Saying, "it's just a theory" to a scientific theory, particularly to something well-tested like the relativity theory can basically only be said from willful ignorance to satisfy one's wishful thinking.
You're missing the point. Trying to use a scientific theory to prove something CAN'T be done doesn't really work. Using it to demonstrate that we don't know HOW to do something is fine.
Saying, "it's just a theory" to a scientific theory, particularly to something well-tested like the relativity theory can basically only be said from willful ignorance to satisfy one's wishful thinking.
You're missing the point. Trying to use a scientific theory to prove something CAN'T be done doesn't really work. Using it to demonstrate that we don't know HOW to do something is fine.
In point of fact, for the purposes of the discussion at hand, use of theory to prove something can't be done is perfectly okay. You can't exceed the speed of light in an Einsteinian plenum. (In fact, if you have mass, you can't even reach lightspeed, and if you don't have mass, you can't exist at any other velocity.) You can't fly unaided under a 1g field. You can't live without consuming calories. And so forth. All of these are borne out not merely by math (which doesn't of itself prove anything), but by observations of predictions made by those theories.
If we're going to exclude time travel because it's "impossible", then we're basically going to have to throw out everything that makes Trek Trek. And no, "just a theory" doesn't fly. It's a phrase invoked by the ignorant to attempt to claim everyone is just as ignorant. "Evolution is just a theory!" "Relativity is just a theory! Gravity is "just a theory", but I don't see many people volunteering to try to dispute that "theory" by jumping off of buildings.
Saying, "it's just a theory" to a scientific theory, particularly to something well-tested like the relativity theory can basically only be said from willful ignorance to satisfy one's wishful thinking.
You're missing the point. Trying to use a scientific theory to prove something CAN'T be done doesn't really work. Using it to demonstrate that we don't know HOW to do something is fine.
In point of fact, for the purposes of the discussion at hand, use of theory to prove something can't be done is perfectly okay. You can't exceed the speed of light in an Einsteinian plenum. (In fact, if you have mass, you can't even reach lightspeed, and if you don't have mass, you can't exist at any other velocity.) You can't fly unaided under a 1g field. You can't live without consuming calories. And so forth. All of these are borne out not merely by math (which doesn't of itself prove anything), but by observations of predictions made by those theories.
If we're going to exclude time travel because it's "impossible", then we're basically going to have to throw out everything that makes Trek Trek. And no, "just a theory" doesn't fly. It's a phrase invoked by the ignorant to attempt to claim everyone is just as ignorant. "Evolution is just a theory!" "Relativity is just a theory! Gravity is "just a theory", but I don't see many people volunteering to try to dispute that "theory" by jumping off of buildings.
Of course, in Star Trek they rarely get anywhere near the speed of light. A ship that leaves orbit at warp two (like the TOS Enterprise often did) has the same velocity it had in orbit. It is the bubble of space containing the ship that is "moving" its position along without adding any velocity. It is science-fiction handwavum but anything with FTL ships has to do that so the question of whether something is possible in reality is rather moot since in the imaginary universe of the story it is possible in order for the rest of the story to happen.
Saying, "it's just a theory" to a scientific theory, particularly to something well-tested like the relativity theory can basically only be said from willful ignorance to satisfy one's wishful thinking.
You're missing the point. Trying to use a scientific theory to prove something CAN'T be done doesn't really work. Using it to demonstrate that we don't know HOW to do something is fine.
In point of fact, for the purposes of the discussion at hand, use of theory to prove something can't be done is perfectly okay. You can't exceed the speed of light in an Einsteinian plenum. (In fact, if you have mass, you can't even reach lightspeed, and if you don't have mass, you can't exist at any other velocity.) You can't fly unaided under a 1g field. You can't live without consuming calories. And so forth. All of these are borne out not merely by math (which doesn't of itself prove anything), but by observations of predictions made by those theories.
If we're going to exclude time travel because it's "impossible", then we're basically going to have to throw out everything that makes Trek Trek. And no, "just a theory" doesn't fly. It's a phrase invoked by the ignorant to attempt to claim everyone is just as ignorant. "Evolution is just a theory!" "Relativity is just a theory! Gravity is "just a theory", but I don't see many people volunteering to try to dispute that "theory" by jumping off of buildings.
Of course, in Star Trek they rarely get anywhere near the speed of light. A ship that leaves orbit at warp two (like the TOS Enterprise often did) has the same velocity it had in orbit. It is the bubble of space containing the ship that is "moving" its position along without adding any velocity. It is science-fiction handwavum but anything with FTL ships has to do that so the question of whether something is possible in reality is rather moot since in the imaginary universe of the story it is possible in order for the rest of the story to happen.
