111 réponses à ce sujet

[Ulzeraj]

xentar wrote...

RedKnight410 wrote...

Turbooggyboy wrote...

xentar wrote...

Huh, give me an example of a setting where FTL is done RIGHT.

Turbooggyboy wrote...

As the Mass Effect core lowers the mass of the ship, the speed of light is essentially raised thus allowing for fast travel with relatively small effects of time dilation. At least according to fluff/codex entry.

You can't "essentially raise" the speed of light by lowering the mass of a body (it would help it reach the speed of light easier, though).

I know. There is also talk about some kind of Mass Effect envelope. Probably similar to the warp field of the Star Trek universe. Though in Mass Effect the core is most certainly only allowing for this "envelope" to be created as the ships uses regular thrust for achieving speed.

Einstein's theory is oudated, so far the only reason we still believe FTL is impossible is because the amount of energy required to accelerate an object to that speed is impossible with today's tech. Also it would be almost impossible to sense/observe an object moving at that speed with today's tech. The "mass effect envelope" would merely solve the problem of the near infinite number of collisions between the ship and any particles in its path, that would ordinarily disintegrate the ship.

However if the mass effect tech has the ability to convert mass to energy than achieving FTL speeds should be possible.

Where do you suggest we get more than infinite energy to accelerate an object to ftl speeds within special relativity? No, to go ftl we need some tricks (and mass has nothing to do with it). More likely wormholes or some other kind of spatial distortions.

In my homeworld "more than infinite is still infinite". Just saying lol.


BTW for those who are interested I highy recomend a very interesting and fun documentary called "The Elegant Universe" (based on the book of the same name) by Brian Greene. Its about string theory (a possible unified theory) but it tries to explain in a simple way the conflict of general relativity and quantum mechanics among other interesting concepts like wormholes.

[RedKnight410]

Stensig wrote...

ok so one of the things Mr. Albert Einstein talked about in his Teory of relativity was that if you were albe to travel with a speed close to the speed of light, or even faster, you would actually travel through time, since the time you experience is different from the time for those observing "you", thus traveling through time.

An exaple(random numbers) you be if you travel to a start with FTL speed. You say goodbye to your girl/boy-friend, and your journey takes 1 year to you, but when you get home, your soulmate has aged 10 years.
This means that you don't travel 100% back in time. You do travel forward in time, but slowlier then the rest of the world, so kind of "back in time" yet still forward, from the POV of the general mobe.

So actually if they DO travel with FTL speed in ME, which they are saying all the time, how are they able to compensate for that, and does this invoulve dimension theories?

hehe hope this gave you a bit to think about, bc to me, this seem like a big fail in the series actoually, if you look at it with an realistic POV =)

Dicusssion OPEN!

Einstein's equation for time dilation wouldn't apply to FTL, if it did you would end up with nothing aging traveling at the speed of light, and FTL would translate to going back in time. According to Einstein, time passes at the speed of light. Also time dilation is relative to the speed at which you travel. Hence FTL speeds should compensate for this.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Ulzeraj wrote...

(...)

GR explains how gravity works. GR doesnt explain how gravity works on subatomic level. On the other side not even QEM can't explain gravity on the subatomic level.

In a very rough way to explain QEM is the best theory for the realm of the very small and GR is the best theory for the realm of the very big. When you take into account singularities like the big bang and black holes you need a theory that encompass both realms. A theory that unifies QEM and GR is the Grand Unified Theory of Everything™.

Thats what I'm trying to say.

Yup, that's what I meant -- the subatomic scale. You're right about the Theory of Everything. However, constructing a unified theory of everything is no easy task. The best we can do is make progress by finding partial theories that describe a confined range of incidents and by neglecting other factors or estimating them by certain values, which is all we've done and are doing. The question of whether we will ever reach a unified theory of everything remains wide open.

[xentar]

Ulzeraj wrote...

In my homeworld "more than infinite is still infinite". Just saying lol.

Well, qualitatively speaking... Actually, it would have to be complex.

[Ulzeraj]

For some reason I can't explain time-space dilatation without beer and a dirty napkin. Dont ask lol

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

Ulzeraj wrote...

(...)

GR
explains how gravity works. GR doesnt explain how gravity works on
subatomic level. On the other side not even QEM can't explain gravity on
the subatomic level.

