QUOTE (Robittybob1+Mar 31 2012, 10:11 AM)
Without an atmosphere a planet soon stops spinning. eg the Moon, Mercury, Venus (lost then regained atmosphere, now speeding up backwards)
then Earth and Mars (little atmosphere). Gassy ones roaring Jupiter 9 hours, Saturn, Neptune, Uranus.
Wow, that's not even close to accurate.
then Earth and Mars (little atmosphere). Gassy ones roaring Jupiter 9 hours, Saturn, Neptune, Uranus.
Wow, that's not even close to accurate.
QUOTE (Robittybob1+Mar 31 2012, 02:11 PM)
Without an atmosphere a planet soon stops spinning. eg the Moon, Mercury, Venus (lost then regained atmosphere, now speeding up backwards)
then Earth and Mars (little atmosphere). Gassy ones roaring Jupiter 9 hours, Saturn, Neptune, Uranus.
Talking about these things on the mercury thread.
I think the big planets spin faster because more matter has fallen into the vortex when they formed. It's like putting a weight on a string and swinging it back and forth. The end of the string is moving faster than it is an inch from where your holding it. As for the other three you mentioned there was a lot of stuff flying around in the early solor system there rotation is probibly a result of colisions.
then Earth and Mars (little atmosphere). Gassy ones roaring Jupiter 9 hours, Saturn, Neptune, Uranus.
Talking about these things on the mercury thread.
I think the big planets spin faster because more matter has fallen into the vortex when they formed. It's like putting a weight on a string and swinging it back and forth. The end of the string is moving faster than it is an inch from where your holding it. As for the other three you mentioned there was a lot of stuff flying around in the early solor system there rotation is probibly a result of colisions.
Ok sorry
Going to mercury
Going to mercury
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Mar 31 2012, 03:57 PM)
Wow, that's not even close to accurate.
That wasn't meant to be accurate. It was the middle of the night and I had gotten up for 5 minutes.
This this is the Warp Drive Thread let's get to the topic. But the biggest energy source is the Sun so put the Sun into the equation.
That wasn't meant to be accurate. It was the middle of the night and I had gotten up for 5 minutes.
This this is the Warp Drive Thread let's get to the topic. But the biggest energy source is the Sun so put the Sun into the equation.
Doesn't matter where you go the four Minions are not far behind 
And oh yah Lady Wacko the great attractor is (NOTHING)
And oh yah Lady Wacko the great attractor is (NOTHING)
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+Mar 31 2012, 09:44 PM)
Doesn't matter where you go the four Minions are not far behind
And oh yah Lady Wacko the great attractor is (NOTHING)
Tell us about the 4 minions - sounds interesting??
And oh yah Lady Wacko the great attractor is (NOTHING)
Tell us about the 4 minions - sounds interesting??
QUOTE (Robittybob1+Mar 31 2012, 11:13 PM)
Tell us about the 4 minions - sounds interesting??
Alex, Ed, "The Lady & the Fly,
Sounds like a bed time story lol
Alex, Ed, "The Lady & the Fly,
Sounds like a bed time story lol
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+Mar 31 2012, 11:28 PM)
Alex, Ed, "The Lady & the Fly,
Sounds like a bed time story lol
Sounds like a bed time story lol
Thats the Fly alright !
Still wondering if it's a German joke.
QUOTE (Lady Elizabeth+Mar 31 2012, 11:43 PM)
Still wondering if it's a German joke.
Its a not funny joke
Isn't there some toilets that need cleaning at the big house?
Its a not funny joke
Isn't there some toilets that need cleaning at the big house?
Last night I bought the movie, the Day the Earth Stood Still. There was a scene where Klaatu (played by Keanu Reeves) is rewriting the Einstein equations. The scientist writes "=0". Klaatu draws a line through it that reads as "not equal zero"; the scientist looks at Klaatu, shocked.
The physicist community really could pursue warp technology if they really wanted to. It is too bad that they don't.
The physicist community really could pursue warp technology if they really wanted to. It is too bad that they don't.
You know the movie is fiction, not fact?
Apparently, you can't tell the difference.
Apparently, you can't tell the difference.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 31 2012, 05:13 PM)
Last night I bought the movie, the Day the Earth Stood Still. There was a scene where Klaatu (played by Keanu Reeves) is rewriting the Einstein equations. The scientist writes "=0". Klaatu draws a line through it that reads as "not equal zero"; the scientist looks at Klaatu, shocked.
The physicist community really could pursue warp technology if they really wanted to. It is too bad that they don't.
Since your arguing for the reality of a fictional movie, it seems I remember something about the alien ship speed being less than the speed of light.
The physicist community really could pursue warp technology if they really wanted to. It is too bad that they don't.
