Note from Kathleen:
Sorry to cut this, but now it's closer to 13 lines.
[This message has been edited by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (edited November 12, 2004).]
There are also alot of grammar/spelling mistakes.
You show some creativity here, work on it.
You are aiming for hard sci-fi, an idea-based story. The first problem is, and of course it may just be my opinion, there is no story yet. To me it reads like a first person history report.
The second, the known science you state is not exact. And for hard sci-fi you have to be.
<Albert Einstein for example stated that humans can not go beyond the speed of light because of E=MC² the time it would take for cosmic rays to reach earth from distant stars in a complete space vacuum have no mass>
First cosmic rays have mass, they are all made of fermions (either electrons or nuclear particles). Thus cosmic rays cannot reach C (186282 miles per second), the energy it takes to accelerate a particle increases its mass, and the more mass a particle has the more energy it takes to accelerate it. Thus by the time it would reach C it would have infinite mass. This is essential calculated by a version of the Lorenz-Fitzgerald contraction.
Only massless particles can reach C. In fact if you look at light from a particle view, as photons, photons always travel C.
What Einstien stated in his paper 'Eltrodynamics of Moving Objects' [which is his primary work on special relativty] is there are two principles.
(1) The laws of physics are the same in any frame of reference, that is iregardless to motion. This would include Maxwell's laws involving electromagentic fields and waves, so that thus:
(2) The speed of light is also absolute in all frames of reference, that is iregardless of motion of observers.
And thus if the speed of light is absolute to observers in different frames of reference, thier measurements of space and time and mass would have to be relative.
E=MC² grew out the two invariance principles and not the other way around.
I hope this does not come across as nitpicky, it probably does. Perhaps you don't need to make this in the hard sci-fi vien, but just sci-fi, where you don't have to explain FTL. It's just a given.
The explanations of a hyperspace mechanism for FTL travel are so frequent that it does not really need to be explained to the reader. Sometimes all that exposition just clogs the story.
Basically, you've got a couple of things to work out here. First, you need to do some legwork on your fictional science. The Open Discussions forum is the place for that. You can begin by searching for "speed of light" or "science FTL" and reading some interesting discussions, I think. There's a thread titled FTL travel and another called science topics, I found them with the suggested searches.
After reading a few threads that interest you, you could then post a new thread to discuss the particulars of your SF ideas.
The other issue is researching and learning about how to write narrative text, and that's also in the other forum. Key issues include POV, exposition, characterization, tenses, and so forth. The main thing to do is learn to read well written text with a critical eye and see how existing authors have solved the problems of narrative fiction. You can come up with your own solutions, of course, but be sure that you are aware of what you're solving
Keep writing...but more importantly, keep reading. Read about writing, yes, but read, read, read the sort of thing you want to write.