Re: starship-design: stuff

[Paul Anderson <madhobbyist@geeky1.ebtech.net>]

On Fri, 9 Jan 1998, Mike Cross wrote:

> Hi, my name is Mike Cross and I am new to this list.  It looks neato.
> 
> I read an article in the paper today, and it made me a little sad, actually.
> It said that scientists are almost 95% sure that the universe will not have
> enough gravity to overcome its outward motion. 
>
Well, if you want my personal opinion, people where once 100% CERTAIN that
wood contained fire, then they where 100% CERTAIN the earth was flat, then
100% CERTAIN that mechanical flight was imposible...  Anyways, the issue
has SIGNIFICANTLY minute relevance to us.

> 
> Another concept was that "if you can get above c, then you can go any speed
> above it.  But you have just as hard a time stopping as you did getting
> there."  Which would kinda make the warp drive star trek stuff kinda weirded
> out and inaccurate, huh.  Does any of that make sense?  
> 
Well, IIRC, einstein theorized that to go FASTER than light would require
an infinite amount of energy, and so would slowing below the speed of
light.  IMHO, the goal isn't to really go fast at all, it's to get from
point A to point C, without intersecting point B between A and C.  I'm an
advocate of wormholes, if one knew how to manipulate spacetime, you could
travel at a speed far less than light, and still travel massive distances
in seconds.

> So this list is devoted to starship design.  That's just so cool, you know.
> Are there any standing goals or anything that the list is shooting for?
> Nearest star by 2000 and something?  Cool.  Well, thanks for letting a newbie
> having the post of today...
> 
I beleive Tau Ceti by 2050.  TTYL!



---
Paul Anderson
Hacker, Mad Scientist, Machinist, Publisher, and Author
http://www2.ebtech.net/~panderso
Owner of the madhobby list, to subscribe e-mail:
2madhobby-request@geeky1.ebtech.net