FANDOM


Wiki-shrinkable

This is the talk page for the article "Hyperspace/Legends."

This space is used for discussion relating to changes to the article, not for a discussion about the topic in question. For general questions about the article's topic, please visit the Knowledge Bank. Please remember to stay civil and sign all of your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Click here to start a new topic.

Force Using Hyperdrives ?Edit

Ever wondered if hyperspace/hyperdrives unknowingly utilise the Force in some way? After all, the Force has no trouble traversing time or space. Maybe the designers tapped into this without even knowing it. Although it isn't why I thought of the idea, the Rakata used the Force in their spacecraft to propel them (and presumably as a component of 'lightspeed'). I'm not trying to suggest it is the case, rather just toying with an idea. Thoughts? --Fade 21:08, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • Maybe the Force aligns hypermatter so that it can be used for high energy power. Just a thought. -- Riffsyphon1024 21:30, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • My opinion is that it's bull-honkery. Frankly, the actual article needs some revision to get rid of the "other dimension" junk, and make it more in line with the current tachyonic perspective method, such as described at SWTC's hyperspace page that's linked to.--Spanky The Dolphin 10:43, 7 Jul 2005 (UTC)
    • Saxton's views are realistic given terrestrial physics, but IU references have been made to hyperspace being an alternate dimension. That seems to hold more credence than Saxtononian analysis. All views should be included. --SparqMan 13:50, 7 Jul 2005 (UTC)
      • I like that theory very much. I've always been curious as to the way that the Rakata utilized the force in their technology. And didn't the Duros reverse engineer hyperspace technology from the Rakata beofer the Corellians were "given" the technology by the Whills? Lonnyd 08:58, 20 February 2006 (UTC) (just kidding about that last part)
        • The force is a part of all LIFE... Somehow it doesn't seem likely that it uses the force. and besides, "The republic has been in existance since the discovery of hyperspace, nearly 20,000 years ago" (KOTOR1)... 24,000 to make it current... Isn't that before the Jedi? Jacen Solo 12:26, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
          • For the record, Tales of the Jedi 3: The Saga of Nomi Sunrider, Part 1 says that hyperdrive was invented (or reinvented) "about 20,000 years before Andur and Nomi's day", which would also be about 24,000 BBY. 68.44.13.236 04:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
            • If the Force is utilized in any way, it would make sense that those who have no training could not jump to hyperspace, like Han Solo. Force being part of 'life', then non-sentient machinery couldn't make use of it, but could assist once the Force variables are supplied by a trained 'Hyper Force' Jedi Pilot.
              • In RotJ doesn't Yoda tell Luke, just before levitating the X-wing out of the pond, that the Force is in all things, specifically naming "the rock". The Force binding all matter in the Star Wars universe then could be considered fact, whether living or not.
                • This conversation has been dead for five years. Do not resurrect it. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 15:25, September 13, 2012 (UTC)

Hyperspace KamizazeEdit

Is it possible to use a hyperspaced ship as a sort of kamikaze weapon? Because a fighter going beyond lightspeeed could easily cripple or destroy a capital ship, while a capital ship going at that speed could cause serious damage (probably destruction) to a planet.

  • It would get pulled out of hyperspace by the gravity of the ship/planet before reaching its target. -Vongchild
    • I know this is an old conversation, but I think that actually happened. The Quaestor ruined a planet in a Hyperdrive accident. -LtNOWIS 12:44, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
      • In battlefront II you have to destroy a MC-80b cruisers before they jump in to hyperspace because it would have destroy the Imperial Star Destroyer.

Hyperspace Effect Edit

How did the guys at ILM do the hyperspace effect when making the original films? What method did they use? -- AdmThrawn --

YoumayEdit

That {{youmay}} box is pretty funny. I mean, all it does is clearly disambiguate the phenomenon from a website, but the wording makes me laugh. —Darth Culator (talk) 22:18, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Can't, not can Edit

According to Wikipedia link Hyperdrive, A ship in hyper space CAN NOT interact with the outside universe. I have corrected this mistake in the artical here. Jacen Solo 11:24, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

