59
submitted 1 year ago by hedge@beehaw.org to c/science@beehaw.org
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Default_Defect@midwest.social 41 points 1 year ago

As long as we aren't trying to fuck with the transporter technology that kills you and makes another you somewhere else, I'm fine.

[-] jarfil@beehaw.org 19 points 1 year ago

But if the another you is undistinguishable at the quantum level... then it's still you (as seen by external observers, and honestly, I could use a break).

[-] 14th_cylon@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago
[-] Default_Defect@midwest.social 3 points 1 year ago

This. Watching this is why I'd never use a Star Trek transporter.

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] jnsn@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[-] lingh0e@lemmy.film 2 points 1 year ago

There's also a Family Guy episode that touches on this issue... but it's less philosophical since neither version realizes the other exists. That and some doubles/originals die in convenient ways.

[-] TheHalc@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago

I believe I have read that it's literally impossible to copy an object's quantum state without destroying it, so in a real sense a transporter that's indistinguishable at a quantum level would be moving you rather than creating a copy and killing the original.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] FaceDeer@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago

To my surprise and delight, the article itself confirms Betteridge's Law of Headlines by starting off with:

A provisional answer is “no.”

Personally, I've never really seen the need for such a thing. There's no great rush to jump dozens of light years away when we have hundreds of planets and moons and other large bodies we've barely even taken a glimpse at right here in our own back yards. We can go right up to a Kardashev II civilization without having to travel more than a few light hours away.

[-] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 year ago

Don't need to go light years, it's the speed that's important.

If you can hop to Mars in 8 seconds instead of 8 months we can explore our backyard a lot better.

[-] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 year ago

There's no great rush to jump dozens of light years away when we have hundreds of planets and moons and other large bodies we've barely even taken a glimpse at right here in our own back yards

None of those are habitable

[-] FaceDeer@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

It's not particularly likely that any of the planets or moons around other stars are habitable either. At least not "step out of the ship and take a nice deep breath of the fresh air, picking an apple off of a nearby tree and making some kind of comment about how it's like Eden" habitable like is so common on TV. It's likely that if there's a native biosphere then that planet is going to be incredibly hostile to alien life like us.

Build habitats. If you've got the tech to build a starship then you've got the tech to build a habitat, it's way easier. Habitats will give you exactly the environment you want, not whatever you happen to find.

[-] chaogomu@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

As long as the atmosphere is roughly similar, the native biosphere would have very little defense against us. Sure, some of the defenses that local plants and animals developed against each other might cause issues, or they might not.

We would be an invasive species on the grandest scale. A completely foreign biology would maybe have useful nutrients, or maybe not. That would be the key, but the periodic table will be the same everywhere, and chemistry being what it is, we'd probably see similar molecules, at least the simple stuff. Basic hydrocarbons and such.

The complex biochemistry would be vastly different. That could trip up human explorers.

[-] FaceDeer@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

the native biosphere would have very little defense against us.

Why is it that way around, instead of "we would have very little defense against the native biosphere?" Especially considering the native biosphere has the home court advantage, it's already well adapted to the environment it's in and has a planet's worth of diversity to draw on when dealing with new competitors.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago

Yeah, that's a pretty strong statement. I'm sure if we had the technology it would see a ton of use. Could we survive without it? Sure, but that goes for most useful technologies.

[-] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

Warp drive, replicator, holodeck, transporters.... So many technologies in ST that would change everything if they existed.

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Particularly replicator and transporter. It would completely pancake down the entirety of the manufacturing and transport industries.

[-] chaogomu@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

I'd not trust transporters, but replicators would be great. If I had replicators, I'd open a replicator restaurant, then hire a few chefs to just cook random stuff all day to scan and then give out to the guests.

Maybe I'd travel around the world, scanning the best and freshest ingredients. But I'd travel by shuttle, not transporter.

[-] MJBrune@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago

Technology to make a planet habitable is far more likely and within our grasp, than to travel faster than light. To add to that, you'll likely experience time-dilation with most methods of FTL travel. It's also doubtful that warp technology is possible to compress space without any ill effects with the space being compressed. Subspace doesn't exist.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] freeman@lemmy.pub 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

With something like an Alcubierre drive you can still travel between planets fairly fast. (Though this concept needs basically dark matter or some type of negative energy)

Even missions to Jupiter and Saturn take 5+ years in travel time one way with normal Hohman transfers and gravity assists that still allow for orbaital capture.

Even if you could simply find some type of fuel that would allow something like the Epstein drive (from the Expanse) where you can accelerate at 1g for 1/2 the trip and decel at 1g for the second half that would cut the travel time down to something on the order of like 9 days to Saturn or so.

[-] FaceDeer@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Using a warp drive for that purpose would be like using a suborbital rocket to pop down to the local mall for some groceries.

9 days is too long to spend on a trip to Saturn? That's quite the first-world problem, there. Especially given that by the time we've got drives like that we'll likely have life extension and/or hibernation technologies to make the trip's duration irrelevant.

In any case, as the article says, warp drives are probably not possible anyway.

[-] freeman@lemmy.pub 4 points 1 year ago

Don’t agree. Play a little Elite Dangerous or any game that can simulate scale of our solar system. Moving around it, even at multiple times the speed of light can be useful.

Imagine making a trip to Ganymede within a day. It would allow for civilizations expansion while maintaining supply chains and not require each place to be wholly independent.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] BobKerman3999@feddit.it 5 points 1 year ago

It takes years of traveling to go to any of them

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] kitonthenet@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

because, much like the show the warp drive is from, it's not about colonization or exploiting resources, but meeting new people and going new places

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 12 points 1 year ago

Tl;dr: we dunno. 🤷‍♂️

If there is a way to make it happen, it'll be interesting to find out how the universe resolves the resulting causal paradoxes. What happens if the cause of an event is able to observe the event before causing it? What happens if the cause of the event responds by not causing the event?

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think the best we can hope for if we get very very lucky with future laws of physics is a cheap way to travel near but slightly below lightspeed. Maybe some sort of way to lower the rest mass of matter.

It's much more likely there will be no immediate application of whatever the full laws are, because new physics only appears in very extreme circumstances we can't easily replicate.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] jay2@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago

No, but on the brightside you got a much better chance of it having a 10 Forward.

[-] melroy@kbin.melroy.org 3 points 1 year ago

Yes, you can try to change time-space before and after the space aircraft. Basically manipulating space around you. So instead you moving through space.. You move the space around you. Allowing you to accelerate at to speeds within seconds without causing harm to yourself.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2023
59 points (100.0% liked)

Science

12955 readers
81 users here now

Studies, research findings, and interesting tidbits from the ever-expanding scientific world.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS