Okay, your device puts you into space where the speed of light is faster, so you wouldn't run into relativistic problems.
But you're still not moving.
Thing is, relativity really isn't much of a problem for us right now. You don't need to go faster than light to get to Mars in 3 days. If you're going faster than light, then you should be able to get to Mars in under 8 to 20 minutes.
You'd still need those great big rockets to get you moving that fast.
Without really big rockets or huge amounts of thrust, it's like we're on a bicycle and they're talking about rasing the speed limit from 80 to 120MPH.
A good point. The article says that the "engine" would produce thrust through the creation of a gravitational field. How that translates into thrust is not adequately explained.
Personally, I think the whole thing is bunk. It's based on controversial physics theories that have been around since the 50s and yet are still entirely unproven/undemonstrated, AFAIK.
no subject
Date: 2006-01-05 08:12 pm (UTC)Okay, your device puts you into space where the speed of light is faster, so you wouldn't run into relativistic problems.
But you're still not moving.
Thing is, relativity really isn't much of a problem for us right now.
You don't need to go faster than light to get to Mars in 3 days. If you're going faster than light, then you should be able to get to Mars in under 8 to 20 minutes.
You'd still need those great big rockets to get you moving that fast.
Without really big rockets or huge amounts of thrust, it's like we're on a bicycle and they're talking about rasing the speed limit from 80 to 120MPH.
no subject
Date: 2006-01-05 10:52 pm (UTC)Personally, I think the whole thing is bunk. It's based on controversial physics theories that have been around since the 50s and yet are still entirely unproven/undemonstrated, AFAIK.