You apparently didn't bother with actually reading the article you linked to. In any case, you're wrong. "Without precise calculations we'd fly right through a star or bounce too close to a supernova and that'd end your trip real quick, wouldn't it?" -Vermilion 13:41, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
A ship in WARP can interact with normal space, IE comunicate, plot courses, fight, etc... A ship in HYPERSPACE, can not. The only communication seen via hyper spaced ships in the EU is when Luke and Mara communicated with the force. Jacen Solo
If there was no interaction, it wouldn't be a problem to fly through a star or planet. There is also an incident mentioned in the ROTS:ICS where a ship effectively destroyed a planet by accidently ramming it in hyperspace. -Vermilion 18:33, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm assuming it was a pretty large capital ship, since a small ship would have been pulled out by the planet's gravity well before it was anywhere near the atmosphere. -- SFH 21:37, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
    • A failure in the failsafe? Presumably there's a reason hyperdrives have failsafes to take them out of hyperspace when a mass shadow is sensed. *shrug* Yrfeloran 00:27, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Thing is, it is impossible to interact with a planet. The mass shadow (gravity) of the planet exists in hyperspace, the planet doesn't. "A failure in the failsafe? Presumably there's a reason hyperdrives have failsafes to take them out of hyperspace when a mass shadow is sensed. *shrug* " I think it's got soemthing to do with overloading the engine. If you read the Corrilean (sp?) trilogy, you'll notice that they had to install extra equiptment (rather then disable failsafes) inorder to get through the indiction field Jacen Solo 15:07, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

if the ship is traveling faster than light then it should be able to escape any field of gravity possibly even a black hole. I don't know if this article is true it should be improved. I don't know if that thing about using hyperspace to destroy enemy fleets is true because i haven't heard of it being done. The likely outcome would be that both ships would be destroyed so it was probably a good suicide tactic.--Dumac 04:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Not necessarily. The reason black holes aren't visible is because the gravity is so strong that the escape velocity at the center of the hole is faster than the speed of light. Try not to think of it as moving at the speed of light, but rather as moving from Point A to Point B without crossing the space between. According to Stephen Hawking, the speed of light is the greatest speed possible, so the only way of getting across a galaxy faster than lightspeed (it would take 120,000 years to cross from one end of the galaxy to the other at lightspeed) would be to take advantage of a wrinkle in the fabric of time. Consider this, take a rug and put it up with a little hump in it. This is our "fabric of time". Now, we've got two ways of getting to the other side of the rug: (a) We can go over the hump, or (b)we can punch a hole in both sides of the hump and go through. To do this, according to Stephen Hawking, we would have to accelerate to lightspeed, and then the fabric of time would bend around us, and anyone not in hyperspace would continue go over the hump, but we're going right through it, so to speak. So we are accelerating to lightspeed, but it is not our means of getting to where we want to go. The means of keeping time from passing accordingly seem to be pure fiction, however. All four dimensions mentioned are advancing, and we would age rapidly and die, however, our ship would make it to its destination. 120,000 years later to those outside of hyperspace, we would emerge in our destination, if our ship was built well enough, but the trip would seem instantaneous to us.--Atlas503 06:03, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
    • A problem remains: How do we get to the speed of light?--The All-knowing Sith'ari 19:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
      • I'm no physicist, but that doesn't seem like such a stretch. In a vacuum, if you accelerate at 1g for about a year, you'd eventually hit light speed. Of course, infinite time would pass outside your reference frame, but subjectively it would only take a year, or so I've been led to believe. (This contradicts Atlas503's analysis above, but I have no confidence at all that mine is correct. See Introduction to special relativity if you're brave enough.) Incidentally, microparticles you collide with would also have infinite mass, which could potentially cause other logistical problems. (Someone who knows what they're talking about - unlike me - is welcome to correct my analysis.)Cúthalion (talk) 15:18, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
        • Anything that's a bit more quick?--The All-knowing Sith'ari 21:01, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
          • Technically Cuthalion would be correct if Special Relativity did not apply. According to Special Relativity (SR) the inertia of an object traveling at relativistic velocities (about 20% of the speed of light and greater) increases eventually reaching an effective infinite mass. It then follows that to accelerate to the speed of light one would need an infinite force (in real-space). As for the passage of time, SR says that the time for the object moving with relativistic velocities is dilated, that is for someone traveling at relativistic velocities time passes slower than for someone standing still. Taking this further, if you were traveling at the speed of light then according to the equation for time dilation, time is dilated to infinity. This means that for the person traveling at the speed of light time stands still for them allowing you to live to see your destination while others not moving at the speed of light will have long since died (this is the famous Twin Paradox. Of course, SR allows you to assume either the ship is moving, or the rest of the Universe is moving, which would make {{User:Atlas503|Atlas503's]] assessment correct. That is, the person on the ship would see time pass regularly while everything outside would seem to stop, so to speak. There is another aspect of SR that is important for this discussion, I believe. According to SR the distance along the direction traveled is contracted, meaning that at relativistic velocities the distance from A to B is shorter than it would appear to someone standing still. Furthermore, at the speed of light the distance is contracted to zero, essentially placing the destination at the starting point (A and B are in the same place). I believe that since there is a distinction between hyperspace and real-space that they are not the same thing, and so Special Relativity may not apply. Also, to note about acceleration: If you could accelerate at 3,000 m/s^2 (about 306.12 g) (, it would take 100,000 seconds (about 1.15 days) to get to the speed of light. And if you could accelerate at 300,000 m/s^2 (about 30,612 g) it would take only 1000 seconds (about 16.7 min).MasterSearcy 06:13, February 24, 2010 (UTC)

