OK, I've always taken issue with this for one reason.
Lets assume it becomes possible that we can bend space, and emerge on the other side of the known universe.
Well as we gaze across the heavens, we see the beginning of the universe/time as we know it, but how do we know what we're looking at even exists, or has changed so dramatically, that it's nothing but a giant black hole?

Think about it, this is akin to jumping off a cliff in the fog, just because you can't see the ground, doesn't mean it isn't there. Sure, it's all fun till someone gets an eye put out.

Star Trek-like travel between galaxies is possible, claims astrophysicist
Claim made by Professor Geraint Lewis from the University of Sydney
Physicist says warp speed was part of Einstein's theory of relativity
This describes how we can bend space and time around a spaceship
We are yet to discover materials with negative density energy to do this

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3203772/Warp-speed-reality-100-years-Star-Trek-like-travel-galaxies-possible-claims-astrophysicist.html

I read somewhere that worm holes are faster than warp speeds.

Quote from: darroll on August 23, 2015, 11:14:58 AM
I read somewhere that worm holes are faster than warp speeds.

Remember something about that some time back.  But it was so long ago.

Quote from: darroll on August 23, 2015, 11:14:58 AM
I read somewhere that worm holes are faster than warp speeds.

In this case, it's space folding, but when you reach your destination, and it happens to be a black hole?
You're in for a Hell of a ride.

While the data from various stars - even the closer ones, is several years to several millennia out of date (depending on distance), there is one quite obvious answer to making sure one does not land their FTL craft in a bind.  Simply pop out of subspace (hyperspace/wormhole/whatever) 2-3 light days away from the target star.  New data will be immediately available to the exploration craft and will be only a few days old.  If all looks calm, make a micro-jump to a few AU's out, and survey again. Black holes aren't a problem. While they may be invisible, their effects are easily detected, and are therefore easily avoided.

Another item is if/when we do discover FTL drive, our first missions will undoubtedly be to the local group (ie: stars less than 50LY out), and while the data from those systems will still be up to 5 decades old, we do know enough about stellar evolution to anticipate any that may have changed their status from blue super-giant to supernova.

Besides, the chances are in favor of being perfectly safe.  Supernovae occur at the rate of 3 per century per galaxy. The probability of visiting a new one while the region is still being bathed in dangerously massive EM waves is significantly less than winning the lottery.

I don't think we'll be around to see it.

Quote from: Dori on August 23, 2015, 01:37:43 PM
I don't think we'll be around to see it.

I know I will not, unless I live to be 200 years old.   

But science has come a long way from when I was born.  Life expectancy has doubled in my life time. 

Quote from: zewazir on August 23, 2015, 01:30:55 PM
While the data from various stars - even the closer ones, is several years to several millennia out of date (depending on distance), there is one quite obvious answer to making sure one does not land their FTL craft in a bind.  Simply pop out of subspace (hyperspace/wormhole/whatever) 2-3 light days away from the target star.  New data will be immediately available to the exploration craft and will be only a few days old.  If all looks calm, make a micro-jump to a few AU's out, and survey again. Black holes aren't a problem. While they may be invisible, their effects are easily detected, and are therefore easily avoided.

Another item is if/when we do discover FTL drive, our first missions will undoubtedly be to the local group (ie: stars less than 50LY out), and while the data from those systems will still be up to 5 decades old, we do know enough about stellar evolution to anticipate any that may have changed their status from blue super-giant to supernova.

Besides, the chances are in favor of being perfectly safe.  Supernovae occur at the rate of 3 per century per galaxy. The probability of visiting a new one while the region is still being bathed in dangerously massive EM waves is significantly less than winning the lottery.

And you're under the assumption a new moon had yet to emerge in that area, why?
Point is, no one has a clue as to what exists a million light years away.
Reverse scenario. Aliens looking at our sun decide to pop in, and wham! A moon/planet/asteroid happened to appear that wasn't visible , nor existed at the time.
No doubt probes will need to be sent first to map the area, but if they don't return, it's a pretty good guess we need a new target.

Quote from: Solar on August 23, 2015, 02:09:45 PM
And you're under the assumption a new moon had yet to emerge in that area, why?
Point is, no one has a clue as to what exists a million light years away.
Reverse scenario. Aliens looking at our sun decide to pop in, and wham! A moon/planet/asteroid happened to appear that wasn't visible , nor existed at the time.
No doubt probes will need to be sent first to map the area, but if they don't return, it's a pretty good guess we need a new target.