In fact, that inspired Mexican astrophysicist Dr. Miguel Alcubierre to create his own hypothetical "warp drive", based on hyperinflation theory and the fact that while relativity places absolute limits on the speed of objects moving through space, it does not limit how quickly space itself can expand or contract. Alcubierre's warp drive, which is not the same as Trek's warp drive, would function by placing the ship into a bubble of flat space, then contracting space in front of the bubble and expanding space behind it, in such fashion that the ship would appear to move at speeds far in excess of mere light. (In fact, the ship would be sitting perfectly still; the space surrounding its bubble, however, would be "moving" like a mother. This is given a nod both in the discussion of transwarp beaming in the 2009 Star Trek, and in Cubert Farnsworth's revelation about how the Planet Express ship works on Futurama.)
There are a few technical issues with the Alcubierre drive. For one, it's hard to steer a vessel that's been causally separated from the rest of the universe (there is no even hypothetical way for the occupants of the flat-space bubble to communicate with anything outside of it). For another, no one has the least idea how to create such a bubble, nor how to collapse it later. Third, the maths seem to indicate that the leading, or compressed, edge of the bubble will sweep up anything it encounters, from dust to asteroids, into a temporary singularity, only to release it all as a burst of Hawking radiation aimed forward upon collapsing the bubble. And perhaps most importantly, Alcubierre's theory requires exotic matter - something capable of generating a negative energy density - and quite a lot of it, equivalent to about the mass of the planet Jupiter.
Fortunately, Howard White at NASA fiddled with the equations some, and found that if you vibrate the outer shell of that bubble, you can reduce the exotic-matter requirements to only about 700 kilos. Of course, we're still confronted with the problem that nobody has the least clue how to create even an atom or two of this exotic matter, nor where it might be found in nature, so the entire question may well be moot.
Star Trek's warp drive avoids the question by ringing in another SF staple - subspaces and overspaces. The ship uses the Cochrane reaction to translate itself, and a small bubble of normal space so the occupants of the ship can survive the trip, into another subspace of the universe's overspace that has different physical laws than our own. It maintains a one-to-one physical correspondence with our particular subspace, but in that one, it's possible to travel at speeds far greater than that achieved by light in ours. (The asymptotic nature of warp speeds in TNG and later would suggest that the realm popularly referred to as "subspace" has a local lightspeed equal to warp 10, which is why no ship can do that speed in TNG's warp scale.) Since we live in this subspace, we just call it "space", and refer to the one available via warp drive as "subspace".
(Note that the above is not truly canonical, but does not conflict with either available show continuity or the laws of physics as we know them. It is, rather, the result of a lifetime spent reading "that stupid sci-fi TRIBBLE." )
Star Trek's warp drive avoids the question by ringing in another SF staple - subspaces and overspaces. The ship uses the Cochrane reaction to translate itself, and a small bubble of normal space so the occupants of the ship can survive the trip, into another subspace of the universe's overspace that has different physical laws than our own. It maintains a one-to-one physical correspondence with our particular subspace, but in that one, it's possible to travel at speeds far greater than that achieved by light in ours. (The asymptotic nature of warp speeds in TNG and later would suggest that the realm popularly referred to as "subspace" has a local lightspeed equal to warp 10, which is why no ship can do that speed in TNG's warp scale.) Since we live in this subspace, we just call it "space", and refer to the one available via warp drive as "subspace".
This does maintain that nothing in "normal" space can exceed the speed of light. Its by ducking into subspace that they can achieve FTL velocities.
Hell... I believe that 99% of all Sci-fi actually honors. Very few have any kind of non "alt-space" FTL drives.
Babylon 5 has its version of Hyperspace, which is an entirely alternate realm they travel through using Sublight engines, but can achieve interstellar distances.
Star Wars has its version of Hyperspace, which... could be described as just tunneling through space or something.
Stargate has a variation of Hyperspace that requires a window to be opened to shift into FTL (Although Destiny's FTL in SG:U is still a mystery)
Wing Commander had fixed points in space that allowed for leapfrogging from one system to another called Jump Points.