Hyperspace combat? Edit

In the Babylon5 universe, ships can fight in Hyperspace. How about in the Star Wars version? Will 02:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Not Another Dimension Edit

Hyperspace is not another dimension! Saxton flat-out says in the AOTC:ICS that Hyperspace is Realspace viewed from a FTL perspective. I would change the article, but I don't really know how to do it without sounding stupid.Commodore Axilon 00:43, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

  • I've just done it.--The All-knowing Sith'ari 15:08, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Commodore Axilon might be right. Perhaps hyperspace is actually the transit in warp drive.
    • Wait a minute! The answers been here all along! If hyperdrives are also known as warp drives, then that must mean it works a bit like Star Trek warp drives or transwarp!--The All-knowing Sith'ari 11:59, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Sure, you see realspace from a FTL perspective, but the realspace dimension prohibits matter moving past the speed of light. You have to break that inter-dimensional barrier in order to make the jump to lightspeed. Piequals3 11:38, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
    • Warp drive does exactly that.--The All-knowing Sith'ari 12:46, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
      • Hyperdrive does not at all work like Star Trek warp drive. jSarek 12:54, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
        • Yeah, but in Star Wars no one explains exactly how the technology works, and we still have no canon explanation of what hyperspace is, so I'm afraid neither of us are right.--The All-knowing Sith'ari 16:58, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
          • Except the properties and practical realities of both hyperspace and Star Trek-style warp drive are known, and they don't match up. Ships in warp speed maintain situational awareness, able to sense other things in the galaxy and react to them, even engaging in battles at warp speed; ships in hyperspace are unable to interact with things in realspace (other than their gravity shadows or other things in hyperspace. Things which leave a warp field slow to sublight speeds; things which leave a hyperspace field disintegrate. jSarek 02:06, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
            • Yes, but hyperdrive is considerably faster than warp drive. The properties of superluminal travel may change the faster you go.--The All-knowing Sith'ari 16:44, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

The Real Nature of Hyperspace? Edit

Quote from the article: "Consequently, despite common usage, relatively little is known about the true nature of hyperspace. Popular theories say that hyperspace utilized another dimension to 'sidestep,' per se., the light 'speed limit.' Others theorize that it phased matter directly into another universe, similar to otherspace or subspace, and thus gain superlight speeds. Whatever the case, there are many complex scientific principles known to modern hyperdrive engineers which allow for myriad different uses of this faster-than-light phenomenon."

It seems that Lucas did not even consider the ontology of spacetime employed in his hyperspace theory. Is hyperspace really another dimension, is it a tunnel through space (wormhole effect), or is it a dynamic warping of space akin to Alcubierre Drive? (Unsigned comment by 192.234.16.2)

If you can send messages through it, then it should be a dimension, rather than like the albucierre warp drive, which has a ship enclosed in a bubble of exotic matter, moving faster than the speed of light globally, while at rest locally.