In a very rough way to explain QEM is the
best theory for the realm of the very small and GR is the best theory
for the realm of the very big. When you take into account singularities
like the big bang and black holes you need a theory that encompass both
realms. A theory that unifies QEM and GR is the Grand Unified Theory of
Everything™.

Thats what I'm trying to say.

Yup,
that's what I meant -- the subatomic scale. You're right about the
Theory of Everything. However, constructing a unified theory of
everything is no easy task. The best we can do is make progress by
finding partial theories that describe a confined range of incidents and
by neglecting other factors or estimating them by certain values, which
is all we've done and are doing. The question of whether we will ever
reach a unified theory of everything remains wide open.

Isn't embarassing how our entire modern physics are based on two sets of laws that don't agree?

Modifié par Ulzeraj, 16 janvier 2011 - 06:45 .

[Razagon]

Actually it is a true that it isn't tested. What he ment was that no one could travel with speed of light to prove it. Einstein himself said that no amount of experiment could prove him right and only a single experiment could prove him wrong. What special theory of relativity postulated is that the speed of light is the greatest speed possible and in no way is it possible to achieve greater speed. There is no way!!! This is proven. When body(particle) reaches speed of light it loses it's mass and becomes infinetly long(imagine that effect on a human). Modern physics still has no answer on why the bodies have mass, they just do. General theory of relativity postulated that gravity is a force created by bodies which curves space around them. This Einsten theorem is also proven by watching eclipse and seeing the light curve around it. The simplest explanation of this I can give you is imagine a solid, heavy ball on a sheet. Now when you throw something smaller on that sheet you know what is going to happen - that is gravity in modern physics. And it is expected that gravity has it's own particles of effect called gravitons like light has photons althought they are still not found nor discovered.



Mass effect is a sci-fi game. Awsome one at that. Enjoy it for what it is. And no lightsabers aren't possible because you can't catch photons.

[ForumHelper]

Einstein can still be wrong:) Besides, this is a sci-fi game, which needs this kind of things.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Ulzeraj wrote...

Isn't embarassing how our entire modern physics are based on two sets of laws that don't agree?

Which only teaches you how little you know, and how much there is to know.

By the way, Mass Effect has been regarded as one of the more scientifically sound sci-fi stories. BioWare has done a good job of keeping things in line. There are, of course, exceptions, which shall remain nameless for the sake of this thread's continued health since they've been discussed to death already.

[RedKnight410]

xentar wrote...

RedKnight410 wrote...

Turbooggyboy wrote...

xentar wrote...

Huh, give me an example of a setting where FTL is done RIGHT.

Turbooggyboy wrote...

As the Mass Effect core lowers the mass of the ship, the speed of light is essentially raised thus allowing for fast travel with relatively small effects of time dilation. At least according to fluff/codex entry.

You can't "essentially raise" the speed of light by lowering the mass of a body (it would help it reach the speed of light easier, though).

I know. There is also talk about some kind of Mass Effect envelope. Probably similar to the warp field of the Star Trek universe. Though in Mass Effect the core is most certainly only allowing for this "envelope" to be created as the ships uses regular thrust for achieving speed.

Einstein's theory is oudated, so far the only reason we still believe FTL is impossible is because the amount of energy required to accelerate an object to that speed is impossible with today's tech. Also it would be almost impossible to sense/observe an object moving at that speed with today's tech. The "mass effect envelope" would merely solve the problem of the near infinite number of collisions between the ship and any particles in its path, that would ordinarily disintegrate the ship.

However if the mass effect tech has the ability to convert mass to energy than achieving FTL speeds should be possible.

Where do you suggest we get more than infinite energy to accelerate an object to ftl speeds within special relativity? No, to go ftl we need some tricks (and mass has nothing to do with it). More likely wormholes or some other kind of spatial distortions.

FTL itself would invalidate special relativity, so those equations wouldn't apply. If you look at how our understanding of size and mass have changed you'll see my point. We use to believe that as size approached zero, mass became infinite. We now know that as soon as one reaches the planck length, the coomon sense observation, bigger=heavier once again becomes true. If FTL is possible, a simialr evolution in understanding would occur.

[xentar]

RedKnight410 wrote...

xentar wrote...

RedKnight410 wrote...

Turbooggyboy wrote...

xentar wrote...

Huh, give me an example of a setting where FTL is done RIGHT.

Turbooggyboy wrote...

