Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rtp47.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!mcnc!rti-sel!rtp47!throopw
From: throopw@rtp47.UUCP (Wayne Throop)
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers
Subject: Re: FTL travel
Message-ID: <99@rtp47.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 21-Jul-85 21:22:15 EDT
Article-I.D.: rtp47.99
Posted: Sun Jul 21 21:22:15 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 25-Jul-85 00:43:07 EDT
References: <4683@mit-eddie.UUCP> <1700006@ccvaxa>
Organization: Data General, RTP, NC
Lines: 43

> [...] The subsonic aerodynamics equations will produce complex results
> if you try to put supersonic speeds in them.  [...] It seems reasonable
> to me that the same sort of thing could be true of faster-than-light
> speeds, i.e., we are making assumptions on this side of the barrier
> about physical conditions on the other side that could be quite wrong,
> but then I want to believe we can break the light barrier.
>						Wombat
>					ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!wombat

I agree with this posting to a large degree, but I'd like to add a point
or three.  First, most people don't see the problem at all, saying in
effect "well, the light-speed problem is just another limit, and we'll
get around to solving that one one of these days".  The problem isn't
that we don't have equations that model what would happen in FTL,
(supersonic flight) or that we think that the barrier is beyond our
current technology (heavier than air flight).

One problem is that we don't know of any phenomna at all that exhibit
FTL travel.  Heavier than air flight was obviously possible (birds do
it), and supersonic speeds in air were obviously possible also
(metiorites do it).  Another problem is that we *do* have equations that
model what should happen at FTL speeds, and they all involve causality
violation, or imply time travel in one form or another.  I for one find
this discouraging, but am unwilling to "give up hope", so to speak.
Nevertheless, FTL *is* fundamentally more difficult than any of the
other "limits" that folks have surmounted in the past.

Second, I find some SF treatments of FTL very implausible.  Some simply
reject the notion that a fundamental breakthrough is needed to make FTL
possible, and have FTL occuring without the slightest justification.
Even Star Wars did better than that, and SW isn't noted for scientific
plausibility.  This (to me) is somewhat more jolting to the suspension
of disbeleif than having a character in a story decide that all that is
needed to acheive heavier than air flight is to flap the arms fast
enough... and succeed at it!

And thirdly, most SF ignores the problem that FTL implies time-travel.
However, this doesn't jar my enjoyment of the story, since I just assume
that this little problem has been handled as part of the theoretical
breakthrough (warp drive, tachyon converter, doubletalk generator, or
whatever), that solved the FTL problem in the first place.
-- 
Wayne Throop at Data General, RTP, NC
<the-known-world>!mcnc!rti-sel!rtp47!throopw