although extra dimension are theroised to be ten to the power of minus 63 meters. 219.88.161.251 04:51, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I once read something in a book about the "Theory of Hyperspace", and I've kind of applied that theory to what hyperspace is in Star Wars because it seemed to make sense. According the the theory, before the Big Bang the Universe was ten-dimensional including the four dimensions that make up real-space and six others. At the moment of the Big Bang the Ten-Dimensional Universe was split into two universes: 1.) a four-dimensional universe (Real-Space that we live in), and 2.) a six-dimensional universe called "Hyperspace". The theory further stated that hyperspace is continually contracting while our universe continually expands, meaning that distances in hyperspace are shorter than in real-space. I also believe that it said that hyperspace was a virtual mirror of the physical objects in our universe, which would be the mass-shadows, but I could be remembering incorrectly here. As I said, I've applied this theory to my understanding of hyperspace in Star Wars because it provided an explanation of the ability to travel vast distances in shorter times not only because the distances are shorter in hyperspace, but because Special Relativity probably doesn't apply in hyperspace, so there would be no speed limit.MasterSearcy 06:29, February 24, 2010 (UTC)

Changes to the Article Edit

I changed the article to the present tense, as it seems like otherwise that it doesnt apply anymore. 219.88.161.251 04:51, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

  • Could you please change that back to past tense? This is an In universe article and according to the Manual of style, All in-universe articles should be in past tense, per the quote below.
"A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away..."
Star Wars films

Thanks. --Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 11:50, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Changed Piequals3 12:05, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

SourcesEdit

Somebody that knows where they actually found the information regarding how hyperspace works, please source this article. Piequals3 11:42, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

  • I added some of the relevant sources. More are, of course, still needed. jSarek 11:53, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Merge articles? Edit

This article has considerable overlap with the Hyperdrive article. It might be worth merging the two articles, or else making a clearer distinction between their content. –Cúthalion (talk) 03:27, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

  • I would disagree on a merge. A hyperdrive is a physical piece of technology. It allows a ship to travel into hyperspace which is a separate phenomenon within physics. Each article is categorized as so. -- Riffsyphon1024 05:38, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I agree with Riffsyphon. - JMAS 05:48, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I agree that a merge is not a good idea. Hyperspace is a phenomenon, hyperdrive is a technology; it'd be a bit like merging "combustion" with "engine." However, a clearer delineation between the two topics is definitely warranted. jSarek 06:00, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Red shift Edit

Has anyone ever considered the visual effects of entering/leaving hyperspace? When accelerating, you should see massive red shift, perhaps into the infrared range. Likewise, when decelerating, you should see massive blue shift, perhaps into the ultraviolet range. The movie graphics suggest blue shift, but not red shift.

  • Accelerating into hyperspace would cause objects ahead of you to be blue shifted. Objects moving away from an observer are red shifted, see wikipedia:Redshift.MasterSearcy 06:34, February 24, 2010 (UTC)

I'm not suggesting any changes, just musing. –Cúthalion (talk) 14:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I know that on Star Tours, there is a red shift during the second hyperspace segment if you look at the alternate (right side) display. During this 'jump' this secondary screen shows the Death Star explosion occurring behind you (with R2-D2 in the foreground) and continues the shot from the same relative viewpoint (Outside and above RX-24, looking towards the rear of the ship) as you travel to the finale. Though, I don't know how this figures into the Star Wars canon. Disneyhollic 06:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Clone Wars contradiction Edit

In Clone Wars Chapter 11, a CR20 troop carrier goes into hyperspace from inside the atmosphere of Muunilinst? How has that been explained, since atmosphere + hyperpace = bad? Or, hasn't it been explained, as I'm guessing from the lack of any mention about the matter in Wookieepedia? --Master Starkeiller 21:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


Well, from what I think, the CR20 should have instantly disintegrated. Look, do we all agree that a ship needs to go into a high speed to either exit realspace or enter hyperspace (possibly passing otherspace in the process)?

If that is true, the CR20 had to have snapped through the planet's gravity and into an impossibly high speed faster than the speed of light, and obviously enough to escape the planet's gravity.

Wouldn't that have created a disruption in the planet's solar system and possibly pulled it out of it's sun's gravitational pull?

Sorry, that wasn't much of a solution.--Darkforcerising 47 16:40, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Mass shadows and failsafesEdit

I believe I remember reading somewhere that gravity doesn't technically pull ships out of hyperspace, but rather this is caused by an irreversible failsafe in all hyperdrives. I don't remember where I read it, probably one of the novels or the original West End Sourcebook. Can anyone confirm, and add to the article if it's true? Some Guy 07:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Time Edit

How long did hyperspace travel take? Hours? Days? Weeks? In Vector Prime it explicitly says to go from the Core to the Outer Rim took a week. From reading the X-wing novels and other sources from all over star wars however, I got the impressio that hyperspace travel took only hours. Which is correct? Tarvin Calaan 04:33, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

How is it that it takes only a few hours to get from alderaan to either coruscant or tatooine, but it takes many days to get from coruscant dircectly to tatooine.