As the Mass Effect core lowers the mass of the ship, the speed of light is essentially raised thus allowing for fast travel with relatively small effects of time dilation. At least according to fluff/codex entry.

You can't "essentially raise" the speed of light by lowering the mass of a body (it would help it reach the speed of light easier, though).

I know. There is also talk about some kind of Mass Effect envelope. Probably similar to the warp field of the Star Trek universe. Though in Mass Effect the core is most certainly only allowing for this "envelope" to be created as the ships uses regular thrust for achieving speed.

Einstein's theory is oudated, so far the only reason we still believe FTL is impossible is because the amount of energy required to accelerate an object to that speed is impossible with today's tech. Also it would be almost impossible to sense/observe an object moving at that speed with today's tech. The "mass effect envelope" would merely solve the problem of the near infinite number of collisions between the ship and any particles in its path, that would ordinarily disintegrate the ship.

However if the mass effect tech has the ability to convert mass to energy than achieving FTL speeds should be possible.

Where do you suggest we get more than infinite energy to accelerate an object to ftl speeds within special relativity? No, to go ftl we need some tricks (and mass has nothing to do with it). More likely wormholes or some other kind of spatial distortions.

FTL itself would invalidate special relativity, so those equations wouldn't apply. If you look at how our understanding of size and mass have changed you'll see my point. We use to believe that as size approached zero, mass became infinite. We now know that as soon as one reaches the planck length, the coomon sense observation, bigger=heavier once again becomes true. If FTL is possible, a simialr evolution in understanding would occur.

New theories in physics don't invalidate the old ones, they expand them, providing a more precise description of the world while the old ones still work pretty well within their limits of applicability. What I mean is that if FTL travel is possible it's likely going to cirvumvent "conventional" travel (keeping relativity valid for it) and be quite unlike anything described in modern science fiction because of temporal considerations.

[Aramintai]

Here's an interesting article about dark energy in ME:
www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm
All in all it once again states that ME is first and foremost a futuristic sci-fi and should not be taken under serious scrutiny of today's science.

Modifié par Aramintai, 16 janvier 2011 - 07:13 .

[TheJiveDJ]

I see a lot of talk here about the tech limitations when it comes to the speed of light. Here's the thing. Relativity according to Einstein (which has already been proven correct, see Special Relativity Experiment) would not allow anyone to break the light barrier by simply attempting to accelerate past it. Heres why:

A woman is on a train traveling at 99.99% the speed of light. All is good. However, **** hits the fan when she decides to stand up and start walking forward. Crap! Technically this woman has broken the speed of light right? The whole universe implodes and space-time rips itself apart! Wrong. The speed of light is relative to the observer's frame of reference. This means it is different depending on where you are. The only way you could circumvent the speed of light would be to remove or work around Relativity!  This is not possible unless you could raise or lower the trains mass at will, or utilize Star Trek's "warp" system which moves space itself, not the ship, avoiding any relativistic effects. No matter how hard a person tried, they could never simply accelerate past light speed by conventional means.

Back to our time-traveling woman; time dilation and relativity do not allow this woman enough time to stand up and break the light barrier. So her standing up and taking a step makes no difference. In her frame of reference she is not traveling very fast (due to time dilation). As she peers out the window, everything appears to be moving much, much faster than her. Infact, to this woman, it is SHE who is moving slowely! Weird, I know...I love this stuff.

However to an outside observer the train appears to be moving insanely fast (99.99% light speed) but should said observer peer into the cabin, he would notice that everyone inside appears frozen in place due to the relativistic effects being applied.

Lets recap. In the woman's frame of reference, she is not traveling anywhere near the speed of light. She takes a step forward but nothing happens because no light barrier has been broken. In the observer's frame of reference the train appears to be moving near the speed of light and everyone inside the cab is frozen in place. If the woman were to stand up and take a step in the observer's reference frame she would effectively be breaking the light barrier but due to relativity she is frozen in place. She literally is unable to break the light barrier in either time-frame. The phyisical constant is unbroken, and the laws of relativity are victorious. It's a beautiful thing.

Check and mate.

Modifié par TheJiveDJ, 16 janvier 2011 - 09:02 .

[Walker White]

TheJiveDJ wrote...

I see a lot of talk here about the tech limitations when it comes to the speed of light. Here's the thing. Relativity according to Einstein ... would not allow anyone to break the light barrier by simply attempting to accelerate past it.

