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 AlfkeDoug 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 Any story in which ftl works is tacitly assuming that something new has superceded Relativity in the same manner as Relativity superceded Newtonian mechanics.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