Warp Drive
Empire of Lights Lyrics

We have lyrics for 'Warp Drive' by these artists:

Blargg 3, 2, 1, go crazy Aaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh 3, 2, 1, go crazy Go s…
Soulights Can I see you one minute, please? I know it sounds…
Subtronics & Dirt Monkey Every galaxy I′ve traveled All the species are the same You …

We have lyrics for these tracks by Empire of Lights:

Across The Sky Across the sky A trillion lights I can see everything Const…
Chasing Stardust We're chasing stardust We're chasing stardust We're chasing …

Shake Off The Heat No you can't shake off the heat No you can't shake…

The lyrics are frequently found in the comments by searching or by filtering for lyric videos

TRACKS

Genre not found

Artist not found

Album not found

Search results not found

Song not found

Most interesting comments from YouTube:

Stuff59042

1y↑42

First thing that causality/FTL paradox diagram makes me think is that our basic understanding of causality may be inaccurate. That's the first place my brain reaches for.

It's like running through an equation that you already know the answer to but coming up with the wrong answer. You know the answer you got is wrong because you know what the answer already is, you're just working through the scenario the equation presents.

In life, when it comes to problems involving perception of any kind, I've learned that the first place you always want to look is at the human error factor.

I'm no quantum physicist or math wizard, sure. But when you know the answer you're coming up with doesn't match the answer you know to expect, do you blame the problem or do you double check your work?

Or to simplify it, when you take a measurement and then cut something to length and it doesn't work, do you check the measurement or do you check the cut length?

Problem then becomes that we don't have a cheatsheet to refer back to and there's no way to run a real world version of it to see how we get to the answer. At least not yet.

Z M

1y↑19

I was also wondering this. It seems as if the crew's time frame is simply dilated.

A true "FTL" transmitter is violating the speed of light, therefore an "FTL" transmission of data no longer follows the rules of relativity. The frequency of the transmission would be compressed or stretched. Yes, normal EM is not supposed to do that, but certainly a rule-breaking machine would be the exception.

It would be like "FTL message incoming"

"HHHHEEEELLLLLLLOOOOO PLLLLLLEEEAAAASSSSEEE TTTTTUUURRRNNN OOOOFFFF TTTHHHEEE TTT..."

"Sorry, ship, we have to activate the transmission to Vega, we'll get back to you after your message fully arrives".

Z M

1y↑2

@Adi Rice Assume that there is no actual distance or time in whatever medium propagates EM signals between matter (packaged quanta). For clarification, there is at least enough minimal distance to know that two objects are not in the same place, but no possible "space" to measure what that distance is. There's also cause and effect, so it's not "timelessness", but there's no universal clock metronome by which your position in time can be measured.

For this environment, variations in frequencies as these packaged quanta communicate and interact, create a sense of distance and a sense of relative time. If the "speed of light", the communications time is constant between all things, then different frequencies would create different relationships, different orders of events, and apparent measurable time and distance.

Imagine two objects with some measurable space between them, but the distance is fixed because they are going at the same relative speed. This is a kind of stable equilibrium in their shared communication frequencies. Any influence they have on each other will become measured as differences in time.

Now imagine a third object moving faster than both. The time effect itself will vary over time since it will "take longer" for the message to be received as an object "moves further away".

So, there's no "space" there's just "how long does it take for this signal to make changes relative to the signals of 'closer' objects?".

There's no "time" just the order signals are processed based on "distance". And so space and time are the same thing.

However, when you are moving faster, spacetime is changing, like a higher frequency influencing a lesser.

I can't absolutely cheat spacetime. If there's "distance" then I need to apply time to cross it, since they are one and the same. But if I had an entangled geometry and carried it across space, then I could have a geometry where "one side" was a great distance and the other side was a short distance. Like the base of a triangle versus its apex. You can cheat faster than light distance problems this way.

However, once you start moving, say you move one end of a wormhole faster than the other, then you will simply distort the wormhole. You will be able to enter and exit one end faster than the other end.

One way to think of this is to represent these frequencies as geometries. Two objects moving at the same speed are like a stable object. You cross from one end of the triangle to the other. The triangle is "spacetime".

When one object moves faster than the other, it's as if the triangle is growing while your are crossing it. Whatever temporal paradoxes could be solved by the geometry of a wormhole, will be frustrated by this changing geometry of objects with different relative motion.

Arnab Bose

51w

Excellent video, as always!

After watching it, and having watched Star Trek TNG, Voyager, or even Avengers Endgame, one can be forgiven to feel that quantum mechanics and many worlds may be can salvage this.

But, unfortunately it does not :) Even if many worlds interpretation is "correct", it still does not resolve causality violation created in this video by introducing a new timeline. To explain why, hear me out if you will.

First, the thought experiment clearly demonstrate that in a classical world (i.e. if quantum mechanics did not exist), this sort of transport is not possible. The only requirement is an agent who can follow orders.
It is a reasonable question whether such agents could exist if QM did not; since that gives rise to a different universe which is not ours. I think the answer to it is yes it will, since you do not need QM to have entropy or to build a classical computer which is more than capable to follow rules.

Second, quantum mechanics does not save it with its many-world-hypothesis.
Remember quantum mechanics posits superimposed states that can live parallel to each other, undetected by each other, collocating in the same space-time.
Therefore, one could argue that sending an FTL message creates a parallel world where different events unfold, and both worlds have their own timeline, thus the paradox gets resolved. Or does it? Suppose the events in the video here are from timeline A. Sending the message back from the space ship creates a timeline B, where the message from Earth is no longer sent. But it doesn't change the fact the the Earth in timeline A did not receive any such message, whereas the space-ship in the same timeline A did send it. If the spaceship now returns to Earth and checks it, they can confirm that their message was not received. Which in turn means the messaging system is not reliable (well, it sent it to "an alternate timeline", which is not really a hallmark of a reliable messaging system). But that leads us to either a contradiction (if you assume that messaging system was indeed reliable), or leads us to a version of the chronology-prevention-conjecture (you cannot build reliable FTL messaging system).

Hence QM and many-world do not come to rescue.

Sidenote: I'd like to point out that the paradox does not need FTL matter transport (a.k.a. FTL spaceship). Instead of sending the message from the spaceship, we could just send the message back from Vega and have the same effect with just the FTL messaging system.

Dev Verma

2y↑6

@David McCoy Why would we talk about instances where nothing happens?

Let me try to explain:
We are talking about a hypothetical concept(faster than light travel).
If that hypothetical concept is possible then it would never break causality.
So we are deliberately trying to look at those (possible)scenarios that would violate causality to disapprove the concept.

Here is an example that has nothing to do with causality but maybe it will make things clearer:
If you are trying to disapprove a business that states that their armour is indestructible, you would try out scenarios where the armour is subjected to gun shots or other weapons and not the scenarios that involve the showering the armour with rose petals.

rumblef1sh

50w↑1

Really good explanation, thanks for this!

So, if I've understood you correctly (I may well not have) if a ship travels not STL or FTL but "at" the speed of light...

the ship will travel along the null line correct? And if so, then both its time axis and spatial axis are also this same null line?

Which makes err.. a very confusing idea - that it's moving forward in time, travelling through space, yet all by moving along the single null line axis.

Of course I could simply have completely misunderstood.

All comments from YouTube:

Brick bread

1y↑2.5K

I like to imagine that as soon as we discover FTL and break spacetime, the simulation crashes and the higher beings are annoyed they have another bug to fix

Marcyyy

1y↑200

"God damn it i didnt think they would actually get to it! Now i gotta program a whole new enviorment and items"

Lucas Moers

1y↑226

“There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.