That is correct.  Which is why Einstein is compatible with wormholes and other space-time distortions.  There is no acceleration.  You distort space to travel instantly without significantly altering your reference frame (e.g. what the observer sees).

EDIT: This is why the name MASS Effect is appropriate.  The pseudo-science is using the gravitational effects of mass to distort space time, not to accelerate.  This approach has other problems, but they are more complicated.

Modifié par Walker White, 16 janvier 2011 - 09:07 .

[Aramintai]

TheJiveDJ wrote...
.The only way you could circumvent the speed of light would be to remove or work around Relativity!  This is not possible unless you could raise or lower the trains mass at will

..which can be done in ME via mass effect technology.

[Stensig]

OK seriously guys, many of you have missunderstood me. Im not atlking about how ME is BS bc FTL speed is miss made in the game, im simply giving an topic to dicuss, things to think about.

ALso ofc its possbile that there may/ possible is a speed faster then light, we just cannot comprehent it yet.
"the reality is limited by the single individual and what that person is capable of understanding and questioning."

We constantly evaulve the science laws, and discover new things. However of what we know NOW, FTL speed as done in ME would be some weird ****.

And yes there are lots of things we cannot explain.. Drak energy, wormholes, black holes, and all that. But saying that Einstein's theories was wrong, is wrong to say IMO, since a LOT of our way to messure and calculate physic things today, especially quantum mechanics, have roots to Einstein and all the other big guys, and so far those rules still apply and seem rather correct.

[TheJiveDJ]

Walker White wrote...

TheJiveDJ wrote...

I see a lot of talk here about the tech limitations when it comes to the speed of light. Here's the thing. Relativity according to Einstein ... would not allow anyone to break the light barrier by simply attempting to accelerate past it.

That is correct.  Which is why Einstein is compatible with wormholes and other space-time distortions.  There is no acceleration.  You distort space to travel instantly without significantly altering your reference frame (e.g. what the observer sees).

EDIT: This is why the name MASS Effect is appropriate.  The pseudo-science is using the gravitational effects of mass to distort space time, not to accelerate.  This approach has other problems, but they are more complicated.

Yep.  I'm talking about the moment.  Now.  What we currently have.  Which is not much.  Everything else is theoretical at best.

[TheJiveDJ]

Aramintai wrote...

TheJiveDJ wrote...
.The only way you could circumvent the speed of light would be to remove or work around Relativity!  This is not possible unless you could raise or lower the trains mass at will

..which can be done in ME via mass effect technology.

Wasn't talking about Mass Effect.  Was talking about real life technologies.

[TheJiveDJ]

Stensig wrote...

OK seriously guys, many of you have missunderstood me. Im not atlking about how ME is BS bc FTL speed is miss made in the game, im simply giving an topic to dicuss, things to think about.

ALso ofc its possbile that there may/ possible is a speed faster then light, we just cannot comprehent it yet.
"the reality is limited by the single individual and what that person is capable of understanding and questioning."

We constantly evaulve the science laws, and discover new things. However of what we know NOW, FTL speed as done in ME would be some weird ****.

And yes there are lots of things we cannot explain.. Drak energy, wormholes, black holes, and all that. But saying that Einstein's theories was wrong, is wrong to say IMO, since a LOT of our way to messure and calculate physic things today, especially quantum mechanics, have roots to Einstein and all the other big guys, and so far those rules still apply and seem rather correct.

And what we're saying is there are no ways to break the light barrier by conventional means.  We'd have to essentially cheat our way past the light barrier.  Either way, the law applies and is true.  We're not going to suddenly discover that there is no light barrier.  Relativity and time dilation have all been proven correct already.

[Stensig]

also to move faster then light, you would(in "simple theory") have to have a smaller mass then light, as even light has mass. But to reach such a low mass would require to to split atoms to unbelievable small measures, even smaller then the building stones of pro- and neutrons. This size out limit all chances of life, as the most simple life code would have a mass trillion times higher then light.



In all fairness i would like to see the guy inventing a way to FTL travel, and where the heel he would get that energy.. we can't even do the suns work properly yet.

[Whereto]

One thing its a game, if they didn't have it, it would be extremely slow work getting any where.

