Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

10
  • $\begingroup$ I thought that perpetual acceleration would only get you asymptotically close to light speed, but never quite to (or past) it? $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 21, 2022 at 19:15
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @JeremyFriesner Whether or not an Alcubierre Drive could in fact accelerate past 1.0 C is a matter of debate. Not trying to say an Alcubierre Drive CAN pass 1C, just that of currently known theories, it holds the most weight as maybe being able to using real world math, physics, and scientific results. $\endgroup$
    – Nosajimiki
    Commented Jun 21, 2022 at 19:55
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Alcubierre drive doesn't accelerate your to light speed. It just contracts space in front of you, and expand it behind you, but in the bubble you don't even need to move at all. $\endgroup$
    – njzk2
    Commented Jun 21, 2022 at 20:12
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @T.E.D."actually traveling through physical space faster than the speed of light is definitionally impossible" Make sure that reality knows the rules, and that reality knows you will throw a hissy fit if reality breaks your rules. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 24, 2022 at 1:31
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Nosajimiki Not to mention that there are many discrepancies in the current model that prevents it from explaining everything that we know happens in reality. If the current model can not explain everything adequately, it leaves room for many, many loopholes. That is, currently we know things happen that should not happen in the current model so proposing something can happen in contradiction of the current model by 'breaking the rules' is not a good argument. The rules of relativity are already broken, and we know it. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 24, 2022 at 14:15