There is another theory which states that this has already happened.”

― Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Inside Job

1y↑15

Na no crashes (But i like the thought) I'm thinking just level 2 of the sim. It does not crash until 999,980 like the old arcade defender game.

Borat Sagdiyev

1y↑34

@Lucas Moers Can confirm. Same thing happened with my father.

not I

1y↑14

human scientists are the higher beings who put a sim into effect at a higher speed than their own reality to see the future, then when paradoxes occur, they have to wind back to when it happens, and figure out what's meant to happen then, and to do that they have to study the sciences which the sim people developed, but they can't figure it out, so one frustrated technician just removes the people who did the faster than light stuff, and resumes the sim.

88 More Replies...

Icedragon256

1y↑269

I landed at the same "strict rules" conclusion back in 2007 when designing a sci-fi setting with FTL. I borrowed a bit from Douglas Adams and ended up with a version similar to one you hinted at. That any attempts to perform an action which would result in a paradox would be met with increasingly unlikely events to prevent it from occurring in the first place. Thus, before sending any FTL comms, or engaging in certain kinds of travel, you have to draw the light cones and think through the implications as shown in your video. Thanks for putting this together. It was nice to see someone think through the same things and tie it into a neat package.

Just_ Me

1y↑15

I am doing a copy and paste from a quick thought I had.
"Just spitballing here, because I am not a physicist nor time traveler, but perhaps it needs to be viewed in other dimensions rather than with a 2d graph.
Say for example someone makes a device that in theory can send an FTL message. They turn it on and send a message, but nothing happens so they think it didn't work. However thinking in the infinite universes model the senders universe continued on it's time line, but the message was received in a multitude of parallel universes. They have zero clue as to where the message came from, but they received it none the less.
Or perhaps the universes have a way of keeping things tidy, so too speak. So when the FTL message is sent, how do I say this, the entire universe is sent and is no longer where it was in time. Thinking in terms of infinite universes perhaps there are as many, call them anti universes (empty spaces) in the big empty. So the universe itself where the FTL message originated instantly fills the space where the message is received thus avoiding some weird entanglement of timelines.
Sure there might be some side effects such as the Mandela effect, but that is price we pay in order to have FTL."

W0NK042

This is why I only travel on Bad News. 😉

nothing nothingness

48w↑1

I have proven that even if you ignore all paradoxes with time travel it still violates the 1st law if thermodynamics.

Raymond Turner

46w

This is what I was thinking. I'm glad to see somebody else thought the same. I even hypothesized that that causing a paradox, that section of time is broken off and takes that space with it, like ALL of that universe at that exact time, essentially causing what would be parallel universe. Sting Theory mathematically checked out, and postulates that a multiverse exists, along with at least 11 dimensions. I think something like this videos scenario paradox happened in the Mark Wahlberg Planet of the Apes. I remember there being a video transmission they received in the beginning of the movie that was actually sent years later...

Gatekeeping 七輪

46w

But I don’t understand, the problem seems to be STL not FTL but STL are totally possible

1 More Replies...

Frank Plughoff

1y↑92

Possibly the best, most informative and most intelligible videos on an impossible subject I have ever seen. There are those moments in life you can't un-see. Mostly we think of those in negative terms. But things we actually grok come in moments of elucidation and just can't be unlearned. This video put understanding just on the tip of my tongue ... I just get the flavor of the intertwined complexities. Thanks so much!

VEGA SHAINNING

Your Not Kidding! Boy oh boy my mind feels as if it’s on steroids traveling the roller coaster 🎢 into exiting possibilities of discovery/emotion.

notfiveo

51w

I sped up this video 1.5X and even went faster!

Terra

1y↑71

Cosmological and chronological paradoxes are so interesting, rather enjoyed listening to this more than I'd expected.

MisterMysterios

1y↑47

I think a possible sollution to the time travel paradox is a system like we have seen it in the show Dark. The reason why you cannot change anything by traveling through time is because the events always included you traveling in the past. Meaning that the ship sending back the order to turn out ftl communication happened in the original time line as well, and was there ignored.

So, the idea that time paradoxes are impossible is that actions of time travel always happened and this cannot change the outcome.

Tim de Fauconval

43w↑2

I'm not sure to understand everything but would this mean that the future already happened ?

MisterMysterios

43w↑2

@Tim de Fauconval Haven't thought too deeply about it, but I think so. If a time travel exist, and he has always made the impact in the past, it means he will have to always travel back into the past in the future, making it a deterministic universe where everything is set in stone, from every decision of intelligent life down to each quantum state that defines the future.

Jacey Gaither

41w↑2

Yes, this is Nietzsche's ideo of eternal recurrence. Everything that has happened will happen again, and what will happen has already happened an infinite number of times. A-la, "time is a flat circle."

MisterMysterios

41w↑2

@jaceygaither2581 well, yes and no. As far as I understand Nietzsche here, the cycle of time is the entire history, while the time travel here only limits that cyclic idea to actual time travel, which is the exeption. So, while for the time travel causality, it will be a repeating ring, the rest of the universe would still follow a linear time line of causality.

Ihsahn Åkerfeldt

40w

@MisterMysteriosWhat you're describing is referred to as eternalism or "block time" theory.

Matthew Fura

39w↑1

You've taken an incredibly hard thing to explain and made it something even I can understand. Very well done mate!

Krish P

2y↑7.2K

Does anyone realize how crazy it is that we can even theorize something like this

Random Cubing

2y↑279

Thanks to Einstein

Jeffrey B

2y↑467

I mean, on a certain level it's completely intuitive. You can't shine a light at something and then arrive before the light hits it, or conversely the light we see from stars has been traveling X light years to reach us, so to travel faster than light we would travel to the source before it was sent.

But I will agree that it's crazy that we have actual equations and models for it, thanks to the work of giants (upon whose shoulders we stand).

Merc007

2y↑71

If you think about it, maybe it is just a breach of the time line where earth after the ship send the reply to turn off the ftl transmitter, so you have a time line where the crew reply and a other where the don't receive any message because earth did not send it. So in the end 2 time line exist and no loop or paradox.

AboveEmAllProduction

2y↑94

It's just the brain being brain lol, so smart it had to name himself

Eddy Colon

2y↑20

We usually dream bigger as humans with the knowledge we have. Just think about Egyptians about death.

399 More Replies...

Sarge

1y↑9

I love watching this channel.
I have such a longing for knowledge of the universe, space and all the theoretical studies and possibilities they potentially propound.
I feel like I'm learning with every video, yet after each one ends, I feel more stupid than before I started.

YS

1y↑25

"The cosmic speed limit, the speed of light is so diminutive compared to a galaxy. It almost seems like a cruel cosmic joke that the universe be arranged in such a way that we are able to look out and glimpse its wonders and yet are trapped here by the speed of light. Fated to only ever peer through the bars of our cosmic prison and dream." -- This is so beautifully spoken...

Creepys land of dreams 123789

45w↑5

The Alcubierre drive avoids some troublesome time bending by correcting its relativistic effects behind it. But honestly, the causality breaking things aren't entirely time travel. They seem like really cool emergent effects and fall under engineering problems for me, and also, I like the conclusion in this video. But I feel like FTL is ultimately possible, just "it causes paradoxes we think" isnt enough for me. I feel like the undiscovered physical effecrs inhibiting paradoxes dont have to inhibit FTL.

David G Austin

44w↑5

You do a remarkable job of explaining this in a way that we ordinary folks can understand. Really great video on a fascinating topic!

