Faster than Light travel.

[Woolygimp]

This is such an interesting topic because it in itself is a barrier to the progression of technology. It's something that if not possible would mean that even with infinite time, resources, and manpower it still wouldn't be possible to colonize space in a realistic manner that doesn't involve sending robots and embryo's across space only to make a colonize several million years later, which is pointless.

I've read the theories and arguments for both sides, and at this moment it's impossible to make anything more than an educated opinion. I'm just saying that it would really, really, really, suck if for some reason FTL travel was impossible.

It would be quite possibly the greatest letdown imaginable. It's basically like saying we are limited to only go so far, and then that's it. Imagine technology being stuck in the stone age, with no possibility for progression...

[Mr_Moore]

Patience.

[EWS87]

even if we create something that travels faster then light we would still only be able to see it at the speed of light...perhaps one day a technology could exist where we travel at a faster speed but it would require a hibernated state

like you said the best anyone can do is give their best guess at this point

[PantsOnFire]

Here is the answer:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole

[Jamougha]

I would guess at a 105 chance that FTL will prove to be technically feasible.

Sub-light interstellar travel should be possible though. Trip times of tens of thousands of years should be achievable, and we could build habitats that would be capable of supporting life over that kind of timescale.

Still, the solar system is larger than we can imagine already.

[Noodles.]

How about light? I mean, if it moves horizontally it goes the light speed, but it waves, so it has to move more than just the horizontal distance, right?

[Jamougha]

Ah, no. Sorry. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[soko]

"that doesn't involve sending robots and embryo's across space only to make a colonize several million years later, which is pointless."

This statement is somewhat absurd, why would it be pointless? Giving technology a philosophical purpose is your opinion, I for one would be perfectly content to live forever and never travel faster than the speed of light. I am also content with the idea that I can not create more energy than the sum of all the energy in the universe. It's just a part of the universe that I believe humans don't need to conquer. There are much more important micro-needs that can be fulfilled for eternity to keep humans happy.