[003]
PDLgenoa
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
It\'s a little condescending and frankly not very educated to call warp drive and wormholes \
to:
It\\\'s a little condescending and frankly not very educated to call warp drive and wormholes \\\"technobabble\\\". Yes, this is about tropes not theories but you\\\'re kind of begging for it with statements like this. Lest you think I\\\'m nitpicking the definition of \\\"technobabble\\\" according to the site is: \\\"Any impressive- and scientific-sounding, but ultimately nonsensical utterance, full of buzzwords.\\\" It is not in any way nonsensical nor is the actual science full of buzzwords.
If you\\\'re going to bother writing sci-fi it\\\'s probably a good idea to educate yourself on current science and technology. Very current. I\\\'m talking about warp but that necessarily includes an understanding of just what FTL is and isn’t. Having a spaceship that can travel interstellar distances in a short amount of time does not mean its travelling faster than light.
FTL violates the laws of physics, period - travelling using warp or some other variation of wormhole does not.
As of right now we know - and feel free to ask the next physicist you meet - that creating a wormhole or a warp bubble or enclosure or whatever you want to call it - does NOT violate the laws of physics. Two years ago Alcubierre published his work and while it has been modified and been written about extensively it has not been shown to violate physics as we know them. I don\\\'t care how you spin it, it just doesn\\\'t.
That\\\'s not to say there aren\\\'t serious problems involved but none of them kill the theory. There are problems such as exotic material which may or may not be possible to create and when the theory was first published it required fuel quantities about the size of a large gas giant but in less than a year another physicist made a modification to the equations that reduced that to the size of a minivan.
There\\\'s issues concerning the consequences of using such a drive in terms of radiation. A couple of students and educated scientists - not physicists have expressed doubts about being able to actually have a ship in the middle of the space created but those doubts have not been confirmed to have validity.
You simply cannot say that in fifty or a hundred or five hundred years we will not be able to solve these obstacles. That would be incredibly arrogant and history is littered with the forgotten names of those that said \\\"can\\\'t\\\" in the world of science much less science fiction.
Again, FTL is impossible without rewriting the laws of physics - yeah, we get that. Feel free to call that technobabble all you want. Other ways around interstellar distances such as warp, wormholes or variants of such are not impossible and do not violate the laws of physics and that can be said empirically - with no buzzwords or anything.
If you\\\'re going to bother writing sci-fi it\\\'s probably a good idea to educate yourself on current science and technology. Very current. I\\\'m talking about warp but that necessarily includes an understanding of just what FTL is and isn’t. Having a spaceship that can travel interstellar distances in a short amount of time does not mean its travelling faster than light.
FTL violates the laws of physics, period - travelling using warp or some other variation of wormhole does not.
As of right now we know - and feel free to ask the next physicist you meet - that creating a wormhole or a warp bubble or enclosure or whatever you want to call it - does NOT violate the laws of physics. Two years ago Alcubierre published his work and while it has been modified and been written about extensively it has not been shown to violate physics as we know them. I don\\\'t care how you spin it, it just doesn\\\'t.
That\\\'s not to say there aren\\\'t serious problems involved but none of them kill the theory. There are problems such as exotic material which may or may not be possible to create and when the theory was first published it required fuel quantities about the size of a large gas giant but in less than a year another physicist made a modification to the equations that reduced that to the size of a minivan.
There\\\'s issues concerning the consequences of using such a drive in terms of radiation. A couple of students and educated scientists - not physicists have expressed doubts about being able to actually have a ship in the middle of the space created but those doubts have not been confirmed to have validity.
You simply cannot say that in fifty or a hundred or five hundred years we will not be able to solve these obstacles. That would be incredibly arrogant and history is littered with the forgotten names of those that said \\\"can\\\'t\\\" in the world of science much less science fiction.
