From: "James Wynn"
Subject: RE: (urth) FTL Travel Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 18:14:54 -0600 Don asked: Please explain. Is this the usual SF take on FTL or is there a physics explanation that makes backward time travel the most likely? I'm pretty ignorant on this. Crush does his best to help: As one moves faster and approaches the speed of light, time slows down, exponentially, until time stops at the speed of light. I am informed by Stephen Hawking (not personally) *that it takes* an infinite amount of time and an infinite amount of energy to reach the speed of light. Jerry Friedman asks facetiously: "...that it *would* take..."? Crush explains to Mr. Friedman: Why no. Everyone knows that Hawkings has a FTL wheelchair. ;-) Nit. nit. nit. Crush goes on responding to Don's question: It is simple mathematics that as one moves faster than the speed of light, time moves in the opposite direction. Jerry Friedman bristles at this bowdlerization of the theory of Relativity: I wouldn't call it simple mathematics. Crush responds to Jerry Friedman: Neither would I, as my response to Hartshorn was intended to convey. But the general concept of why a *possible* implication of FTL travel is that one would move into his own past is one of the most straightforward concepts in this realm. I believe Don's question was whether or not all this had the scientific pedigree of dililthium crystals. I don't think my answer was misleading given the context. You have heroically attempted to clarify Hartshorn's beautiful explanation, but I've got a dollar that says that a majority of the readers of this list -- still - have no more than the vaguest understanding of what you are describing or its implications (unless a majority of the people on this have a B.A. in Physics). Remember Kypris explaining possession to Silk? -- Crush --