Your concerns of collision are based on, IMO a significant lack of appreciation just how BIG and EMPTY space is.

2-3 light days distant from a stellar system is WAY outside the realm of planetary bodies, moons, and Kuiper belt.  And while it is still within the Oort cloud, the probability of emerging in normal space already occupied by an astronomical body is significantly less than winning the Powerball lottery 3 times in a row.

Assume 100 trillion (10 to the 14th) objects in the Oort cloud of the target stellar system. (10 times the upper limit of current estimates).  The Oort cloud is approximately 50-100,000 AUs from the sun, giving it a volume of 2.34 X 10 to the 39th cubic miles. That means, worst case scenario, about one object per 2.34 X 10 to the 25th cubic miles. So, even if your FTL is the size of, say, the Enterprise E, the chances of an object being in the same place as the emergence is one in 4.3 X 10 to the 26th power.

1 in 430,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

You have a better chance of being hit by a stray meteorite sitting in your living room than being hit by one emerging into normal space in an FTL spaceship. 

Quote from: zewazir on August 27, 2015, 07:48:30 PM
Your concerns of collision are based on, IMO a significant lack of appreciation just how BIG and EMPTY space is.

2-3 light days distant from a stellar system is WAY outside the realm of planetary bodies, moons, and Kuiper belt.  And while it is still within the Oort cloud, the probability of emerging in normal space already occupied by an astronomical body is significantly less than winning the Powerball lottery 3 times in a row.

Assume 100 trillion (10 to the 14th) objects in the Oort cloud of the target stellar system. (10 times the upper limit of current estimates).  The Oort cloud is approximately 50-100,000 AUs from the sun, giving it a volume of 2.34 X 10 to the 39th cubic miles. That means, worst case scenario, about one object per 2.34 X 10 to the 25th cubic miles. So, even if your FTL is the size of, say, the Enterprise E, the chances of an object being in the same place as the emergence is one in 4.3 X 10 to the 26th power.

1 in 430,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

You have a better chance of being hit by a stray meteorite sitting in your living room than being hit by one emerging into normal space in an FTL spaceship. 

As long as there not a lot of Alien space junk out there.   

Quote from: zewazir on August 27, 2015, 07:48:30 PM
Your concerns of collision are based on, IMO a significant lack of appreciation just how BIG and EMPTY space is.

2-3 light days distant from a stellar system is WAY outside the realm of planetary bodies, moons, and Kuiper belt.  And while it is still within the Oort cloud, the probability of emerging in normal space already occupied by an astronomical body is significantly less than winning the Powerball lottery 3 times in a row.

Assume 100 trillion (10 to the 14th) objects in the Oort cloud of the target stellar system. (10 times the upper limit of current estimates).  The Oort cloud is approximately 50-100,000 AUs from the sun, giving it a volume of 2.34 X 10 to the 39th cubic miles. That means, worst case scenario, about one object per 2.34 X 10 to the 25th cubic miles. So, even if your FTL is the size of, say, the Enterprise E, the chances of an object being in the same place as the emergence is one in 4.3 X 10 to the 26th power.

1 in 430,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

You have a better chance of being hit by a stray meteorite sitting in your living room than being hit by one emerging into normal space in an FTL spaceship. 

We know the universe is constantly expanding, we also know when we look at the distant stars, we're looking millions, if not billions of years in the past.
What we can't do is predict the future in what ever became of these areas surrounding these stars/galaxies.
We do not have a clue if any of them even still exists, for all we know, the area we see as mathematically plausible to shoot for may now be a massive spinning asteroid belt millions of light years across in every direction.

Why are you under the illusion that all of space looks like what we're experiencing at the moment, not taking into consideration massive gravity by a star we never knew existed, not to mention radiation, enough to vaporize anything emerging into it's field.

And I'm mathematically challenged?

Quote from: Solar on August 28, 2015, 06:14:05 AM
We know the universe is constantly expanding, we also know when we look at the distant stars, we're looking millions, if not billions of years in the past.
What we can't do is predict the future in what ever became of these areas surrounding these stars/galaxies.
We do not have a clue if any of them even still exists, for all we know, the area we see as mathematically plausible to shoot for may now be a massive spinning asteroid belt millions of light years across in every direction.