Again, FTL is impossible without rewriting the laws of physics - yeah, we get that. Feel free to call that technobabble all you want. Other ways around interstellar distances such as warp, wormholes or variants of such are not impossible and do not violate the laws of physics and that can be said empirically - with no buzzwords or anything.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
It\'s a little condescending and frankly not very educated to call warp drive and wormholes \
to:
It\\\'s a little condescending and frankly not very educated to call warp drive and wormholes \\\"technobabble\\\". Yes, this is about tropes not theories but you\\\'re kind of begging for it with statements like this. Lest you think I\\\'m nitpicking the definition of \\\"technobabble\\\" according to the site is: \\\"Any impressive- and scientific-sounding, but ultimately nonsensical utterance, full of buzzwords.\\\" It is not in any way nonsensical nor is the actual science full of buzzwords.
If you\\\'re going to bother writing sci-fi it\\\'s probably a good idea to educate yourself on current science and technology. Very current. I\\\'m talking about warp but that necessarily includes an understanding of just what FTL is and isn’t. Having a spaceship that can travel interstellar distances in a short amount of time does not mean its travelling faster than light.
FTL violates the laws of physics, period - travelling using warp or some other variation of wormhole does not.
As of right now we know - and feel free to ask the next physicist you meet - that creating a wormhole or a warp bubble or enclosure or whatever you want to call it - does NOT violate the laws of physics. Two years ago Alcubierre published his work and while it has been modified and been written about extensively it has not been shown to violate physics as we know them. I don\\\'t care how you spin it, it just doesn\\\'t.
That\\\'s not to say there aren\\\'t serious problems involved but none of them kill the theory. There are problems such as exotic material which may or may not be possible to create and when the theory was first published it required fuel quantities about the size of a large gas giant but in less than a year another physicist made a modification to the equations that reduced that to the size of a minivan.
There\\\'s issues concerning the consequences of using such a drive in terms of radiation. A couple of students and educated scientists - not physicists have expressed doubts about being able to actually have a ship in the middle of the space created but those doubts have not been confirmed to have validity.
You simply cannot say that in fifty or a hundred or five hundred years we will not be able to solve these obstacles. That would be incredibly arrogant and history is littered with the forgotten names of those that said \\\"can\\\'t\\\" in the world of science much less science fiction.
Again, FTL is impossible without rewriting the laws of physics - yeah, we get that. Feel free to call that technobabble all you want. Other ways around interstellar distances such as warp, wormholes or variants of such are not impossible and do not violate the laws of physics and that can be said empirically.
If you\\\'re going to bother writing sci-fi it\\\'s probably a good idea to educate yourself on current science and technology. Very current. I\\\'m talking about warp but that necessarily includes an understanding of just what FTL is and isn’t. Having a spaceship that can travel interstellar distances in a short amount of time does not mean its travelling faster than light.
FTL violates the laws of physics, period - travelling using warp or some other variation of wormhole does not.
As of right now we know - and feel free to ask the next physicist you meet - that creating a wormhole or a warp bubble or enclosure or whatever you want to call it - does NOT violate the laws of physics. Two years ago Alcubierre published his work and while it has been modified and been written about extensively it has not been shown to violate physics as we know them. I don\\\'t care how you spin it, it just doesn\\\'t.
That\\\'s not to say there aren\\\'t serious problems involved but none of them kill the theory. There are problems such as exotic material which may or may not be possible to create and when the theory was first published it required fuel quantities about the size of a large gas giant but in less than a year another physicist made a modification to the equations that reduced that to the size of a minivan.
There\\\'s issues concerning the consequences of using such a drive in terms of radiation. A couple of students and educated scientists - not physicists have expressed doubts about being able to actually have a ship in the middle of the space created but those doubts have not been confirmed to have validity.
You simply cannot say that in fifty or a hundred or five hundred years we will not be able to solve these obstacles. That would be incredibly arrogant and history is littered with the forgotten names of those that said \\\"can\\\'t\\\" in the world of science much less science fiction.