TayZonday

2y↑106

The speed of light should really be taught as the speed of causality. The speed of light is an incidental stenographer of the speed of causality.

Cool Worlds

2y↑22

Yes! It’s not the right name but sadly we’re sort of stuck with it

Alec Dacyczyn

2y↑11

Let's adopt Asimov's interpretation and say that light, gravity, and causality all travel at "Celeritas", a special speed that is an innate property of the universe.

A Painting

2y↑1

Tay wtf you got some varied interests. Taught me economics and now you're prepping a physics song?

W0tch

2y↑1

And the speed of light is a top limit in the Lorentz transformation of spacetime diagrams that cannot be exceeded !
Using FTL info transmission breaks the maths of the spacetime diagrams (square roots of negative numbers), so the conclusions of this videos do not stand :)

Tony

2y↑6

@Cool Worlds light travels faster than sound and doesn't break casuality for a blind man. Light travelling faster than light doesn't break casuality either. The universe operates on universal time, not local time. If you want to do a video about casuality, do one on the two different speeds of sound on Mars.

16 More Replies...

Tony G

1y↑15

My explanation of time paradoxes has always been that the timeline is rewritten each time. For example in Terminator, John Connor rose to be a lead through other means. After the events of the movie happen, he becomes a better leader in the future and changes appearance (genes) due to his father being different than the previous timeline.

Teal

44w↑6

Well, I don't know about time travel, but a fascinating thing to think about is that if you could travel FTL and have a way to look at earth from any distance, you could go far enough away from earth to see the past.

José Rodrigues

44w

That’s pretty incredible to think about. What the flying fuck.

Phil Giffin

39w

@José RodriguesVery easy point to understand. We're here on Earth looking out into space. If we look at the sun we're all seeing the sun in the past, as it was 8 minutes ago because that's how long light from the sun takes to reach our eyes. So likewise, if we could instantly transport to a point next to the sun and then looked at Earth we'd be seeing Earth as it was 8 minutes ago in the past. If we could instantly transport to Alpha Centauri and stare back at Earth we'd be seeing Earth as it was over 4 years ago because that's how long it takes light to reach our eyes from that star system. Get it?

TG-Maverick22

44w↑4

Videos on this channel is just on another level of greatness. I enjoyed every minute of this video. 100/100!

Carlos Palencia

1y↑5

Wow, you explained this perfectly. Very deep and thought-provoking. Thank you.

George A

1y↑6

If FTL is impossible, the upside is that the possibility of aliens attacking would be quite low.

ProfShibe

40w

That also includes the possibility of meeting them :(

The world could be littered with civilizations, just they might be far apart, or some might even be next to each other, and we’d never know.

Shiny Sheepy

2y↑1.4K

"It almost seems like a cruel cosmic joke that the universe be arranged such a way that we are able to look out and glimpse its wonders and yet are trapped here by the speed of light." So well said

Foxtayle

2y↑85

Like God said "You can look but you can't touch".

A Ka

2y↑32

Blind people have eyes yet they can not see. Be grateful for what you have.

S Tho

2y↑52

It is only a cruel joke, due to human avarice.
The concept of continuing to climb stairs to silver level, gold level, platinum level, diamond level luxury and status ...and be temtped by yet another staircase.

The fire door locks behind you and you're trapped on a dirty roof with a noisy AC compressor.

Chemplay

2y↑5

@A Ka Some don't have eyes.

111 More Replies...

GEOXwill

48w↑1

The problems started when we had the STL crew interfering with FTL. The two might exist parallel to each other to satisfy Hawking or these paradoxes can actually happen

Stuff59042

1y↑42

Ando Rexurix

1y↑10

There was a PBS Space Time video where the narrator proposed that the decreased progress in quantum mechanics may be due to the fact that we may have to consider a completely different outlook on how we see the universe. For all we know we might've reached a dead-end given the knowledge and mathematical formulas we have. We're trying to apply macroscopic rules onto subatomic events that we cannot properly measure, so our intuition fails us time and time again. Or as someone else said, "if your only tool is a hammer then everything looks like a nail."

April

51w↑2

your problem with this diagram lies entirely within vibes. if you want a reason to disagree you have to come up with a reason, not just say "idk why but it feels like this is wrong somehow". as far as we know, it's not, but if you have any theories to the contrary go collect your nobel prize

Ando Rexurix

50w

@April You have to come up with a hypothesis before delving deeper. We're at a point in QM where things are stagnating, so it's only reasonable to try and approach it from a different perspective. He may be wrong, who knows, but without trying or at least attempting to think 'outside the box' no progress will be made.

Skeletor Jopko

46w

@Ando Rexurix Matt O'Dowd does have a way with words when it comes to... spacetime.

Pol Garcia

1y↑24

Very interesting video! However, a question popped up for me about the breaking of the causality rule and I can't seem to answer it myself.

So, according to the rule, "the world line defines the time axis, as perceived by those following it", and thus the time slice of the STL's crew has to be parallel to the that of the observer's (that is, them; the red dash line). However, I noticed that, according to the diagram, the hypothetical STL ship takes off from Earth (I assume the point of origin within the vertical Earth's time axis is the point of departure of the ship) to send the warning of the Supernova X to Vega before the Earth(lings) actually "sees" Supernova X. Does that mean that, in this case, it is implied that "seeing" is a different event than "perceiving", and that the Earth(lings) are aware of the Supernova X radiation coming their way before they actually "see" or rather experiment its effects (if any)? Also, assuming an STL ship was ready to be launched the moment something like Supernova X was detected (not "seen" as in the diagram; something prior to that), does that mean that both an STL ship and an FTL ship are sent to Vega within the same space and relatively the same time, just in different points in time on Earth relative to the "seeing" and "perceiving" of Supernova X? Should that be the case, then both ships would have been sent to space with the same knowledge of Supernova X and the same goal, and thus when the STL ship gets to Vega, it already knows about Supernova X happening right from its departure from Earth because its purpose was to warn Vegans about that in the first place, right? My point here is, the time slice for the STL's crew is supposed to be parallel to the red dash line, and as shown in the video causality was broken when applied, but the red dash line doesn't seem to start at the right point of the Earth's time axis if anything I said makes sense, and so its origin should be the same as the one from the FTL ship if "seeing" is the same as "perceiving", which is what I understand is the case. Then the testing with the time slice would make sense since the red dash line, with its new point of origin being the star on Earth in the diagram, would roughly have the same angle as the original green line that connects Supernova X, Earth and Vega, and thus the causality would be the same as with the FTL ship, the only difference being that the STL ship would get there long after Vegans noticed the Supernova X, right?

Furthermore, the red dash line, from what I understand, does not represent the actual moment when the STL ship reaches Vega: it represents how its crew perceived the time that passed from their departure from Earth until their arrival on Vega, but the real moment when they reach Vega is the red line, not the dashed one. So, the only "paradox" here would be that the crew thought they reached Vega on time to warn Vegans about Supernova X when, in reality, it happened decades or centuries ago. Shouldn't we then apply the time slice in the the red line's angle and not in the dashed one?

Otherwise, if an STL ship was sent to Vega before Supernova X was detected from Earth, then the diagram would be correct as it is but the causality wouldn't be broken: the STL ship would've been sent to Vega for a different purpose other than warn Vegans about Supernova X given that the crew from that STL's ship would not know about it: it just hadn't happened yet when they departed from Earth. In that case, just like in the last scenario, the only problem would be the crew's perception of reality or knowledge about it, but not the actual events that happened around them.

ace

1y↑12

You are 100% right, their perception would be different in my opinion, not the actual events that are happening. I had this same thought. This video is a bit confusing isn't it?