Oh and secondly, as much as I'm intended to agreenwith current theories, they arenjust theories till tested. If you want to accelerate to the speed of light and tell me how it goes that would be great, just mind the speck of dust as at that speed apparently it could rip a hole in your spaceship. But then again I guess thats just a theory as well to some degree

[Spartas Husky]

Lumikki wrote...

Spartas Husky wrote...

xentar wrote...

 According to current knowledge, we can't achieve anything faster no matter how much power we apply.

I need say nothing more.

Actually you do need to say little more, because you give impression that FTL travel is just knowledge issue as not knowing how it could be done, like we don't need to know to make it science fiction. That's not right.

Because there is difference between science fiction and fantasy as magic like invented imagination. Science fiction is based what could be possible, but what we can't yet do it  or prove that it can be done with current technology, but we have some teories how it could be done. Fantasy magic how ever doesn't require any teories how it's done, so it's invented action without any knowledge how it's done. So, if you can not tell any teories how it could be done, it's magic, not science fiction.

Ok I'll say a bit more calm down.

Humanity advances at an incredible pace... too bad we use most of it for self destructive purposes. But at the pace we are going we push the limits of our boundaries every further. And every time there are those, no offense, like you who believe there are limits we will never cross.

Same as the past "science" has preconcieved notions of what is our limit. before we knew nothing of light and things that were faster than the animal world. Then came industrialization and we prooved all preconcieved limits to be false.

Then came einstein and shattered many pre concieved notions and placed new limits to our new knowledge.

So yes, is all a matter of knowledge, in the past we did not know that we could travel faster than animals, now we do. Same will apply for years in the future, which will proove our today's limits to be false.

Like my astronomy teacher says "only difference between man and god is the knowledge they both posses". Now now I am not going into religious issues, just saying:

The more time progresses the limits are set ever higher, yesterday it was the speed of an animal because we were ignorant of the speed of light. I am sure later on we will have the same discussion as the speed of light is broken. ANd then a new speed limit is put in place.

Human technology is only limited by our ingenuity. And that is before we cross the singularity threshold... which will probably be broken within this century. So we can't really imagine where we will stop.

[Stensig]

TheJiveDJ wrote...

Stensig wrote...

OK seriously guys, many of you have missunderstood me. Im not atlking about how ME is BS bc FTL speed is miss made in the game, im simply giving an topic to dicuss, things to think about.

ALso ofc its possbile that there may/ possible is a speed faster then light, we just cannot comprehent it yet.
"the reality is limited by the single individual and what that person is capable of understanding and questioning."

We constantly evaulve the science laws, and discover new things. However of what we know NOW, FTL speed as done in ME would be some weird ****.

And yes there are lots of things we cannot explain.. Drak energy, wormholes, black holes, and all that. But saying that Einstein's theories was wrong, is wrong to say IMO, since a LOT of our way to messure and calculate physic things today, especially quantum mechanics, have roots to Einstein and all the other big guys, and so far those rules still apply and seem rather correct.

And what we're saying is there are no ways to break the light barrier by conventional means.  We'd have to essentially cheat our way past the light barrier.  Either way, the law applies and is true.  We're not going to suddenly discover that there is no light barrier.  Relativity and time dilation have all been proven correct already.

not yet. maybe we do get a way to do it... who knows? but it would take a long time to reach that point id say. But in theory FTL travel will never be realistic. I agree with that yes...

i only created this post to see what people were thinking and in hunger to have something new posting to. It wasn't created to prove something (not much, at least)

[Aramintai]

TheJiveDJ wrote...

Aramintai wrote...

TheJiveDJ wrote...
.The only way you could circumvent the speed of light would be to remove or work around Relativity!  This is not possible unless you could raise or lower the trains mass at will

..which can be done in ME via mass effect technology.

Wasn't talking about Mass Effect.  Was talking about real life technologies.

This does not invalidate the above point because this topic is about ME FTL technology and how it ties in with today's theories. Here's your tie. Today's it's sci-fi, in the future..who knows?

[Spartas Husky]

Stensig wrote...


 But in theory FTL travel will never be realistic. I agree with that yes...

Same was said about many unproven technologies we had yet to discover in the past.


Compared to the past look how far we've come.

Modifié par Spartas Husky, 16 janvier 2011 - 09:33 .

[Ulzeraj]

Stensig wrote...
also to move faster then light, you would(in "simple theory") have to have a smaller mass then light, as even light has mass.

Thats wrong. Photons (the "light particle") have no mass.