Since your arguing for the reality of a fictional movie, it seems I remember something about the alien ship speed being less than the speed of light.
QUOTE (waitedavid137+Apr 1 2012, 03:27 AM)
Since your arguing for the reality of a fictional movie, it seems I remember something about the alien ship speed being less than the speed of light.
waitedavid,
Actually, it was less than c, it was 0.1c (3x10^7 m/s). Klaatu drew a line through the "=0" sign, which basically meant there was a missing term. My control systems book is packed up right now. But that missing term should be a driving term.
A theory of everything (TOE) is supposed to unify QM and GR. I noticed that they both point to light (photons). The wave function of a photon is the simplest wave function: Psi = Aexp [i*omega*t]. Time dilation, both GR & SR, result from the speed of light restriction. Particles & anti-particles can be annihilated to produce light; but there is no anti-photon that annihilates light. Photons are the only particle whose energy content is a constant times it's frequency. These are clues that we have to work with light to directly interface with the space-time continuum.
Gravitational redshift & gravitational time dilation are clues that we have to frequency shift light to get back gravity (curvature in space-time). The missing term has to be a constant * df/dt.
But if you think the missing term could be something different, I'm all ears.
alexg,
Strange, it's like I'm becoming trained to ignore your posts.
waitedavid,
Actually, it was less than c, it was 0.1c (3x10^7 m/s). Klaatu drew a line through the "=0" sign, which basically meant there was a missing term. My control systems book is packed up right now. But that missing term should be a driving term.
A theory of everything (TOE) is supposed to unify QM and GR. I noticed that they both point to light (photons). The wave function of a photon is the simplest wave function: Psi = Aexp [i*omega*t]. Time dilation, both GR & SR, result from the speed of light restriction. Particles & anti-particles can be annihilated to produce light; but there is no anti-photon that annihilates light. Photons are the only particle whose energy content is a constant times it's frequency. These are clues that we have to work with light to directly interface with the space-time continuum.
Gravitational redshift & gravitational time dilation are clues that we have to frequency shift light to get back gravity (curvature in space-time). The missing term has to be a constant * df/dt.
But if you think the missing term could be something different, I'm all ears.
alexg,
Strange, it's like I'm becoming trained to ignore your posts.
QUOTE
Strange, it's like I'm becoming trained to ignore your posts.
So you are trainable but not teachable. Sort of like a bear that learns to dance. But the bear will never learn physics, although it has a better chance at it than you do.
QUOTE (Maz'+)
A theory of everything (TOE) is supposed to unify QM and GR. I noticed that they both point to light (photons)
Oh really? ....... says you.?
Oh really? ....... says you.?
QUOTE (Maz'+)
Particles & anti-particles can be annihilated to produce light; but there is no anti-photon that annihilates light
Not strictly true;- when a photon encounters another of equal wavelength (albeit 180° out of phase), both disappear.
ps;- I cannot comment on the rest of your headfucked post, as I'm way far too polite.
Not strictly true;- when a photon encounters another of equal wavelength (albeit 180° out of phase), both disappear.
ps;- I cannot comment on the rest of your headfucked post, as I'm way far too polite.
QUOTE (Lady Elizabeth+Apr 1 2012, 05:49 AM)
QUOTE (Maz'+)
A theory of everything (TOE) is supposed to unify QM and GR. I noticed that they both point to light (photons)
Oh really? ....... says you.?
QUOTE (Maz'+)
Particles & anti-particles can be annihilated to produce light; but there is no anti-photon that annihilates light
Not strictly true;- when a photon encounters another of equal wavelength (albeit 180° out of phase), both disappear.
ps;- I cannot comment on the rest of your headfucked post, as I'm way far too polite.
Photons that are 180 degrees out of phase disappear while they cross each others path, then they reappear. Yes we should be looking at light as a way to manipulate space-time, says me.
Exhibit A;- In case of sound we have two speakers. One gives off an incredibly loud AC/DC 'number' and the other speaker gives off the exact inverted phase of the other, both with equal magnitude.
Result = No sound will be heard
Exhibit B;- Two water waves with exact opposite magnitude and phase meet each other, again they cancel each other out.
Result = the water becomes flat.
See, total destructive interference actually occurs, you ill-educated headfuck and they do not "reappear" whether they're sound, water or photons.
Edit;- your image shows you to suffer from a dreadful syndromic disorder effecting body shape, skin pallor (we're already aware of the savage mental handicap) ...... inbreeding can be so, so cruel.
Not strictly true;- when a photon encounters another of equal wavelength (albeit 180° out of phase), both disappear.
ps;- I cannot comment on the rest of your headfucked post, as I'm way far too polite.
