Re: starship-design: FTL idea

["Kyle R. Mcallister" <stk@sunherald.infi.net>]

Timothy van der Linden wrote:
> 
> How nice it would have been if you'd not left out the calculations for this
> transform... Now I still don't see why it goes backwards in time.

It doesn't really go backwards in time. Just in some reference points.
Nothing goes backward in time. Even if you think causality violations
prohibit FTL, no problem. FTL can be done without causality violations
in EVERY REFERENCE POINT. See my follow up message.

> 
> BTW.
>     Ship B echoes the message back towards ship A at 1.8c
>     in _its_ frame of reference.
> 
> That means it is moving at only 1.03053c in the frame where B moves with 0.9c
> -1.8=(0.9-1.03053)/(1+(0.9*-1.03053))
> 
> So for A the beam has approaches with:
> (0.9+1.03053)/(1+(0.9*1.03053))=1.001584c
> 
> (I haven't the faintest idea how you get 1.42)
> 
> Timothy