Again, FTL is impossible without rewriting the laws of physics - yeah, we get that. Feel free to call that technobabble all you want. Other ways around interstellar distances such as warp, wormholes or variants of such are not impossible and do not violate the laws of physics and that can be said empirically.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
It\'s a little condescending and frankly not very educated to call warp drive and wormholes \
to:
It\\\'s a little condescending and frankly not very educated to call warp drive and wormholes \\\"technobabble\\\". Yes, this is about tropes not theories but you\\\'re kind of begging for it with statements like this. Lest you think I\\\'m nitpicking the definition of \\\"technobabble\\\" according to the site is: \\\"Any impressive- and scientific-sounding, but ultimately nonsensical utterance, full of buzzwords.\\\" It is not in any way nonsensical nor is the actual science full of buzzwords.
If you\\\'re going to bother writing sci-fi it\\\'s probably a good idea to educate yourself on current science and technology. Very current. And that includes just what FTL is and isn’t. Having a spaceship that can travel interstellar distances in a short amount of time does not mean its travelling faster than light. Its embarrassing this has to be said frankly.
FTL violates the laws of physics, period - travelling using warp or some other variation of wormhole does not.
As of right now we know - and feel free to ask the next physicist you meet - that creating a wormhole or a warp bubble or enclosure or whatever you want to call it - does NOT violate the laws of physics. Two years ago Alcubierre published his work and while it has been modified and been written about extensively it has not been shown to violate physics as we know them. I don\\\'t care how you spin it, it just doesn\\\'t.
That\\\'s not to say there aren\\\'t serious problems involved but none of them kill the theory. There are problems such as exotic material which may or may not be possible to create and when the theory was first published it required fuel quantities about the size of a large gas giant but in less than a year another physicist made a modification to the equations that reduced that to the size of a minivan.
There\\\'s issues concerning the consequences of using such a drive in terms of radiation. A couple of students and educated scientists - not physicists have expressed doubts about being able to actually have a ship in the middle of the space created but those doubts have not been confirmed to have validity.
You simply cannot say that in fifty or a hundred or five hundred years we will not be able to solve these obstacles. That would be incredibly arrogant and history is littered with the forgotten names of those that said \\\"can\\\'t\\\" in the world of science much less science fiction.
Again, FTL is impossible without rewriting the laws of physics - yeah, we get that. Feel free to call that technobabble all you want. Other ways around interstellar distances such as warp, wormholes or variants of such are not impossible and do not violate the laws of physics and that can be said empirically.
If you\\\'re going to bother writing sci-fi it\\\'s probably a good idea to educate yourself on current science and technology. Very current. And that includes just what FTL is and isn’t. Having a spaceship that can travel interstellar distances in a short amount of time does not mean its travelling faster than light. Its embarrassing this has to be said frankly.
FTL violates the laws of physics, period - travelling using warp or some other variation of wormhole does not.
As of right now we know - and feel free to ask the next physicist you meet - that creating a wormhole or a warp bubble or enclosure or whatever you want to call it - does NOT violate the laws of physics. Two years ago Alcubierre published his work and while it has been modified and been written about extensively it has not been shown to violate physics as we know them. I don\\\'t care how you spin it, it just doesn\\\'t.
That\\\'s not to say there aren\\\'t serious problems involved but none of them kill the theory. There are problems such as exotic material which may or may not be possible to create and when the theory was first published it required fuel quantities about the size of a large gas giant but in less than a year another physicist made a modification to the equations that reduced that to the size of a minivan.
There\\\'s issues concerning the consequences of using such a drive in terms of radiation. A couple of students and educated scientists - not physicists have expressed doubts about being able to actually have a ship in the middle of the space created but those doubts have not been confirmed to have validity.
You simply cannot say that in fifty or a hundred or five hundred years we will not be able to solve these obstacles. That would be incredibly arrogant and history is littered with the forgotten names of those that said \\\"can\\\'t\\\" in the world of science much less science fiction.
Again, FTL is impossible without rewriting the laws of physics - yeah, we get that. Feel free to call that technobabble all you want. Other ways around interstellar distances such as warp, wormholes or variants of such are not impossible and do not violate the laws of physics and that can be said empirically.