Why are you under the illusion that all of space looks like what we're experiencing at the moment, not taking into consideration massive gravity by a star we never knew existed, not to mention radiation, enough to vaporize anything emerging into it's field.

And I'm mathematically challenged?

Because you are assuming thousands if not millions of lights years distances. I am saying there is no need to go that far out - at least until we know more. The information from stars in the local group is less than 50 years old.  Since there are 133 stars in the local group, I figure that gives us quite a bit to explore in the immediate (astronomically speaking) neighborhood. And if that is not enough, there are 511 stellar systems within 100 light years, which includes over 100 E-type planets, the data from which is less than a century old.

I have no problem with the idea that light from objects millions of light years away is, to put it lightly, outdated.  But I am saying SO WHAT?  We don't need to go flying out a million light years or more our first trip. Besides, stellar evolution is measured in billions of years, so even a million light years away is only about 0.01% of the average star's lifetime.

IOW, things don't change as much as your concerns indicate. And, the math was to show that MOST of that space is nothing but big empty. All those movies showing spaceships maneuvering - some not so successfully - amongst a field of spinning asteroids is so much twaddle. The reality of an asteroid belt (even one millions of light years across) is a spaceship could travel from one edge to the opposite edge and never see an asteroid close enough to take a picture without a good telescope. So concerns of hitting something because our FTL ship pops out in a place for which the available data is even several million years out of date are still over stated. What I wrote earlier is NOT an exaggeration. You are more likely to be hit by a meteorite sitting in your living room than run into one in an FTL spacecraft. The same for goes black holes, or the wave front of a supernova, or anything else for that matter.

Quote from: zewazir on August 28, 2015, 06:10:29 PM
Because you are assuming thousands if not millions of lights years distances. I am saying there is no need to go that far out - at least until we know more. The information from stars in the local group is less than 50 years old.  Since there are 133 stars in the local group, I figure that gives us quite a bit to explore in the immediate (astronomically speaking) neighborhood. And if that is not enough, there are 511 stellar systems within 100 light years, which includes over 100 E-type planets, the data from which is less than a century old.

I have no problem with the idea that light from objects millions of light years away is, to put it lightly, outdated.  But I am saying SO WHAT?  We don't need to go flying out a million light years or more our first trip. Besides, stellar evolution is measured in billions of years, so even a million light years away is only about 0.01% of the average star's lifetime.

IOW, things don't change as much as your concerns indicate. And, the math was to show that MOST of that space is nothing but big empty. All those movies showing spaceships maneuvering - some not so successfully - amongst a field of spinning asteroids is so much twaddle. The reality of an asteroid belt (even one millions of light years across) is a spaceship could travel from one edge to the opposite edge and never see an asteroid close enough to take a picture without a good telescope. So concerns of hitting something because our FTL ship pops out in a place for which the available data is even several million years out of date are still over stated. What I wrote earlier is NOT an exaggeration. You are more likely to be hit by a meteorite sitting in your living room than run into one in an FTL spacecraft. The same for goes black holes, or the wave front of a supernova, or anything else for that matter.

But that's the point, we just don't know, and even something a short as 7 million light years, is plenty of time for things to move about, even a collision by another astral body would completely rearange the area..
Hell, we don't have a clue what space may look like 7 million light years out, for all we know, it may all be merged into one big ass rock, or infinite amounts of rocks the size of baseballs.

Point is, we just won't know until we send out probes to map the area, that can return to earth so we can travel safely.

Quote from: Solar on August 28, 2015, 06:24:12 PM
But that's the point, we just don't know, and even something a short as 7 million light years, is plenty of time for things to move about, even a collision by another astral body would completely rearange the area..
Hell, we don't have a clue what space may look like 7 million light years out, for all we know, it may all be merged into one big ass rock, or infinite amounts of rocks the size of baseballs.

Point is, we just won't know until we send out probes to map the area, that can return to earth so we can travel safely.

