Re: starship-design: Quantum Gravity

[kyle <stk@sunherald.infi.net>]

Zenon Kulpa wrote:
> 
> > From: "L. Parker" <lparker@cacaphony.net>
> > To: "'LIT Starship Design Group'" <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
> >
> > I apologize if this is old news to anybody, but it sounds interesting
> > since it relates (slightly) to this group's objective -
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > The idea that space and time may not be continuous but are built,
> > like matter, from very tiny "atomic building blocks" is not new-it was
> > proposed previously by Roger Penrose, of Oxford University and Penn State,
> > and other physicists and mathematicians. The work of Rovelli and Smolin
> > is, however, the first to show that these discrete structures are required
> > by the laws of quantum mechanics and relativity theory.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> If that proves to be true (whatever "true" exactly means),
> it will relate to our objective quite significantly.

Quite true.
> 
> Namely, it will mean that our Universe is like a 3(or more)-D
> cellular automaton (just like a giant version of Conway's game "Life"),
> which in turn will mean that FTL is really impossible
> (and explain why - you cannot shift bits in your computer
> faster than one tick of your master clock...).

The universe has no "clock" as far as we know. Besides, giving structure
to the fabric of space would only strenghten FTL (Try walking in a
vacuum). It gives you something to warp (Alcubierre's theory),
somethingto push against (the Aether hypothesis), and alot of energy.
Lee Parker is right though: it could be used badly. So lets use it for
good (FTL Propulsion), not planet bombs.
 
Kyle Mcallister