Well... that statement is just what you claim at the end..
If that was the case we wouldn't have science at all. Our progress lies entirely on the fact that we are not satisfied with only what has a scientific (science is a rather modern term btw.) basis. We always believed in making the seemingly impossible possible.
So it's therefore safe to say that rejecting anything that has no scientific basis (just yet) is the rather dumb way, in regards of mankind's progress as a whole.
As for US going faster than the speed of light.. No living being on Earth could survive a speed anywhere close to speed of light. Let alone at the same, or even above.
The only way to go "faster" would be to trick the distances, by creating a short cut through space and time. And for that, we still try to figure that out entirely.
Last edited by Wildtree; 2013-01-06 at 06:59 PM.
If we voted to increase the speed of light, we could be going even faster.
You don't really get the point. No mass can travel faster then the speed of light, because the faster you go the more mass you gain, when objects get near the speed of light their mass is close to infinity thus requiring near infinite energy to maintain said speed. We are as certain about this as that we are certain that when you trow something in the air, it will fall back on earth.
This does not mean faster then light travel is impossible, I suggest you read up on warp drive.
If you believe anything is possible, amputate your left arm. Hope, wish, pray, and meditate for it to regrow. Then at the end of your life realize as you die with one limb that not only is everything not possible, but more likely most things are not possible.
Republicans would filibuster it.
As far as I can see it, none does in this thread. For a serious (non-willy nilly) attack on lightspeed would include a new theory, supported by repeatable tests etc.
People that write that any theory, including the one of e=mc^2, can be proven wrong and replace by a better theory are right. But that observation is without substance till that theory has arrived. Until then we can make up all the fiction we want, write, dream, and believe in whatever we want - those seriously involved in this kind of physics like researchers, space vehicle builders etc. will focus on what is currently known to work .
It's a theoretical limit. As in, based on what we understand right now (the theory of special relativity), that's how fast anything can go (not just 'us').
Our view can and will be changed when something comes along to make that a reasonable hypothesis and eventual theory.
That doesn't mean in the meantime we should just go "Anything might be able to do anything, so why bother discussing the specifics". We can still model and discuss and theorize based on how it's been shown/understood to work currently.
Edit: And yes, my post is simplified. /dealwithit.
Actually, I read about a successfull hand surgery today in Britain. Some guy got a new hand from someone that didn't need theirs anymore, and he could move the fingers in the hand but didn't have any sensation in it yet.
Bionic arms and legs are a reality nowadays. I saw a video on youtube about a woman that had no arms and legs, that had gotten some robotic arm connected to her brain. She could control it very well. She fed herself a bar of chocolate with it.
There is a direct connection between spacetime, C and the cause-effect connection of the Universe. Due to that, you can't travel faster than light regardless of the method. Otherwise you can observe the effect of an action before the action happened.
Even if there was some way to travel 100 million light years by a wormhole, a mechanism must be in place to protect causality, which means that time will be so distorted in the wormhole that you will appear on the other end 100 million years later. To you it will look like you traveled 100 million light years in a second, but that won't be the case.
Yet to be complete you need to add that the above is according to current theories, likely (I am no physicist) tested. A new theory based on right now unknown new insights could change this story.
(And sorry for picking *your* post for this remark - it is one that can be added to a lot of posts in this thread).