In Heir to the Empire it takes the Chimaera seventy seconds at point four to reach Bpfasshi, a distance of one thousandth of a light year away. If you work out the math, it takes 70,000 seconds to travel one light year, which, according to my mental arithmatic, is 19 hours to travel one light year. I have to be wrong somewhere.

QUESTION: Now, it said that a Hyperspace jump from Tatooine to Alderaan took 7 hours. Didn't Han Solo say in Ep. IV "We'll arrive at Alderaan in 0200 Hours (2:00)"?

jedi Edit

it says in the article that the raktan used forced powered hyper drives,did the jedi use this technology in their hyperspace or was it lost

Times Edit

The times don't seem to make any sense. Why would one travel for 12+ days from Coruscant to Dagobah, when they could jump from Coruscant to Alderaan, then Alderaan to Dagobah, and make the trip in about 2 days?

In general, the travel time between 2 planets along a "direct" route shouldn't exceed the travel time for an indirect route.

  • They only make some kind of sense when you take hyperlanes into account. Sometimes it's faster to go a little out of your way to get on a faster road. Not that they make MUCH more sense in that case - they weren't terribly well thought-out to begin with. jSarek 07:10, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
    • I think we should remove that table from the article, it's an affront to logic. It take 4 hours to go from Coruscant to Corellia, 4 hours to get from Corellia to Tattoine, and 22 days to get from Tattoine to Coruscant? That's just dumb. I won't make the change because I am not a registered user, but please.
      • At the very least, it would be nice to know where the different numbers are from. If they are for different ships with different speeds, or are simply the result of different authors contradicting each other, a comment to that effect might be warranted.
    • One could think of the difference in "direct" route and "indirect" route times in terms of the highway network. Consider the Interstate highways as the primary "hyperlanes" like the Corellian Run, Perlimian Trade Route and so on, and state highways and secondary roads as the lesser known hyperspace routes. If you try to travel a direct route from a small town to a major city in the next state may be on secondary roads and state highways, which generally go through other towns along the way and have lower speed limits it could take you much longer to get to your destination than if you went the "indirect" route of taking the Interstate, which generally avoids smaller towns and cities, and has higher speed limits. Thus, giving you a shorter travel time by taking an "indirect" route because it allows you to travel faster by avoiding major obstacles.MasterSearcy 06:45, February 24, 2010 (UTC)


Maybe that in the state or alternate dimension of hyperspace, massive holes, or gravitational irregularities caused by stars and black holes, prevent quick travel; maybe you have to go around them.--Darkforcerising 47 16:31, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

.3 past lightspeed Edit

I'm wondering if there shouldn't be a section here explaining what is meant by descriptions of speeds in hyperspace when worded this way. If not in this article, does one exist on wookiee? As a person who only did a year of physics, I would not be able to do this but I would greatly appreciate it if somebody at least put as much down as they might know.Mad Jax 06:24, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

In A New Hope, Han Solo says, "She'll make point-five past lightspeed." Closer inspection reveals that the Millennium Falcon's hyperdrive is a Class .5. It's possible that Lucas intended for the number to represent the supra light velocities the ship could attain, then changed it to a way of rating hyperdrives after the movie.--ToaCodyNuva 00:28, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

TimeEdit

So it takes days to get from Corusant to Tatooine even in Hyperspace? Nuparu1995

Kamakazie Attack Edit

That other guy is right. In an Imperial-Rebel space engagement in Star Wars Battlefront 2, a Rebel heavy cruiser tried to go into hyperspace while right in front of an Imperial-class Star Destroyer. Which, of course, is a pretty stupid move.--Darkforcerising 47 22:10, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Organized (I hope) list of questions and my unlikely answers Edit

Hey, guys, look at it this way. I don't know much about physics, but this gives me an edge because I don't know that what I'm saying is possibly wrong!