Pol Garcia

1y↑7

@ace At first everything seemed to make sense, but upon rewinding the video for those two things I couldn't understand I just realized that, in the video, there is no distinction between actual facts and perceptions, but in reality that is what makes the whole difference for the argument doesn't it? My guess is that the original theory has more details to it than it was shown in the video and that our concerns with it are actually solved with the full explanation, but let's see if someone can give us an answer in further comments.

Arun PKR

1y↑8

he is just blabbing and grabbing. the reply message from the STL ship must be denoted in upward direction. but he denotes it in downward direction, therby creating paradox

Jimmy Johns

1y↑1

Nerd

Andrew Song

1y↑5

what bro why did I have to read your wall of text god damn.

The ship is not going to vega to warn them about the supernova, there is no implicit or explicit causality here, the ship does indeed depart before seeing supernova x - because its purpose is not to warn vega about supernova x, it's just an abstract representation of any STL ship capable of reaching vega. (and that's the point - causality breaks with any ship travelling to any arbitrary planet sufficiently far apart in the space axis).

The causality break happens when earth decides to send a FTL message to the ship, which from both earth's and the ship's reference frame, happens after the ship has departed from earth.

3 More Replies...

NK Irmath

1y↑3

I think there's definitely a huge risk of putting something in the space of being 2 sizes at one time.

Mike

51w↑2

The fact that I can follow along with this and semi understand it is incredible. I love this guy and I need to now watch everything he's ever done.

Bachelorchownowwithflavor

2y↑1.1K

"The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition." -Carl Sagan

LETS BE HONEST

1y↑18

Thats kind of a Captain Obvious thing for Carl to say..🤣🤣

Tyler Durden

1y↑88

@LETS BE HONEST You'll be surprised how many there are who don't understand something so obvious.

ΝΙΚΟΛΑΟΣ ΗΛΙΑΚΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ

1y↑3

Then for who is it

LETS BE HONEST

1y↑2

@ΝΙΚΟΛΑΟΣ ΗΛΙΑΚΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ not who..what ..
For its self ...

48 More Replies...

cptblood1981

1y↑90

I would posit that it is possible it's just all about frames of reference. You would not be able to affect anything in your personal referential past. You could observe it, but not change it. I think the diagram is off in using the frame of reference for the STL ship as the "speed" of their FTL message would be significantly "faster" than the message from Earth. The correction for this means that their message would NOT arrive prior to that of the sent message. (On the graph their message would appear to them (could they see the graph) to curve upward past the message point. Using star trek terms if you fired off a message at warp 1 its not going to travel at (warp 1 + full impulse) simply because you were going at full impulse. Basically this graph "forgets" that for all of the pink FTL lines, the straight "space" line is not straight. For them it is a curve, so if you factor that in and the flatten it back out it shouldn't violate causality. I am probably wrong somewhere, it's 2 in the morning...

GAURAV RANA

1y↑10

Ah thank you. I was thinking that this seems very off but couldn't put it in words.

John Dean

It doesn't make sense to me that the stl ship exists on a line based on the space axis...

Peter Ingraham

1y↑1

Saying that "the line is not straight" and implying it should be straight is basically equivalent to saying "relativity is incorrect." Now, you can have FTL travel AND causality if you scrap relativity, but unfortunately, relativity looks highly likely to be true based on our current assumptions. And relativity means those strange angled paths through spacetime, where by going really fast in a frame of reference time will pass differently (seems to be experimentally true for satellites with clocks in orbit!).
(And yes, I know that the video seems to claim that relativity isn't the problem, but... it totally is, I disagree with the video on that.)

cptblood1981

1y↑9

@Peter Ingraham no, what I am implying is that this graph is uses a straight line (thus treating it linearly) vis a vis space whereas the whole concept discussed involves bending or folding space. I do not think relativity presents a problem as I have discussed as I believe it sorts itself put if you discount momentum and the standard rules that apply to speed and motion as you would have to when folding space itself. Similarly to how the rules change when you approach a black hole they would change when you folded space. As such, this graph assumes that if they are traveling at (using star trek references just for ease of discussion) warp 1 and fire of a beacon at warp 1 it will be traveling at warp 2. It will not. I posit that folded space travel is a definite limiter such that you cannot increase the speed simply by initiating a launch from something going at speed. As such it would APPEAR to curve away from the perspective of the FTL ships view on the graph IN ACCORDANCE WITH RELATIVITY. Whereas it's not actually making a curve on the graph because the graph treats space as linear and FTL travel does not.

Garconek

1y↑7

It may be right or wrong but the fact that it is showing 4 dimensional space-time on a 2 dimensional graph, it's like trying to show a 3D cube in 1D, it's simply not doable or at least it seems to me. From what I learned we are able to show a cube on a 2d sheet just because we are able to visualize the depth of the image and draw a "line behind the lines" that how we create 3d in short we are able to circumvent one dimension by imagining it so 4d can be shown in 3d, 3D in 2D, 2D in 1D, jumping from 4D to 2D doesn't make much sense and many things may not match like they should. That I think is the main problem here that there is just no way that he could show what he wants on 2D sheet. Rather than FTL I am more convinced by Einstein-Rosen bridges theory beacuse from what I know they go through additional 4th dimension of space there for not creating this paradox if its true.
(sorry for mistakes if any english isn't my first language)

9 More Replies...

Char Pad

1y↑2

" Time Paradox's do not exist; if you tried, something would stop you" pretty much it; if a time paradox existed, space/time would breakdown. Great video!

abrakannabra

1y↑55

One small thing: if the message is traveling in a different time perspective than the ship, in what time perspective will this ship be able to decode it? (a reference to Orson Scott Card's books about Ender). I think this is not considered in your diagram.

Z M

1y↑19

Adi Rice

can you pls explain this a bit

Z M

1y↑2

nuarBlack

41w

@ZM-jb6gc doesn't this assume any FTL communication would be some sort of live stream? Instead of record message, encode in FTL format, then instantaneously transmit message as a whole data package. Which then recipient would decode and experience in there Time?

Z M

41w

@nuarBlack A recorded message, like any data packet, is received as a data stream. You get little bits of it at a time, at a certain download rate. So, what I'm saying is that transmission rate can vary.

2 More Replies...

mark donovan

45w↑1

I’m not the brightest around but due to your easy to follow diagrams and eloquent explanation I totally get it. It’s so weird. We as humans (even the really clever few) like yourself haven’t got a bloody clue what’s going on. My head hurts lol. If there is a superior life form watching us still killing each other over green bits of paper or less we probably wouldn’t even comprehend them. Like cows in a field eating grass.

beyondthetech

47w↑2

To be honest, I've watched this video a dozen times, mostly with awe, but still trying to understand it. I'm getting there!

Gabe

2y↑93

In the Halo extended lore (books and etc), their use of slipspace creates time paradoxes like, constantly. It's not uncommon for a ship to arrive at it's destination hours, days, or WEEKS before it left. And everyone's collective reaction to the existence of these paradoxes is just to kinda shrug, say "hey man, don't worry about it too much," and move on

Max

2y↑11

That's great, i fucking love it

Branden Marcum

2y↑50

“Hey if we keep doing this the universe might break”
“Cool”

Nick Malachai

1y↑18

Every time I learn something about Halo lore it sounds completely tonally dissonant from the games I played. "John Halo is a brainwashed child soldier alongside every other Spartan, and the people who commissioned the Spartan Project belong in the Hague." "The use of slipspace at all is an existential threat to all the universe." "the UN created the Spartans to suppress rebellions with legitimate grievances" this is a space marine game about fighting aliens and being badass, what the fuck is all this genuinely horrifying secondary lore?

