Tim Cook wrote:

> Actually, from what I remember of the Technical Manual, it's not a 1:1
> multiplicative correlation between warp speed and c, more like
> exponential.  Warp 1 *is* c, but warp 10 is 'occupies every point in
> universe simultaneously' and requires theoretically infinite
> energy...warp 9 is Really Really fast.  Because just 10x the speed of
> light still leaves months, if not *years* between most stars.

This is what always bursts my bubble about space travel - whenever I hear of
the incredible distances involved. 

Even IF we could attain, or come close to, lightspeed (and by all evidence
it is NOT like the soundbarrier, it is an absolute physical constraint,
unbreakable by any conceivable method or technology) it is still 4 YEARS in
space to the nearest start. To even get to more "close" stuff, 6 YEARS, 10
YEARS - or -thousands- of years (at LIGHTSPEED!) to another galaxy.

Of course, time dilation at high relativistic velocities might mean you can,
from your relative viewpoint, complete the journey within a human lifespan
of 70, or 80 years, depending on just how close you can get to the
magical "c". Nothing would be left back home though, since thousands of
years might have passed there...

It just somehow... sad.
-- 
Stefan Viljoen

Post a reply to this message