1. What is hyperspace?

Hyperspace is a subject with limited knowledge. It allows properly-built spacecraft to span a great distance within a certain galaxy, known as the galaxy (the Star Wars galaxy), in a lesser amount of time than it would take to travel on repulsor-lift engines. When a ship enters hyperspace, it must activate an entirely new engine to accelerate into a great enough speed to make the journey or transformation of physical particles. Again, not much is known about this, and a large conflict is if it's an alternate dimension, or simply you're going really, really, fast.

We do know that before you enter hyperspace, you must enter the coordinates of your destination. This supports Unsigned comment by Darkforcerising 47 (talk • contribs).

SPEED & TIMEEdit

A major part of hyperpace travel that just occured to me is how does a fleet with various ships who have all different hyperspace ratings arrive at a targetat the same time? I know the question is poorly worded, but this can be seen in Episode VI, when the Rebels attack Endor, the Millenium Falcon has a hyperspace speed of 0.5, and is specifically called the fastest ship in the fleet by Han, and yet it arrives at the same time as the rest of the disparate Rebel Fleet comprised of ships with many diferent speeds, how and why is this? (P.S. Please don't get hung up on the relative speeds or correcting errors in the question, just answer the question).Ciphe 20:01, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, remember, the fleet is organized to reach a certain point, at the same time, with the same coordinates. So when the coordinates are transposed from ship to ship, there is probably a setting in which you can set the ETA to a speed value in which all ships can execute. For example, if the Falcon can hit .5, but the Home One can reach .4, and a few X-Wings following can only reach .3, they will communicate to each other and decide that .2 is the best speed to go at because all ships can go that fast. So the Estimated Time to Arrival will be the same because they are all traveling at the same speed, to the same coordinates, at the same time. Remember, just because they can go that fast doesn't mean they have to. Whoo, that was long. Did that help?--Darkforcerising 47 16:26, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

  • A good explanation would be if the way Hyperspace works is by pushing the limit towards FTL and the jump to hyperspace shifts the dimension of 'time' so the destination is a constant, but the time spent in route differs for each rating. If 2 ships want to leave point A at the exact same time, and end up at point B at the exact same time, the slower ship would spend a longer time in hyperspace from their own point of view, but nobody elses.

Alternate Dimension Edit

If you read Star Wars: Republic Commando: Hard Contact, you will note that they say (quote):

The ship, better described as a junk pile, stunk of rot and rust. Darman was surprised that it could even handle the simple transformation from realspace to the alternate dimension, hyperspace.

Sorry, forgot to sign that!--Darkforcerising 47 16:12, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

  • I don't know if it would be considered part of the canon, but the databank at Starwars.com concurs. "The term hyperdrive refers to the engine and interrelated systems that propel a starship through the alternate dimension of hyperspace." This means that hyperspace is indeed distinguishable from realspace as a separate dimension. It might be worth adding this source to the article, but I'm not a registered user, so someone else will have to do so: <http: //www . starwars . com/databank/technology/hyperdrive/>. Be sure to remove the spaces from the link if you try to visit it. 69.76.234.94 21:28, December 6, 2010 (UTC)

Confusion Edit

I'm very confused as to how the timings work, i don't mean if you take the motorway around the mountain its faster than the backroad over the mountain, i mean that for travelling across the galaxy. someone said above about the rug idea, in that the person going 120000 light years away would be instantaneous via hyperspace but everything else would time would pass normally. this sounds ridiculous, if you were from a small village on Dac/Mon Calamari and lets just say you were trading with Gungans on Naboo, and lets for arguments sake say thats 100,000 light years away, you get message from sick granny to come see her. Well from the way people seem to be saying (or maybe my interpretation of what they are saying), is that whilst the Grandson Quarren would only take a short while to get there, maybe enough to watch a television show while he's waiting, as time is travelling normally outside of hyperspace, so he gets there and 100,000 years have passed, in which guess Granny is long dead, and maybe environmental changes has caused extinction of all life on his world. Surely if your taking the shortcut through the rug (see analogy used above), it would take much less time? I guess the analogy i have is that travelling along an actual straight line and a perceived straight line are much different. if you take the UK and it's antipode New Zealand, flying a mile up in the sky in a Boeing/Airbus takes approximately 24 hours at maybe 600mph, but if you travelled directly there (current technology doesn't allow us to fly planes through matter, but neither does it allow yperspace travel) then you'd have only a half of the way to travel and maybe only take 15 hours. Not sure i've understood this properly or not, how much faster than light are they relatively going, 100000 x faster?