Battletech had Jump Drives that allowed for around 30 LY or so jumps, but required the Jumpship to collect solar energy for about a week between jumps, or hotload off their own reactors to cut down the time while risking damage to the Drive. Also a common thing that comes up is Jumpshock, where some individuals actually get sick for a few minutes after a jump. (one of the few I am aware of that also include a negative effect on humans to a degree)
Andromeda had Slipstream, which was basically a rollercoaster ride dependant on fixed points in space to access.
I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite colored text = mod mode
While many of these forms of FTL try to remain in the "spirit" of the theory of relativity, if I understand things correctly, the moment you find any short-cut to move faster than the speed of light, you also get time travel - and not particularly complicated, no flying around the sun with exact calculations only a Vulcan pull off in his head or needing to collect chronometric particles and reversing some polarity or or stuff like that No, as simple as two people exchanging messages via FTL while they are moving around at sublight speed. (Though it might be helpful if they moved at relativistic speeds, so that the time dilation is notable).
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
While many of these forms of FTL try to remain in the "spirit" of the theory of relativity, if I understand things correctly, the moment you find any short-cut to move faster than the speed of light, you also get time travel - and not particularly complicated, no flying around the sun with exact calculations only a Vulcan pull off in his head or needing to collect chronometric particles and reversing some polarity or or stuff like that No, as simple as two people exchanging messages via FTL while they are moving around at sublight speed. (Though it might be helpful if they moved at relativistic speeds, so that the time dilation is notable).
That's really more along the lines of "hypothesis"; until/unless we can find a way to achieve FTL, the Minkowski diagram can't be tested. It might just reflect Minkowski's own prejudices - for instance, it privileges the information available at the origin point, such that receipt of information from a closer point somehow violates the light cone, as if, say, telegraphy somehow "violated causality" because suddenly messages could be transmitted from Europe to America faster than a clipper ship could carry them.
While many of these forms of FTL try to remain in the "spirit" of the theory of relativity, if I understand things correctly, the moment you find any short-cut to move faster than the speed of light, you also get time travel - and not particularly complicated, no flying around the sun with exact calculations only a Vulcan pull off in his head or needing to collect chronometric particles and reversing some polarity or or stuff like that No, as simple as two people exchanging messages via FTL while they are moving around at sublight speed. (Though it might be helpful if they moved at relativistic speeds, so that the time dilation is notable).
That's really more along the lines of "hypothesis"; until/unless we can find a way to achieve FTL, the Minkowski diagram can't be tested. It might just reflect Minkowski's own prejudices - for instance, it privileges the information available at the origin point, such that receipt of information from a closer point somehow violates the light cone, as if, say, telegraphy somehow "violated causality" because suddenly messages could be transmitted from Europe to America faster than a clipper ship could carry them.
Theories like that only make sense if time has a fixed central origin point and propagates its "ticks" at the speed of light. Someone who jumps away from Earth at FTL and goes to the point where they see a supernova, then reports it back via FTL before the light from the supernova reaches Earth is not time travel though some theories seem to treat it as if it was because the information arrives before the light does. Neither is jumping out far enough to catch the lost episodes of Dr. Who as it arrives at that point time travel. It is just communication transmission speed differences.
That's really more along the lines of "hypothesis"; until/unless we can find a way to achieve FTL, the Minkowski diagram can't be tested. It might just reflect Minkowski's own prejudices - for instance, it privileges the information available at the origin point, such that receipt of information from a closer point somehow violates the light cone, as if, say, telegraphy somehow "violated causality" because suddenly messages could be transmitted from Europe to America faster than a clipper ship could carry them.
I don't think that's it what is the problem of time travel. The problem is that it allows you to send a telegram message to someone in America, then he sends you a telegraph message back, but it arrives before you could send it. What the clipper ship would have been doing is irrelevant.
I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite colored text = mod mode
Just a reminder: this thread is asking for things wanted in-game from Season 2 of Discovery, not random requests. Please stay on topic. Thank you.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
One quote showing he's still in charge and everything is moving along (production wise):
KURTZMAN: ‘Picard’ is in the middle of shooting, we’ve broken the season and I am so happy with the scripts. We are on episode five of Season 3 of ‘Discovery.’ We’re far along. ‘Picard’ is [filming] here in Los Angeles and ‘Discovery’ is in Toronto, and future Trek shows I believe will be in Toronto.
So, yeah - as usual you can take any of the rumors from that crowd (Midnight's Edge, Doomcock, Nerdrotic) and trash them for the BS they always are.