Horse Deluxe

1y↑5

@Nick Malachai I'm glad to see someone else say this, I feel basically the same way. The deep lore fans irk me bad, it just sucks all the wind out of the sails for one of the most fun series of games I played as a kid. Like, I actually used to enjoy wiki diving and reading some of that lore- some of it was cool- but then every time I see people get up on a pedestal about how the UNSC are some evil Nazi-equivalent authoritarian regime, "the real baddies" (Compared to the Covenant? Those genocidal maniacs? Seriously?) and the spartan child soldier stuff, it makes it feel like none of it was worth it. Like, way to ruin a series; not only are the games after Bungie moved on arguably kind of mediocre, but then the books and other secondary lore retroactively hurt the Bungie games too. There's just nothing left to enjoy. It makes me so sad.

Nick Malachai

1y↑1

@Horse Deluxe I actually like the secondary lore, for the most part, I just wish the games were tonally consistent with it.

Granted, I'm a Star Wars and Transformers fan. I'm used to worse bullshit than this.

5 More Replies...

Lincoln W

1y↑14

So if I had a house on mars with a FTL facetime phone and was calling my friend on earth, I could communicate instantly as if we were face to face. But what if while we were FTL facetiming, we also had STL camera feeds of each other’s respective rooms? Could we then see each other in a present past and an instant present?

Jate Litherius

52w↑3

I think it would be more that, if you were FTL facetiming your friend, your conversation would start to get to a point where your friend was replying to things you hadn’t said yet, or you’d be talking over each other, because each back & forth communication would go further & further back in time, or something

Jate Litherius

52w↑2

Maybe: you ring them up, they pick up & say hello, but the hello gets to you before you called, so you don’t hear it. You say ‘how’s it going?’ But they don’t hear because they haven’t picked up yet. Eventually someone would say something that was actually heard, but it would be in the past, & probably while the other was tallking, & then… how do you end a conversation like that?

Tiago Correia

42w↑1

@Jate Litherius that just doesn't make sense to me and same for the video... if you have a FTL communication device, let's say instantaneous to simplify, both will be at the same time reference. You say hello and the other person listens and the conversion can continue, just as if both were standing side by side. if there's a parallel STL com, the person on mars would listen the hello 4mins later. But that hello would already been sent. It would be like if you recorded that interaction and 4min later you would start replaying it.
I think the explanation on the video is confusing (and wrong) because the original warning message in FTL is sent parallel to space (because is instantaneous) but the reply (also in FTL) from the STL ship is being shown as sent back. If the original message is sent parallel to space why is the response not sent parallel too?
I think whether I got this wrong or there's a mixup between perception of event and the occurrence.

Arnab Bose

51w

Ben Mills

1y↑1

If you look at FTL as a linear speed then you probably have access to instant teleportation anyway, I feel as though acceleration and deceleration of anything traveling FTL would help alleviate a lot of confusion around space/time paradoxes. You would be looking at a lot more problems to solve with linear FTL such as matter being instantly obliterated as it instantaneously goes FTL. I like to imagine it as a function curve which starts out as STL then crosses the null line horizontally then decelerates to the same linear function of STL but below the null line. kind of like a tilda ~

I know all this is completely incorrect but hey might give someone something to think about or explain how wrong exactly i am :)

Keef boi

I agree. Instant FTL like teleporting would be kind of impossible. You could maybe transfer data from you to a copy of you in another location but this data would still have to be transfered from one point to another either at the speed of light or ftl somehow but never instantly. Not sure if i'm right tho

John Schelstrate

43w↑3

At 19:21, wouldn’t the STL ship have a null line representing the speed of light emanating from it at a 45 degree angle toward the top left of the screen? And if so, wouldn’t its FTL transmission back to earth simply have to be below said line? I fail to see why this wouldn’t be the case.

Bruce Wayne

51w↑1

This video reminds me of Futurama where Leela explains how the spaceship works to Fry. She essentially explains that the ship doesn't move but the universe does meaning using dark matter as an energy source they are able to make a field around the craft that allows the expansion of the universe to bring them to their destination. Makes sense if the universe expands faster than light.

Victor Cury Simionato

1y↑292

Congratulations, you had my complete attention to the entire 25 minutes. Very well done video and explanation. Super interesting

Rob the Trucker

48w↑1

He's an interesting man, I'm the same way. I can get deep into my own thoughts while listening to a video but like you, listened to it in its fullness.

KhaiGK

44w↑2

I use this video to sleep

Lilith

1y↑3

My issue with this is the STL operates under the assumption that the crew or even a computer is capable of responding the exact same moment the message is received. Even if it was a computer setup to receive a 1 and return a 0 there's still time there for the response to be formulated and sent out

MrFartPants [NUKE] War Robots

1y↑1

I love this video. I’ve watched and shared it to my friends countless times!

Not Provided

1y↑19

In my opinion if FTL was possible, then the apparent causality violations would only be illusions that would be observed from the ship's perspective. Once you stop, everything will appear to "fall" back in order

Mikayla Eckel Cifrese

48w↑1

If FTL travel/communication is possible, it means we're wrong about the geometry of spacetime, since that's what imposes the limit. If we're wrong about that, all these theoretical paradoxes may not come up at all. It is possible that's the case, since it's already known that both general relativity and quantum field theory are incomplete theories that will eventually need to be replaced/augmented with a theory that explains gravity on both the quantum and macroscopic scales. Such a theory needs to also be consistent with all the evidence we have supporting GR and QFT though, which is a tall order.

1 More Replies...

MCFingland

39w

Question. If a vehicle matched the trajectory of its target and then traveled instantaneously, would it still cause a time paradox? That could solve the issue I think…

JACK The All-Seeing Eye

1y↑781

There once was a young lad named Mike.
Who could run faster than the speed of light.
He took off one day,
In a relative way,
And returned on the previous night!

dude w.

1y↑15

6.67 out of 10

J David

1y↑57

@dude w. How about "11/10" because a score greater than 10 is impossible.

oPhysic

1y↑6

@J David ackchtaly 🤓🤓☝️☝️☝️☝️

Joshie K

1y↑19

what we gotta do is rip open a hole into hell itself and travel through in these giant bubbled ships so we aren't eaten by demons

BPJ John

1y↑3

@J David Spinal Tap says otherwise

24 More Replies...

Zaphod Beeblebrox

52w

Excellent video. So I was thinking, what if we went really, REALLY far away - like to a distant galaxy a billion light years away. Yes, we are breaking causality, but the consequences are a billion years away, right?

Torinn Balasar

1y↑15

It's been too long since I learned how reflecting lines about different axis' works; how does the ftl comm reply at 18:10 result in that line, rather than its reflection about the time axis (since it's traveling the opposite direction in space, like described at 8:53), which would then not break causality since the comm will still be traveling higher up the time axis rather than back down?

Omega Studios - Minecraft

1y↑3

This whole thing perplexes me too, but I found that his explanation at 19:10 was cool. The pink line going back to earth to say “don’t send the message” would have to travel parallel to the space axis of the STL ship, as the FTL message would travel instantaneously and can thus not travel through time in the perspective of the STL ship

Lucas Santoro

50w↑1

@Omega Studios - Minecraft 15:13 Why not orthogonal to the ship's world line?