Intergalactic space travel Edit

If a galaxy was a few million light years away, how long would it take to arrive via hyperspace? --User:JediMercenary

Celestials, Architechts and New info Edit

I know a few sources regard them as myths, etc, but does anyone else think that maybe this page should be updated with a bit about how maybe the celestials created hyperspace travel as is suggested in "Star Wars: The Roleplaying Game"? There is no Black or White, only varying shades of Grey 00:21, January 13, 2012 (UTC)

Weaponizing hyperspace? Edit

So what I don't understand is why haven't hyperspace missiles been invented. From reading through the article and seeing the destructive power that ships colliding with objects have, "One of the more famous hyperspace accidents occurred during the Clone Wars, when the Star Battlecruiser Quaestor collided with the Separatist planet Pammant, fracturing it to its core." (taken from article) why hasn't hyperspace been weaponized?--70.240.204.43 05:05, June 12, 2012 (UTC)

  • The Galaxy Gun. Cade Calrayn StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 06:27, June 12, 2012 (UTC)
    • Ok this isn't what I meant though. The Galaxy Gun used hyperspace as a means of transportation of the package, but not as a means of destruction. I was just thinking they could use something like hyperspace cannons to launch projectiles. I mean the Hammer (battle station) launched asteroids at near-relativistic speeds, but was decommissioned by the Republic for fear of causing indiscriminate damage. Why even make that when they could use hyperspace cannons or build something akin to the Hammer battle station only that it could launch projectiles into hyperspace. You wouldn't even need to position it over a planet it could be like the Galaxy Gun in that respect since the projectiles travel much faster. Hell they could just use ships to cause this destruction if they wanted with just the fail-safes on the hyperdrive turned off. I guess the time displacement would make it a little more complicated than just launching asteroids, but they already have the technology to fix that issue so it shouldn't be a problem. Unless this is more complicated than I think it is.--70.240.196.207 02:26, June 13, 2012 (UTC)
      • Yeah its something that should definitely be a common weapon/planet killer in SW verse. (and KEW's for that matter) It is mentioned in the Galaxy of Intrigue sourcebook that such a collision would kill millions even if planetary shields were up.--Darthscott3457 03:31, June 13, 2012 (UTC)
        • Exactly. Where is the point for building a Death Star (which has the mass of thousands of Star Destroyers and takes years to build) if you could instead let Star Destroyers (or maybe even smaller ships) make hyperspace kamikaze runs? First of all it means that the weapon to destroy an entire planet was already there for millennia. Now the Death Star was build. Wow, big deal. Also, the death star can be stopped to reach a planet (with interdictor cruisers for example), but a kamikaze ship in hyperspace cannot be stopped by that, because it's safety mechanisms have been removed. Finally the death star is slower in hyperspace and real space than most ships, which means it will take longer to travel to and destroy a planet. Imagine what the Battle of Yavin would have looked like if the Empire would just have sacrificed one ship as soon as they knew the Rebel Base was there. And you don't even need to sacrifice any life as there are droids. Droid controlled ships are also kind of common. At least since the Clone Wars.--TeakHoken91.47.77.195 17:19, April 6, 2014

(UTC)

OtherspaceEdit

Should there be a mention of Otherspace?

QuoteEdit

The quote at the beginning also appears later in the article. 74.215.113.92 13:46, September 12, 2012 (UTC)


Hazards Edit

We see The Phantom exit hyperspace without a hyperdrive in Star Wars Rebels. This is mentioned on the canon page. Should we remove the bit where it says that a ship cannot exit hyperspace without a hyperdrive?Calfret (talk) 06:36, September 27, 2015 (UTC)

Hypercomm Edit

The hypercomm technology and the HoloNet network are described as two separate ways of communication in the Communications section. Do we have the exact source indicating this is the case? Because I got the impression that hypercomm actually uses the HoloNet hyperwave transceiver network to function, and is just a special case of its use, rather than a separate technology. If hypercomm could transfer signals directly through hyperspace without the HoloNet transceiver network, there would be no need for subspace transceivers as a local cheaper alternative, as hypercomm itself would be that alternative and would entirely replace the subspace transceivers, rendering them obsolete. Unsigned comment by UchuuEngineer (talk • contribs).

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+