Re: starship-design: Suspended animation.

[KellySt@aol.com]

In a message dated 1/8/00 11:39:04 PM, STAR1SHIP@aol.com writes:

><< near light speed? Man, you're just asking for it.
> 
> Faster than light travel opens a whole can of worms. For one, we don't
>know  how, and even  if we did we would be hit by interstellar debris 
>at near the speed of light,  which would really tear a ship up. You'd 
> need some kind of force field, or move space with the vehicle, 
> and that's just plain silly.

One current theory of faster then light (inspired by a physist listening to 
Star Trek technobable.) does involve moving a volume of space at faster then 
light speed.

As to impacts at near light speed.  Yes thats a MAJOR problem.  One idea is 
to fire a stream of dust out ahead of the ship.  Anything hiting it at those 
speeds would be vaporized and simple magnetic fields could shove it away.


>First I know how-see Deja.com: Discussion Search Results 
>for starship1@aol.com  and my message thread 4 light years distance divided
>
>by two years ship time = twice light speed.

Two years ship time, doesn't equal two years of real time.  Your not going at 
a real faster then light speed.