We know more than you give credit for.  Even though current data on bodies millions of light years away is the same age as the distance in light years - the Andromeda galaxy for instance - objects still behave according to the laws of physics. Stars are not going to start accelerating toward each other without some clues that will be visible millions of years in advance of any changes that would cause such a phenomenon. We see more than you seem to realize, using vast networks of radio telescopes, and visible light scopes that make the 200" Palomar scope (the one I grew up with as the Big Daddy) look like a kid's toy. And then there is the Hubble, which in it's 23 year active lifetime has added more astronomical data than all previous human history combined.

While we don't know EXACTLY what is going on in Andromeda at this real time moment, we can certainly say with 99.9999% certainty what has NOT happened.  No giant black hole has consumed the entire galaxy. Nothing has caused a densely packed, multi-light year diameter asteroid field. The physics of moving bodies - regardless of size and shape - are understood enough to know, within reason, what we can expect out there. Those events which ARE within the realm of possibility, such as novae are easily compensated for by arriving 2-3 light days out from the target star.  Supernovae are rare enough we can pretty much discount running afoul one of them.

Besides, as I keep saying, we will undoubtedly spend the first 100 years or more AFTER "warp drive" (or whatever method of FTL travel we discover) simply exploring the immediate neighborhood. And THAT data is less than 100 years old, so we DO know what is going on. Again, calculating according to know laws of physics. If there are things out there which work contrary to our current understanding of physics, we will have a very good chance of discovering those while we explore close by.  By the time we get around to exploring other galaxies, I have no doubt we will have the information we need to do so safely.

That said, if we were to discover and FTL method tomorrow, and if for whatever reason of the laws of physics that method were limited to making jumps of no less than 2 million light years, I am confident enough in our understanding of astrophysics to sign up for the first mission to Andromeda without any reservations.

Quote from: zewazir on August 29, 2015, 08:11:45 PM
We know more than you give credit for.  Even though current data on bodies millions of light years away is the same age as the distance in light years - the Andromeda galaxy for instance - objects still behave according to the laws of physics. Stars are not going to start accelerating toward each other without some clues that will be visible millions of years in advance of any changes that would cause such a phenomenon. We see more than you seem to realize, using vast networks of radio telescopes, and visible light scopes that make the 200" Palomar scope (the one I grew up with as the Big Daddy) look like a kid's toy. And then there is the Hubble, which in it's 23 year active lifetime has added more astronomical data than all previous human history combined.

While we don't know EXACTLY what is going on in Andromeda at this real time moment, we can certainly say with 99.9999% certainty what has NOT happened.  No giant black hole has consumed the entire galaxy. Nothing has caused a densely packed, multi-light year diameter asteroid field. The physics of moving bodies - regardless of size and shape - are understood enough to know, within reason, what we can expect out there. Those events which ARE within the realm of possibility, such as novae are easily compensated for by arriving 2-3 light days out from the target star.  Supernovae are rare enough we can pretty much discount running afoul one of them.

Besides, as I keep saying, we will undoubtedly spend the first 100 years or more AFTER "warp drive" (or whatever method of FTL travel we discover) simply exploring the immediate neighborhood. And THAT data is less than 100 years old, so we DO know what is going on. Again, calculating according to know laws of physics. If there are things out there which work contrary to our current understanding of physics, we will have a very good chance of discovering those while we explore close by.  By the time we get around to exploring other galaxies, I have no doubt we will have the information we need to do so safely.

That said, if we were to discover and FTL method tomorrow, and if for whatever reason of the laws of physics that method were limited to making jumps of no less than 2 million light years, I am confident enough in our understanding of astrophysics to sign up for the first mission to Andromeda without any reservations.

Yeah, and for the same reason one can assume they can drive headlong into pea soup fog at high speed and not hit anything because they're 99.9999% certain nothing is in the way when it was built a year earlier.
That was quite a leap of faith with your "99.9999%" there, especially considering until the Huble launched, we could only speculate on what was in the area.

Now that we have a nice clear picture of the area, granted, only a tad outdated by 2,538,000 light years and still the size of a microscope size view of sand on a beach from miles away millenia old information, lets just assume nothing has changed.
Really? You're basing all that on an unknown, we, as man, have been viewing on a historical time graph, of one, one trillionth of a second of time, snapshot and we can safely assume nothing has changed in the interim 2,538,000 light years later?

Jeez, Z, stick to politics.