Alcubierre Drive and Time Travel

[Aeson]

As long as we do not destroy stuff with military budgets, where do you think the money ends up?

Not in the hands of impoverished people apparently ... thus impoverished. Paying scientists to launch rockets isn't going to change that much.

[Aeson]

However if we spent that money on developing infrastructure (roads, schools, irrigation, sanitary water, etc) in developing nations, we'd quickly have a much healthier world economy that could support much more in the way of space exploration (not that we would do either of those things).

[OneFootInTheGrave]

The truth is we could develop infrastructure with our current defence spending staying intact just as well (or being directed into something more useful), but it is the political class which is not exactly interested.

Moving defence into "space" that would be an order of magnitude, or two increase in investment, it would definitely bring faster progress without much of ill effect, other than less brand new stuff to kill with. We could satisfy the killing instinct with nukes that are already in place.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

and the tech learned from space travel - growing food, making water... that would benefit the world more than making carriers and bombers. it would probably benefit the military too. many new things to learn to put people on mars and other planets/moon.

[AAAAAAAAH!]

However if we spent that money on developing infrastructure (roads, schools, irrigation, sanitary water, etc) in developing nations, we'd quickly have a much healthier world economy that could support much more in the way of space exploration (not that we would do either of those things).

If people in developing nations don't just embezzle the funds.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

I think the US can give up defense spending for a year... or cut back a lot for a few.

We stil have Obama's big red line to smack people with if they step out of line. watch out putin.

[Lorizael]

KH has read this thread and not responded. JM is still innocent.

[pchang]

Did you not see my explanation or was it not enough for you?

[DaShi]

if you don't understand the math you'll never understand the theory. it's crazy math. but... it holds up. strange... math don't lie.

That's because we all live in a computer simulation. In the actual, real world, math doesn't mean ****.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

well... I guess that's one way to look it.

[Lorizael]

Did you not see my explanation or was it not enough for you?

I've heard that explanation before, but I only ever hear of it in terms of Event A and other abstract things. It makes it very difficult for me to put together a coherent picture of what's happening in reality.

[Sava]

I thought this thread was about some sort of wormhole you discovered while traveling down a road named Alcubierre Drive.

[pchang]

I've heard that explanation before, but I only ever hear of it in terms of Event A and other abstract things. It makes it very difficult for me to put together a coherent picture of what's happening in reality.

And you have a picture of Einstein as your avatar???

OK. You and are at 2 different locations. Say I assasinate Franz Ferdinand, get a declaration of war and bring it to you. In a universe where I cannot travel faster than the speed of light, it doesn't matter where you are. You will always see that Franz Ferdinand was assassinated and then war was declared. If somehow, I can move faster than light, then you would see the declaration of war 1st, and then Franz Ferdinand being assassinated.

[KrazyHorse]

I've heard that explanation before, but I only ever hear of it in terms of Event A and other abstract things. It makes it very difficult for me to put together a coherent picture of what's happening in reality.

http://www.theculture.org/rich/sharpblue/archives/000089.html

I was trying to write it up last night while drinking, but gave up.

Essentially, "instantaneous" in one frame of reference is "less than 0 time" in another frame of reference. By cleverly arranging a sequence of events in 2 frames of reference, ability to travel faster than light is equivalent to the ability to travel backward in time (so that you can arrive back before you started and watch yourself leave).

Using lorentz transforms, imagine:

1) transporting instantaneously out to a point 1 light yr away from earth
2) accelerating quickly to 0.1c (traveling away from earth)
3) instantly transporting back to earth
4) decelerating quickly back to earth's frame of reference

use your starting point as t=0, x=0
after first hyperspace jump you are at x=1lt yr, t=0
after accelerating you are at x'=gamma_0.1 * 1 lt yr; t' = -gamma_0.1 * 0.1yr
after second hyperspace jump back you are at x'' = 0; t'' = -gamma_0.1 * 0.1yr
and after decelerating back to your initial for you are at x'''=0; t''' = -gamma_0.1^2 * 0.1yr


gamma_0.1^2 = 1/0.99

so you end up back in your initial f.o.r. sightly more than a month before you left. The amount of time travel scales linearly with distance traveled.

[Lorizael]

Sweet. I'll read your post more thoroughly when morning is not so... morning.