Alrighty now... Anti-protons? Those fall in the same category as positrons and all, don't they? Something to do with the arrangement of Quarks... charm and up and down and strange and all that weird physics that is wholly beyond me. Anyway, regarding the speed of light and all, I just feel inclined to point out that past history has rendered such absolute barriers meaningless. It has often been the case that our theories proclaim something "impossible", and only after the fact do we go "aha! Our equations were wrong!" Take the Doppler equation, for example. According to it, an object moving at the speed of sound compresses the waves in front of it to make a higher frequency. The problem is, according to the equation, this is infinite. People once thought that the sound barrier would cause infinite frequency, and destroy the vehicle. Of course, however, their equation was only too simplistic, and only applied for subsonic conditions. I think a very similar case might apply for the speed of light. And let us not forget that these theories are based, I have heard, on the supposition that the speed of light is a universal constant in a vacuum, throughout all time... which might not truly be the case. I have heard it said that there is a chance that light is actually slowing down over time. Anyway, I think that this so called light barrier may simply be an illusion dreamt up by simplistic (ironic, as I am sure they are a little complex) theories.
In regards to inertia and acceleration... actually, I don’t think that inertia quite governs the power needed. It seems odd to me at the moment, but inertia M=mv. The equation that would give required power would stem from F=ma, where a is the desired acceleration and m the mass of the object. Pardon me, that is a touch wrong. Let’s see... mass changes, so to keep a constant acceleration... all right, this is beyond me at the moment. But it would simply involve the integration of the time dependent variables, in this case it would likely be m, with respect to time, unless my wits fail me. m is f(v) ie. mass is a function of velocity; a, acceleration, is considered a constant, here, although I suppose it would affect the function that governs the mass. What is that damned equation again? Ai, whatever it may be, it has a v in it. Now, if acceleration is constant, that means that v=at. Thus we gain an equation that looks like so: F=f(at)a... where f(at) is whatever the equation for the mass at a given velocity is, with ‘at’ replacing (this assuming velcoity initial = 0.) Now, integrating this would be decidedly odd... BUT E=Fd, where d=vt, thus d=at^2. Combining these yields that E=f(at)*a*a*t^2...E=f(at)*a^2*t^2... shit, I’ve confused myself, and this is going nowhere. 1:00AM is not the time for engineering, I tell you. I probably couldn’t do this aright even at the best of times. But there should be a way of doing this. But I am quite sure that it is this F=ma that is to be used, along with perhaps E=Fd. That might actually be better. E=mad. If that can be put in terms of time, it might be possible to find the energy through integration. I think I messed myself up with trying to integrate the force, only finding that force, being time independent, would be somewhat meaningless to have summed up over a distance or time. Anyway... m=f(at) again. d=a*t^2 again. Alright, I’m confused again. I don’t think this will yield energy to integrate with respect to time; maybe just putting in a number for time would be effective. After all, E=mad, which is essentially what this is. d is usually used as an integral anyway, a difference from end to start. I suppose using time that way would be the same thing, too. Maybe a different approach... E=.5mv^2... kinetic energy. Maybe it will work better than looking at forces applied over time. m=f(at), v=at, therefore... hey, same thing. Well, what do you know. Maybe it does work. E=f(at)*a^2*t^2, where f(at) is the function that defines mass at a given velocity, with velocity replaced with ‘at’. The only thing that bothers me is that mass... I still feel as though it should be integrated with respect to time, somehow... isn’t this the point mass? The mass at a given velocity? I think what is needed is the average mass, actually. Sorry, I’m too tired to think through this now. Anybody else know how to do this? Hadriel?
One more note: I wonder, though... about the acceleration and all... could anti-gravity accelerate something sufficiently? Creating an artificial anti-gravity phenomena behind oneself could result in quite the acceleration. The problem is that gravity, of the five basic universal forces (electricity, magnetism, weak nuclear, strong nuclear, and gravity), not only is it the weakest, but it will be the last to be reconciled to the others (so far only three have been found to be related: electricity, magnetism, and weak nuclear.)
Oh, and as far as Balthesar goes... my opinion on him being an engineer is this... I'll quote me:
Second before him in years was a man of great worldly knowledge, named Balthesar in most lore. Kingly and tall, and marked with a great beard of white, he was held by those under him to be nearly king-like. But, as his two nearest friends, he did not care for glory overmuch. His chief love was in the making of things, and in the understanding of the truths that reside in and govern the world as it is seen to the senses. Little of the ways that pass under the watch of the sun was unknown to him, and with many devices he even looked far into the heavens as an astronomer, marking the movements of the stars and planets. In after years he would have been known as a man of science, but as yet in Zeal no such thing was known, and he it was that first gave birth to many of those ideals that were later re-learned by those knowledgeable men of the Hellenes (of whom Aristotle was chief.) He mastered the rules of the world, and knew the ways in which to turn them to his own ends, forging wondrous creations: a great flying machine, devices uncounted, and even the great time-ship called Epoch, used in the salvation of the world by the Great Hero, is accounted to his hand.