Re: RE: Re: Re: starship-design: RE: Bugs again

[KellySt@aol.com]

In a message dated 10/19/98 1:21:51 PM, lparker@cacaphony.net wrote:

>>
>
>> You can plug values of v > c into special relativity equations,
>
>> at the cost of ending up with things like time and mass values
>
>> that are complex numbers.  I don't know if I'd call that "legal."
>
>> Find me some complex mass and we'll talk then.  A quantum
>
>> mechanical analysis also indicates that you can either have FTL
>
>> particles that aren't localizable (i.e. observable) or you can't
>
>> have FTL particles at all.
>
>
>
>Actually, I think it was AIP News about two weeks ago that was talking about
>
>evidence of a type of neutrino with properties that were imaginary numbers.
>
>( I believe it was spin, but don't quote me.) The scientists who discovered
>
>the effect even stated that if validated, these would have to be tachyons
>
>(faster than light particles).

WHOA!!  If true that would be seriously big news!



>Every analysis I've ever seen of relativity agrees that if you ignore the
>
>evident causality paradoxes, travel above the speed of light is possible,
>
>there just isn't any way to get there because travel at the speed of light
>
>isn't possible.

Thats an assumption (that you can't get from slower to faster without going
fast as) which we might be able to get around.


>Lee

Kelly