Wouldn't an Alcubierre drive starship be immune to relativistic

>>8811394
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUMGc8hEkpc
In a language even a brainlet like me could understand

>>8811397
but a ship using an Alcubierre drive does not have velocity, technically

>>8811394
That's kind of the point. If it wasn't, it couldn't go that fast.

It's not "immune", but it doesn't have the same issues.

>>8811394
Brainlet here.
I heard some somewhat credible people talking about red/blue shift of alcubierre drive.
I don't get it though, in this case wouldn't the front simply be brighter?

>>8811394
Alcubierre drive is a dead end

Electrogravitics is what will get us to the stars, pending we figure out a way to power these systems.

Also, Einstein mechanics has zilch evidence for it compared to Electric Universe theory. So it's much more likely that time isn't "fabric of the universe" but rather, electromagnetic effects are responsible for the vast array of phenomena in the universe itself.

>>8811394
> what would the captain see

Wouldn't a FTL ship be unobservable in transit anyway?

By going faster than light, the light emitted by your ship is going to be spread over an unreasonably long distance, so the photons would never be condensed enough to be recognized as anything. And you are outrunning much of the light that would normally reflect off of you, so you are less visible from anything other than directly in front of you anyway.

I imagine that all anyone would notice of your passage was an unusually warm lane of space for a brief period, if that.

>>8811394
As far as I can see, it would have to be.

I heard that space engine has a working alcubierre drive simulation but when I downloaded the latest version it is the same old shitty global velocity vector scaling factor engine
What gives?

>>8811394
Considering this thing is pushing space and time around itself. Yes.

>>8811704
>Electric Universe theory
Youtube isn't a credible scientific publication.