Prev: Re: Faster Than Light Travel Next: Re: Star Trek background - Reply

Re: Faster Than Light Travel

From: Andy Skinner <askinner@a...>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 17:37:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Faster Than Light Travel

Joachim Heck - SunSoft wrote:
> 
> Chris McCurry writes:
> 
> @:) But thinking about it, I can only think of three truly different
> @:) ways to travel at high speeds in S.Fiction.  Every thing else is
> @:) just a variation of one of those themes:
> @:)
> @:) 1) hyperspace / warp space / worm holes / etc.
> @:) 2) Folding / warping (changing the reality of space time)
> @:) 3) conventional travel
> 
>   I think you're right.  Basically you either traverse some space to
> get from A to B or you don't.  If you do, you either traverse normal
> space, your option (3), or you traverse some other kind of space, your
> option (1).  If you don't traverse any space to get where you're
> going, you either stay put and move the universe, your option (2), or
> you stay put and _don't_ move the universe, which is something of a
> degenerate case because you don't go anywhere.
> 
>   The closest thing I can think of that is any different from any of
> these is some kind of teleoperation/astral projection scheme, but then
> you're not really going anywhere, I guess, so it doesn't count.
> 
>   I too would be very interested to hear any ideas that are somehow
> different from these apparently catch-all transportation methods.

Does converting yourself to energy or a signal and transmitting
that and reconstructing at the other end count?  I know the
transmission has to travel some way.  I'm not all that big on
science fiction, so I am not familiar with who has done what.

(I like Star Wars and stuff like that, for the fun of it, but it
more the fantasy of it that appeals to me.  I happens to be set
in space, with a lot of techological stuff.  In case you're wondering
what I'm doing on such a list if I'm not a science fiction fan.)

andy
askinner@avs.com


Prev: Re: Faster Than Light Travel Next: Re: Star Trek background - Reply