This is bigger than campaign finance reform, bigger than term limits. This is even bigger than when we finally repealed the national 55 MPH speed limit a few years ago.
Wesley Clark is pledging to repeal the speed of light. He calls it his "only faith-based initiative."
Seriously, though. It's easy to make light of Clark's comments, but I'm kind of impressed that a man in his position would come out and say this:
"I still believe in e=mc², but I can't believe that in all of human history, we'll never ever be able to go beyond the speed of light to reach where we want to go," said Clark. "I happen to believe that mankind can do it."
I agree with that sentiment. If we ever do find a way around the FTL limitation (via wormholes or a tachyonic drive or warp nacelles), it won't be a violation of physical law any more than an airplane "violates" the law of gravity. It's interesting that WiredNews, of all news outfits, is so quick to pounce on the Clark-is-a-flake angle. The reporter, Brian McWilliams, doesn't even seem to understand that what Clark is talking about here is interstellar space travel. McWilliams portrays Clark as a time-travel enthusiast. While time travel is one of the implications of going faster than light, it doesn't sound as though that is what interests Clark.
I suppose most journalists would have this kind of knee-jerk response (the same response I started out with) to any truly speculative remark made by a Presidential candidate. That doesn't speak well of our tolerance for vision and imagination in public discourse. With all the big changes coming, maybe it's time journalists — even the really cynical ones covering political campaigns — opened their minds just a little.
UPDATE: Our favorite law professor has some thoughts, along with some legal citations he expects us all to be familiar with.
Posted by Phil at September 30, 2003 06:07 AM | TrackBack