Chettlar

39w

@Lucas Santorothat's what I wanted to know

Overseers Guardian

Every point in the universe has a unique energy signature. If you can create a device that could detect it and another device that could create it then you would be able to phase out of one location and phase into the location you want to be at regardless of distance.

Keef boi

1y↑1

But to transfer the data of your existence it must travel the distance. You could never make a perfect copy of you somewhere else without any travel through space and some amount of time

9box

46w

I have a feeling the first FTL systems will be made by some military contractors just making a strong enough engine, breaking these theories and leaving physicists pulling their hair out

Jacob Maloney

1y↑7

What if when you send the FTL message back instead of breaking causality it creates a new timeline?

Christine

39w

The speed of light limit is a built in safety feature of the universe. The only way to travel from point A to point B instantaneously without breaking causality, is teleportation, where point A and B are linked specially, so that passing through A you simultaneously pass through B.

heret

2y↑536

Yet again you combine scientific explanation with a thoughtful and beautiful message.

Thanks for one day deciding to start doing these videos, they mean a lot to me.

miao kuancha

2y↑5

Same。

Thatguyoverthere

2y↑4

I see what you did there. Or maybe what you will do there

miao kuancha

2y↑2

@Thatguyoverthere Well played!

onlyonewhyphy

2y↑1

I like Carl Sagans son too

14 More Replies...

itcaCoffee

1y↑1

Just wanted to put this comment and anecdotal information into the universe.

Your thumbnail image for this video, I've seen a close example of it in real life. Gravitational lensing / distortions surrounding an object with blueshift at front with redshift on rear, if I would've blinked at that moment I would have missed it. That was the most mind blowing night I've ever had, while stargazing deep in the mountains (other people were with me to confirm it wasn't a dream, there was a few more physics defying events that happened that night). I wish I was better at math to dive deeper into the topic, but there's only so much time in a week (ba dum tiss).

Love the video, great detailed explanations!

wd 752

45w

The problems with time dilation is so worrying for me. How depressing.

Lunk

Honestly, the most depressing thing to think about is that if there is a form of FTL travel developed in the future, literally none of us will be alive to see it.

Double Tap

1y↑1

I have traveled through a deep dark hole many many times and seem to find myself amazed everytime

Drampa Dreg

44w

There are a lot of things passing by earth faster than the speed of light, you can't see them because they are too fast! The last time I was in a FTL vehicle, I kicked it into Hyper light speed right away, that's when my captain told me not to get ahead of myself.

nell kellino-miller

2y↑356

I think as soon as something like FTL is achieved, we'll soon learn that there is some other, infinitely stranger arbitrary limitation way beyond our grasp that we could never have even conceived of before. I have dreams about it all the time, since I was a child in fact.

Griseld Islamaj

2y↑29

Same! I think it's just a question of science. As much as i believe in science, we make a lot of hypothesis and assumptions, we are also able to calculate stuff precisely(think gravity) without actually understanding how it works exactly or at the quantum scale. We can measure stuff and make accurately predictions on things because they follow rules, even if we don't understand them at their core. With our understanding advancing we will eventually find out that there's much more hidden stuff in the universe, much more detail to the laws of physics as we know them. I'm pretty sure with time everything we deem impossible will eventually unravel itself with technology. Think about our understanding of gravity or molecules or whatever has evolved, from thinking that something doesn't allow you to leave the ground, to thinking there might be a force, to formulating an explanation to that force, to finding actual data on it and doing research. We will eventually end up finding that gravity is an illusion and happens for other reasons than we think 🤣

Stefan Schleps

2y↑3

I like the way you think!

OptimusePrime

2y↑13

@Griseld Islamaj As much as I like your enthusiasm, and would love for FTL and other fancy tech to happen, wanting it to happen won't make it so. The reason science is so scientific is because of intrinsic scientific value; skepticism. Being skeptical is probably a key to being a scientist. So it isn't really healthy as a scientist to start thinking that everything you know now is completely wrong because something else that people thought was right turned out to be wrong.
That kind of thinking can lead you to certain biases that can have a lot of effect on your research. Of course, pretty much all scientists and people want FTL to be possible and would love for it to be so, but also most of them know that as it stands right now, FTL is likely impossible, and, assuming they aren't researching something that could change that, they are probably working according to that. Scientific/technological progress could hit a wall tomorrow, and any advancement could freeze. Of course, that's unlikely to happen, but it is possible. It's good to be optimistic, and enthusiastic, but knowing where the potential limits are is good. I would love for FTL to be possible as I already said, but as far as we know it's either impossible or requires incredibly advanced technology that we won't have for hundreds, or maybe even thousands of years. And our current best theories suggest it's the former, but who knows? Maybe someone will create a theory of quantum gravity that will be proven, and that will allow for FTL.

ProcrastinaThor

What would that be like?

Jeff the Hippo

I wonder how much faster you would have to go to reach that barrier

24 More Replies...

Dan my name

42w

Very well explained. If I can understand it, anyone can. Basically, what he was saying is you can't change the past or you wouldn't have been born to begin with.

Chester Marcol

1y↑2

If we're "trapped" by the speed of light, I would imagine that it's for our own good.

Skalman564

I think the thing is that people assosiate time with the speed of light. Seeing something has nothing to do with when it actually happens. Time still exists even if you are blind

Space Freak

40w

Is causality actually broken for the STL ship from it's perspective? Even with instantaneous communication, the STL ship wouldn't know Vega received the warning at 15:40 until much further on it's timeframe. They could only infer that it happened first by accounting for how long it took them to get the signal back, but would not be able to do anything that breaks causality due to receiving the information later.

Koray Ozan

48w

Being stuck with STL travel is not just taking longer to explore universe. It mostly make it impossible to explore because exploring is a verb that suggested being done by a person or one group of people, in that case that group can not conclude the verb in their life time.

frump99

2y↑445

I like how Terry Pratchett said it better than the way Hawking did: Everything that happens, stays happened.

JRod

2y↑7

I wouldn’t even bet my lunch on that smug assumption.

Escaped Psycho

2y↑8

I like Jim Butcher's version Law For the Conservation of History. Postulating that there is a force similar to inertia for temporal events. Essentially after an event has occurred a strong force will ensure that it remains unchanged

Itherageli

2y↑3

Yeah it might be a bit naive or misunderstanding some implications of our current understanding of quantum mechanics, but it always seemed more intuitive to me that the future is set and that "change" is just a matter of viewing the universe from a different position within the spacetime and there is no need to "invent" a force preventing causality to break when the universe was already set (though this being true would probably make closed causal loops impossible).

elmoteroloco

2y↑1

@Escaped Psycho The "Good Doctor" Isaac Asimov described the inertia of the time stream in "The End of Eternity", an interesting read even today.

elmoteroloco

2y↑1

So... "Everything that happens, try to stays happened"

12 More Replies...

aditya patel

very well explained . thanks for sharing knowledge

renisnyanbinary VODs

45w

With the recent discovery that entangled qubits actually react instantaneously, FTL communication is possible

aduntoridas80

1y↑2

Loved your video. Have your same feelings and hopes about it. But "Alcubierre" is a Spanish lastname. From one of our regions, the Basque Country. It's pronounced something like this "Al (like Al Copone), cu (like quality), bi (like bee), e (like elegance) and rre (like recognition). He is mexican with Spanish origins. Thank you and good luck ;)

chrisponsano

1y↑4

If our efforts at FTL create paradoxes, what happens since parts space/time are currently traveling several times faster than light relative to us?

