Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site topaz.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!topaz!Alfke.PASA
From: Alfke.PASA@Xerox.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers
Subject: Re: Discrepancies (ftl and so on)
Message-ID: <2649@topaz.ARPA>
Date: Wed, 10-Jul-85 12:29:03 EDT
Article-I.D.: topaz.2649
Posted: Wed Jul 10 12:29:03 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 12-Jul-85 03:06:46 EDT
Sender: daemon@topaz.ARPA
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 22

From: Peter Alfke 

Doug Alan writes:
>The use of faster-than-light travel in almost all SF is pretty
>assinine, because almost no SF story considers the full effect that
>a faster-than-drive would have on the world that is described in the
>story.  According to Special Relativity, faster-than-light travel is
>exactly equivalent to traveling backwards in time: there is no
>difference.

Actually, according to Special Relativity, faster-than-light travel is
just plain impossible.  All the sqrt(v^2 / c^2) terms turn imaginary . .
.

Any story in which ftl works is tacitly assuming that something new has
superceded Relativity in the same manner as Relativity superceded
Newtonian mechanics.  That, or the author just doesn't care about all
the physical ramifications; he/she just needs ftl to tell the story.
(Either approach is equally valid in my book.)

						--Peter Alfke
						  alfke.pasa@xerox