least one probe will be used to explore relativistic effects.

Bear in mind that nearly all relativity concepts came from accelerator studies of subatomic particles. No object larger than a molecule has ever been accelerated anywhere near C.

EnsignParis · Lieutenant Commander Joined: 07 Sep 2001 Posts: 257

webtaz99 · **Thu Nov 20, 2003 4:45 pm Speed of light travel**

So far, mankind has accelerated subatomic particles or ions near the speed of light using external forces (electromagnetic fileds). As the particles approach C, they also approach the the speed that EM fields propogate. This requires more and more force in the EM fields to accelerate the particles. This results in the theory that it would take infinite energy to reach the speed of light.

Mankind has not yet attempted to accelerate an object large enough to see with naked eye to a large fraction of C. Nor has mankind created a vehicle which can propel itself near C. Theory says these cases will be no different, but anomalies do exist in the real world and these experiments have yet to be done.

webtaz99 · **Thu Nov 20, 2003 5:03 pm Relativity**

Oh, yeah.

Most of us are familiar with E=mC^2. General relativity brings about the equation Guv = -(8(pi)G/c2)Tuv (poor mathematical notation). It equates spacetime (Guv) with matter and energy (the other side of the equation).

This indicates that as energy approaches infinity the rate of time must approach zero. This is the basis of time dilation, which has been shown to exist.

Bottom line is, FTL travel requires a different set of physical laws than we currently posess, not an extension of them. Our current system is based on the fact that nothing has been observed travelling faster than light.

(Some experiments in photon tunnelling appeared to show FTL travel of photons, but this later turned out to be a statistical fluke in the data.)