Astro

1y↑3

Since spacetime is moving FTL relative to us, we are also moving FTL relative to those same parts of spacetime. The reason it doesn’t create paradoxes is because the speed limit of light only applies to things that move THROUGH space, it doesn’t apply to space itself.
So when we look at a distant galaxy moving at a speed that seems to be FTL, the galaxy isn’t actually moving, or at least it’s moving much slower than it appears. One way to envision this is to think of 2 ants on a balloon. An Ant might only be able to walk 1 inch a second, but if you blow up the balloon as they walk apart, they could end up 10inches apart after 2 seconds because the surface of the balloon is expanding so fast, even though they are only walking 1in/s.

chrisponsano

@Astro Good answer! Thanks for your detailed reply!

Hugh Mercuri

48w

what if the ship doesn't travel at relativistic speeds? Some form of teleportation like in the "Expeditionary Force" books by Craig Alanson. The ships just 'jump' to different locations instantly. Probably not possible but I don't think they break causality.

David McCoy

2y↑171

I’m in favor of the conclusion that if we encounter “paradoxes” in a scientific thought process we should consider that the concept is flawed. However, I would point out that the chart has problems when using the STL craft and it’s time slice. Even if one buys that the STL time slice is the correct angle here, it still matters where the craft is on that slice. The crew doesn’t get to instantly “know” when Vega sees things. You’d have to allow time for Vega to send the signal to the craft and by then the light from the super nova might have already reached the ship. In addition, the ship’s movement through space over the course of the events it does perceive would affect the value of this visual.

Hammertime

2y↑13

Don’t think it matters that the STL crew doesn’t know about the vega point knowing. The point of view we have is omniscient seeing how all three points interact, not just the STL craft. The problem the example is showing is if FTL Messages gets to a point prior to sending it.

Dev Verma

2y↑9

Just because they didn't see something happening doesn't mean it didn't happen.
They can easily calculate the time of all the incidents.

Let us say that Vega sent an FTL signal to the ship after receiving the FTL signal from Earth. On receiving the signal, the crew(of the ship) can calculate the time of origin of the Vega signal. Then they could also calculate the time of origin of the Earth signal. Using that information they can find the time of the supernova. Now, they have the whole timeline which they can use to see the discrepancies.

Also that is not the only causality being broken. Pause the video and then look at 14:55. You can see that if the crew intercepted the warning signal, they themselves would see the warning even before the supernova happened and even before earth sent it.

David McCoy

2y↑3

@Hammertime The narrator was asking "what does the crew of the STL ship think."

David McCoy

@Dev Verma in regards to 14:55...the STL time slice intercepts the signal...but what are the changes that the ship/crew are at that moment in their time slice.

Dev Verma

2y↑6

34 More Replies...

Lazzarus Long

01:33 Same. I’ve forever thought this way, though I do leave a tiny bit of room for hope that we can overcome this problem.

Caio F.

49w

Imagine breaking the entire universe because someone knew something before they could

TheSovietFlag&AnthemGuy 234

1y↑3

Imagine being the first person to reach another star only to find humans have already colonized it because of time dilation

lo smart

42w

That eould be like eating your cake before you had to bake it. Or living with your great grandchildren. It may seem bad at first thought however you are the og because you arived "first" and got to actually see the fruits of your labour pay off

Jate Litherius

52w

I wonder, given that objects have a single constant speed through spacetime, is it the observer or the traveler that experiences negative time-speed when exceeding a space speed of C?

rumblef1sh

50w↑1

stealthyshiroean

2y↑66

I always love the very grounding and philosophical thoughts proposed in these videos along with the theory. Really helps to place the science and the importance of these studies in a broader sense and why or why not humanity should pursue them.

Johnny NiteTrain

2y↑2

Well said.

Виталий Шастун

43w

Does a gravity wave have space-time contractions too? We could “surf” them or use some kind of gravity wave resonator in which single mode would serve as a bubble for FTL

Cornelious Stradivarius

I really struggled to follow this and I usualy do pretty well on such things.
I think man should just leave thinsg like this alone. It won't end well. This obsession with spreading from every corner to the next.
Fascinating stuff though. Look forward to more of your videos as you got a new subber : ]

BaronVonToasst

This is the one video that finally makes me understand paradoxes

Astromamut

14:25 From STL ship's perspective, time and space axis should have a 90 degree angle between them, just like ours have it. Since that's not what's drawn here, I guess we can't conclude anything from that graph without introducing some curves or another dimension, or something like that.

Kevin McLain

Its always amazing howcsurprised humans are in their confusion over things they understand so poorly.

james staggs

2y↑111

Humans once looked to the sky and wanted to fly above the clouds. I'm sure that seemed just as unattainable as ftl. Granted it is orders of magnitude more difficult to achieve, but I hope it's something we never give up on. Venturing a guest I'd say we're not looking at reality the correct way for ftl. It will take a totally unexpected discover that requires us to create a new model of physics and just reality in general before we can do any real work on the issue.

Ruchi in China

2y↑10

I think it didn’t seem impossible as we always saw birds flying. We just imitated them. But ftl has no inspiration. Maybe if we meet aliens. Or maybe if we do use ftl, we might go to a parallel world which doesn’t result in a paradox.

Primarycolours-

2y↑2

@Ruchi in China well galaxies are traveling FTL already.

Ruchi in China

2y↑2

@Primarycolours- true. I don’t know how I missed that

Joe p

2y↑8

@Primarycolours- I'm pretty sure it's not galaxies / objects that are travelling faster than light. It's space that is expanding at an increasing rate. That is one of the concepts addressed in this video, about time and space. The objects in space are still moving, but not faster than light. It's space that is expanding which we then perceive as accelerated motion. And since nothing can move FTL that's why we perceive a red shift as space is expanding... I think.

Toofeex

@Ruchi in China in space times doesn't works very well, and faster than light is possible but not with our current understanding. We needs to find negative energy materials which can't be here on earth.

10 More Replies...

Sparky's World

I like the way the diagram with the light lines either side of earths time line shows visually how two items travelling opposite directions can relatively move apart faster than light (upto 2c) in the same way two cars crashing at 30mph is equivalent to a 60mph impact but of course inversely. Maybe in there hides the secret to FTL travel somehow. And of course is how the universe could easily be expanding fater than light i.e. speed of light in each direction at the same time.

Релёкс84

These two items do not travel faster than light. Each one will observe the other one redecing away from it as less than 1c, because of time dilation/length contraction. And it's not a trick or an illusion, their measurement is as valid and accurate as yours.

Ancient Builds

It's way way more complicated than that. For instance: Albucierre Drive: You are synchronous with your starting conditions. Then you turn into a 1D line to an outside observer. You don't exist really in local spacetime. One part is in the future, the other in the past. You are also subject to entanglement.

Sensai Vers

Is it possible that FTL travel is possible but going backwards in time is just not an option? Essentially accelerating infinitely into the future but still having to wait for everything to catch up?

Chris Pacia

Thinking about this more. I'm pretty sure the result is due to the "instantaneous" message not being instantaneous in all reference frames. In this diagram it's instantaneous in the sender's reference frame, but not in the recipient's.

That might be the correct as far as special relativity goes. But then again, before special relativity everyone thought the speed of light was different in different reference frames and no one considered that it could be the same in all reference frames.

What does the result look like if we assume faster than light messages are the same speed in all reference frames, just like we assume with light? I don't think this would break causality. Though it might break other things. I need to think about it more.

