5,257 downloads

0kg so it is the speed of light

GENERAL INFO

  • Successors 2 craft(s) +7 bonus
  • Created On: iOS
  • Game Version: 0.8.402.0
  • Price: $59,249k
  • Number of Parts: 5
  • Dimensions: 188 m x 30 m x 30 m

PERFORMANCE

  • Total Delta V: 0m/s
  • Total Thrust: 8.3MN
  • Engines: 1
  • Wet Mass: 0kg
  • Dry Mass: -31,157,630kg

STAGES

Stage Engines Delta V Thrust Burn Mass
1 1 0m/s 8.3MN 1.08hours 0kg

14 Comments

  • Log in to leave a comment
  • Profile image
    240 CFXA

    @Dogfood i reached 291,000km/s thats like 90 percent speed of light

    one month ago
  • Profile image

    647.3 km per second 😮

    11 months ago
  • Profile image

    Elon Musk approved! ;)

    +5 4.8 years ago
  • Profile image
    367 ItsMeGuys

    I think we can come to an agreement that this rocket is fast

    +4 4.9 years ago
  • Profile image
    1,212 JTAerospace

    @NoIDontWanna that's true because if an object with mass traveled at C then the energy would become near infinite and that would mean that the mass would be near infinite so that would mean that the object would become an extremely dense singularity

    +3 4.9 years ago
  • Profile image

    @ItsMeGuys Epicness, I tell ya.

    +1 4.9 years ago
  • Profile image
    367 ItsMeGuys

    What has my post done?

    +1 4.9 years ago
  • Profile image

    @NoIDontWanna Except there literally is now an article about how scientists COULD find a wormhole: gravitational waves perturbing stars orbiting black holes:

    https://futurism.com/the-byte/scientists-dreamed-new-way-spot-wormholes?fbclid=IwAR3PhVobt11KIw4nAP3kZ8eNV88-TIghfWvmgbPLowxPIaFGvvaw5SAjjRQ

    Quite a grain of salt but intriguing. But even still the non relativistic effects of a warp drive mean you get places without time dilation, which sometimes is what you want: A perfectly normal trip with an incredibly small amount of time actually traveling. But a starship WITH relativistic effects would not collapse into a black hole still, because we have to expect that what we’re seeing when we see a black hole is the analogy of a 2 dimensional figure seeing a circle when there is a sphere: as a spacecraft appears to collapse into itself it is not actually killing the person inside it but stretching spacetime like a marble on a balloon until it clips right through. Where you might ask? Not to another dimension, but traveling temporarily through one to an earlier point in time. Hence white holes and black holes might have some significance in the case of what happens when matter, ie. the extremely fast collapse of a massive star, clips into its own position in space and leaves a black hole. Basically the death of stars and other high matter objects breaks reality to an extent not known yet.

    +1 4.9 years ago
  • Profile image

    Now how would you explain a black hole from a spacecraft trying to reach the speed of light? As gravity warps space time and a spacecraft approaches the speed of light, spacetime warps not because space increases the mass of the vehicle but because time is becoming warped to a point where the craft can warp back into time. Hence black holes and white holes might actually be as time warping as they are space warping, like wormholes but for time.

    +1 4.9 years ago
  • Profile image

    @NoIDontWanna That’s something else I would say is problematic. Not the impracticality of going there but that light that reaches earth from Alpha Centauri takes a little over 4 years to do so. A craft going at the speed of light would end up getting there the same time as the light from the system reaches people’s eyes on earth meaning there would be no net increase in time. The four years it took you to get there should be deducted by the time it takes for the light from that system contemporarily to reach earth, leading to a bet time change of zero.

    +1 4.9 years ago
  • Profile image

    @NoIDontWanna Can’t say I’m one either. But I do like the idea of interstellar travel, and if people are to do it without making a ludicrous amount of antimatter to bend space-time around a spaceship, then it might be a lot more straightforward to accelerate to the speed and because of time being multidimensional along with space, wind up in a different time position than you started in.

    +1 4.9 years ago
  • Profile image

    @NoIDontWanna Not exactly. If infinity cannot be defined, and the speed of light can be defined then how can any kind of velocity be defined in the first place? How much energy would it take to achieve 1AU in ten minutes?

    Causality which has a big part in this problem might not be an accurate way to depict the universe, because regardless of how many ways science can excuse the speed of light from being unachievable it is more than clear that causality doesn’t exist. You reach the speed of light, you wind up stuck at a specific time where others experience time moving forward in a 1:1 time flow. You go 2c, that’s -1:1 time flow where one second to a person would be -1 seconds to you. You go back in time using that, there’s limitations. The grandfather paradox, for example, is impossible because you’ve already broken the paradox by existing in the past. Thus it makes more sense that instead of suddenly disappearing when you do murder your grandfather, you end up an older version of you never to see the way things go as you would know it.

    +1 4.9 years ago
  • Profile image

    @NoIDontWanna Except that’s not entirely true. Engine specific impulse is sometimes in velocity because after you’re going faster than that velocity in the direction a spacecraft cannot accelerate much faster. However, if specific impulse is something higher than 8 million, you can actually get to the speed of light reasonably. Of course though that’s a tough challenge.

    +1 4.9 years ago
  • Profile image
    4,167 4di

    Wait that's illegal

    +2 4.9 years ago

3 Upvotes

Log in in to upvote this post.