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
Comments
My character Tsin'xing
If we're going to exclude time travel because it's "impossible", then we're basically going to have to throw out everything that makes Trek Trek. And no, "just a theory" doesn't fly. It's a phrase invoked by the ignorant to attempt to claim everyone is just as ignorant. "Evolution is just a theory!" "Relativity is just a theory! Gravity is "just a theory", but I don't see many people volunteering to try to dispute that "theory" by jumping off of buildings.
Of course, in Star Trek they rarely get anywhere near the speed of light. A ship that leaves orbit at warp two (like the TOS Enterprise often did) has the same velocity it had in orbit. It is the bubble of space containing the ship that is "moving" its position along without adding any velocity. It is science-fiction handwavum but anything with FTL ships has to do that so the question of whether something is possible in reality is rather moot since in the imaginary universe of the story it is possible in order for the rest of the story to happen.
There are a few technical issues with the Alcubierre drive. For one, it's hard to steer a vessel that's been causally separated from the rest of the universe (there is no even hypothetical way for the occupants of the flat-space bubble to communicate with anything outside of it). For another, no one has the least idea how to create such a bubble, nor how to collapse it later. Third, the maths seem to indicate that the leading, or compressed, edge of the bubble will sweep up anything it encounters, from dust to asteroids, into a temporary singularity, only to release it all as a burst of Hawking radiation aimed forward upon collapsing the bubble. And perhaps most importantly, Alcubierre's theory requires exotic matter - something capable of generating a negative energy density - and quite a lot of it, equivalent to about the mass of the planet Jupiter.
Fortunately, Howard White at NASA fiddled with the equations some, and found that if you vibrate the outer shell of that bubble, you can reduce the exotic-matter requirements to only about 700 kilos. Of course, we're still confronted with the problem that nobody has the least clue how to create even an atom or two of this exotic matter, nor where it might be found in nature, so the entire question may well be moot.
Star Trek's warp drive avoids the question by ringing in another SF staple - subspaces and overspaces. The ship uses the Cochrane reaction to translate itself, and a small bubble of normal space so the occupants of the ship can survive the trip, into another subspace of the universe's overspace that has different physical laws than our own. It maintains a one-to-one physical correspondence with our particular subspace, but in that one, it's possible to travel at speeds far greater than that achieved by light in ours. (The asymptotic nature of warp speeds in TNG and later would suggest that the realm popularly referred to as "subspace" has a local lightspeed equal to warp 10, which is why no ship can do that speed in TNG's warp scale.) Since we live in this subspace, we just call it "space", and refer to the one available via warp drive as "subspace".
(Note that the above is not truly canonical, but does not conflict with either available show continuity or the laws of physics as we know them. It is, rather, the result of a lifetime spent reading "that stupid sci-fi TRIBBLE."
This does maintain that nothing in "normal" space can exceed the speed of light. Its by ducking into subspace that they can achieve FTL velocities.
Hell... I believe that 99% of all Sci-fi actually honors. Very few have any kind of non "alt-space" FTL drives.
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
colored text = mod mode
Theories like that only make sense if time has a fixed central origin point and propagates its "ticks" at the speed of light. Someone who jumps away from Earth at FTL and goes to the point where they see a supernova, then reports it back via FTL before the light from the supernova reaches Earth is not time travel though some theories seem to treat it as if it was because the information arrives before the light does. Neither is jumping out far enough to catch the lost episodes of Dr. Who as it arrives at that point time travel. It is just communication transmission speed differences.
http://www.physicsmatt.com/blog/2016/8/25/why-ftl-implies-time-travel
And this is why Temporal Mechanics and Quantum Physics gives me a headache.
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
colored text = mod mode
My character Tsin'xing
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
Temporal Klingon monk robes, from Points of Light, please.
Edit: Added to reduce posting -
Glass/clear plastic 3D Chess set (would be nice to be able to choose a desk top game to have in the captain's quarters/ready room).
Ice cream and chilly fries (would be nice to have a second set of chef/bartender duty officer missions).
A return trip to New Eden and Saru's homeworld.
100% false. It's the usual YTube "I hate current Trek crowd..." spouting BS. Here's a TrekCore article talking about an interview Alex Kurtzman gave yesterday (Monday 6/17):
http://trekcore.com/blog/2019/06/new-alex-kurtzman-star-trek-updates-picard-discovery-lower-decks-more/
One quote showing he's still in charge and everything is moving along (production wise):
So, yeah - as usual you can take any of the rumors from that crowd (Midnight's Edge, Doomcock, Nerdrotic) and trash them for the BS they always are.
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."