RPD_Phantom

1y↑2

I can’t do 73+29 in my head without panicking but these grand math problems fascinate me

Luna

2y↑119

I like how he predicted every point where I got confused or skeptical and delivered a good answer without me ever asking anything lol
About the talk in the end about exploration without FTL, it was quite poetic, but individuals can actually experience it one day and travel to many stars, considering there is no barrier in the laws of physics that say living things can't last for billions of years. More than that, the way in which time is perceived can be drastically modified, where a million years travel can feel like a mere hour. Just imagining human-like consciousness in a digital substrate is enough to see how this things are possible

Cassandra von Pohl

2y↑1

Same. I'd have a question pop into my head, and two sentences later, he was explaining it!

Toro Montana

2y↑3

One problem. The Universe really doesn't like computers either.

Georgi Rusev

2y↑1

Even if we stay our squishy selves, we can cross our galaxy in under 25 years (traveler's time, because of time dilation) going at a comfortable 1g halfway and decelerating at the same rate the other half. Even going to the edge of the universe will take under 50 years in these conditions. Maintaining that acceleration that long will require insane amounts of fuel of course (i.e. the annihilation of 600 million tons of matter and antimatter as fuel for crossing the galaxy for a 100kg payload), but it's nice to think it's "possible" in some ways.

Pinnacle Express

you must not have even tried to look at the "graphs"

Valkyrie Frost

Looking at my cat, I cannot really fathom what she is truly thinking as she stares back at me. With this in mind, I truly have no way to imagine what a "human-like consciousness in a digital substrate" would ever feel like. I suppose it would be as alien as comparing my consciousness to that of an ant...

8 More Replies...

Unsettled On Purpose

44w

Layman here, but aren't entangled particles at a distance capable of FTL information transmission?

divin’Page

45w

This guy is in deep love what he do 😊

Method2madness

Before we move anything at the speed of light, we need to figure out how we would transport people at such speeds. The human body would be obliterated if we tried. I think that’s an even more difficult if not impossible task than actually reaching the speed of light.

Łukasz Tokarski

All of this is considered by Earths timeframe perspective. But wouldn't it be possible by considering in from one universal timeframe perspective? Like for example our universe's timeframe?

Timothy Mahlkuch

44w

In the instant the transmission is received by the stl ship the frame of reference used in the graph would shift from earth to the ship. Redo your graph from those instances using the ship as your frame of reference.

Jason Cherry

2y↑418

I'm having a lot of difficulty wrapping my head around some things here. For example, why is the space axis a mirror-flip across the null line of the world line? For the "stationary" earth I get that it would look like a mirror-flip, but why is it? Also, when the transmission is sent from the STL ship after receiving the earth transmission, why is the slope negative? I feel like having this side-by-side with a similar diagram for the STL ship's perspective (with its world line being vertical, and the others being angled) would help clear things up...
Like, I get that there's some consideration here for time dilatation, but wouldn't that be bypassed too, as using something like the Alcubierre drive, the object is not actually moving FTL, just the space it resides in is, so it wouldn't suffer time dilatation... I'm just getting confused.

jd shi

2y↑155

This is where I'm stuck as well. I feel like the mirror line is the most critical aspect of the problem, but is also the least explained.

He says, "Now, adding the null line back on we can note the relationship that the space axis is really just a flip of the time axis around the null."
This statement is just kinda thrown out there like it might as well just be a coincidence rather than a requirement. But he's a smart guy, so I'm sure there is more to it that gets lost in the explanation.

Here is what I really don't understand. FTL travel is obviously impossible if what he's saying is true. So then why are people spending years of their lives working on possible FTL ship designs? Is it not a complete waste of time?

rhorho2

2y↑97

yep, the 'obvious' mirror flip across the null line was just thrown in there without any real explanation. I'm confused.

The Orion's arm

2y↑40

Whole this explanation is a little bit wrong, straight lines are from special relativity theory, but relativistic slower than light ship need to have curved lines from general relativity, so space lines of the ship is only local oriented, and not apply to the whole universe, but(to be fair) the general relativity theory allows close temporal lines that breaks causality.

Cool Worlds

2y↑121

If you want to a deeper explanation, check out Section 3.3 of https://williamsgj.people.cofc.edu/Minkowski%20Spacetime.pdf. It really comes down to Lorentz transforms. That the FTL ship is isolated during its trip doesn’t really matter, it departs and arrives in regular space time and is able to reach its destination faster than a beam of light (a beam of “causality”) can.

miao kuancha

2y↑20

@Cool Worlds Beam of causality ... Those are words to conjure with.

174 More Replies...

Reverse World

If we move faster than light, the effect is, the light is slower than us while we travel with that enormous speed.

Anthony Narozniak

We should have been working on these problems since the Apollo missions, but everything fizzles out with us and if we kept going just imagine where we'd be right now....

Robert Cleminson

you are great and i love your videos keep up your good work

Alex Black

There are two possibilities. FTL is only possible between two locations that are not moving relative to each other, in which case they share the same “now”, or ftl is actually moving through the multiverse.

d4m Terro

44w

Question: if you can only go maximum speed through time while not at all through space and the other way around, can you go negative speed through time so that u can speed past the speed of light?

DAT ENGINEER217

So since most of this is theory and assumptions I will question how this STL ship is capable of picking up non direct signals and messages at the speed of light (I imagine that FTL messaging would be more of a P2P affair than standard signals). Because while yes technically effect happens after cause but only if they receive this information at or faster than the speed of light. Which means that from the perspective of the crew, yes its a paradox, but its the same as if I got an email telling me about an oil spill and then got a newspaper that told me about how an oil tanker lost control and may or may not miss an island. In theory I could perceive this as a paradox if I chose to believe the newspaper to be more up to date than the email.

micaiah middleton

2y↑103

Outstanding! FTL was always a dream since watching Star Trek as a kid. The fact that we can glimpse these wonders of the universe as water filled meat sacks is truly amazing. Even if it isn’t possible, I appreciate that logic as to why is isn’t possible. Space is big. We’re living in an age of high definition discovery.

K. Lisa Swensen

2y↑1

Water filled meat sacks, lol 😂

Mateo Nikolic

2y↑5

Wouldn't call humans just water filled meat sacks. We are an outstanding species that just appeared shortly on earth. Our intelligence and consciousness is a God's given gift truly. In the future I believe we'll be able to change universe to our fit

1 More Replies...

Stevie Deej

I have a question, I watched a YouTube vid the other day and it mentioned in that one that galaxies are travelling away from us faster than the speed of light while the universe expands outwards. My question is why are we not travelling out at the same rate as them. It was mentioned some galaxy will pass the edge of the observable universe. Surely if we are moving away from what we believe is the centre we should be going at the same speed.

Ray Genbogen

49w↑1

I don't really understand how the ship would be able to "catch" the message anyways. I assume you cannot display a message "through" space on the same plane as a ship travelling "on" space. I think with a 3D graph there are many possibilities to NOT create a paradox. And in that 3D graph the message would just fly by the STL ship. But that's just a brain fart from my side. Cool video :)

Lars Nyström

1y↑2

The ship would see the time on Earh goes slower than on the ship. But it would also see the time on Vega goes equall slower.
Even the time of the supernova event is in the time of the planets, assuming they all are stationally.

I'm pretty sure the sequences of events on the planets and supernova are pretty non-paradoxal!

I'll try to see where you made your mistake in the worldljne diagram reasoning later. But it's pretty clear that you got the wrong result.

FTL traveling will become a reality, sometime.

Load More Comments...

More Comments

just now