Photons that are 180 degrees out of phase disappear while they cross each others path, then they reappear. Yes we should be looking at light as a way to manipulate space-time, says me.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 1 2012, 06:45 AM)
Photons that are 180 degrees out of phase disappear while they cross each others path, then they reappear.
Exhibit A;- In case of sound we have two speakers. One gives off an incredibly loud AC/DC 'number' and the other speaker gives off the exact inverted phase of the other, both with equal magnitude.
Result = No sound will be heard
Exhibit B;- Two water waves with exact opposite magnitude and phase meet each other, again they cancel each other out.
Result = the water becomes flat.
See, total destructive interference actually occurs, you ill-educated headfuck and they do not "reappear" whether they're sound, water or photons.
Edit;- your image shows you to suffer from a dreadful syndromic disorder effecting body shape, skin pallor (we're already aware of the savage mental handicap) ...... inbreeding can be so, so cruel.
Exhibit A;- In case of sound we have two speakers. One gives off an incredibly loud AC/DC 'number' and the other speaker gives off the exact inverted phase of the other, both with equal magnitude.
Result = No sound will be heard
Exhibit B;- Two water waves with exact opposite magnitude and phase meet each other, again they cancel each other out.
Result = the water becomes flat.
See, total destructive interference actually occurs, you ill-educated headfuck and they do not "reappear" whether they're sound, water or photons.
Edit;- your image shows you to suffer from a dreadful syndromic disorder effecting body shape, skin pallor (we're already aware of the savage mental handicap) ...... inbreeding can be so, so cruel.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 1 2012, 06:45 AM)
Oh really? ....... says you.?
[QUOTE=Maz']Particles & anti-particles can be annihilated to produce light; but there is no anti-photon that annihilates light[/QUOTE]
Not strictly true;- when a photon encounters another of equal wavelength (albeit 180° out of phase), both disappear.
ps;- I cannot comment on the rest of your headfucked post, as I'm way far too polite.
[/QUOTE]
Photons that are 180 degrees out of phase disappear while they cross each others path, then they reappear. Yes we should be looking at light as a way to manipulate space-time, says me.
They look as if they could do with a good feed. The UFO YouTube video has been withdrawn.
[QUOTE=Maz']Particles & anti-particles can be annihilated to produce light; but there is no anti-photon that annihilates light[/QUOTE]
Not strictly true;- when a photon encounters another of equal wavelength (albeit 180° out of phase), both disappear.
ps;- I cannot comment on the rest of your headfucked post, as I'm way far too polite.
[/QUOTE]Photons that are 180 degrees out of phase disappear while they cross each others path, then they reappear. Yes we should be looking at light as a way to manipulate space-time, says me.
They look as if they could do with a good feed. The UFO YouTube video has been withdrawn.
QUOTE (Lady Elizabeth+Apr 1 2012, 07:51 AM)
Exhibit A;- In case of sound we have two speakers. One gives off an incredibly loud AC/DC 'number' and the other speaker gives off the exact inverted phase of the other, both with equal magnitude.
Result = No sound will be heard
Exhibit B;- Two water waves with exact opposite magnitude and phase meet each other, again they cancel each other out.
Result = the water becomes flat.
See, total destructive interference actually occurs, you ill-educated headfuck and they do not "reappear" whether they're sound, water or photons.
Edit;- your image shows you to suffer from a dreadful syndromic disorder effecting body shape, skin pallor (we're already aware of the savage mental handicap) ...... inbreeding can be so, so cruel.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 1 2012, 08:55 AM)
Lady E,
Here, let me help you.
Thanks for that utter faeces.
Been wondering about the conservation of energy thang;- when the energy of two colossal waves (180 degrees out of phase) cancel ...... where does all that energy go???
Here, let me help you.
Thanks for that utter faeces.
Been wondering about the conservation of energy thang;- when the energy of two colossal waves (180 degrees out of phase) cancel ...... where does all that energy go???
QUOTE (Robittybob1+Apr 1 2012, 07:52 AM)
The UFO YouTube video has been withdrawn.
Looked very withdrawn.
Looked very withdrawn.
QUOTE (Lady Elizabeth+Apr 1 2012, 09:09 AM)
Thanks for that utter faeces.
Been wondering about the conservation of energy thang;- when the energy of two colossal waves (180 degrees out of phase) cancel ...... where does all that energy go???
The energy is still there. The waves only cancel out very briefly as they go by each other; then you can see the waves again as they leave each other.
I found this video. I just thought it was fun to watch.
Been wondering about the conservation of energy thang;- when the energy of two colossal waves (180 degrees out of phase) cancel ...... where does all that energy go???
The energy is still there. The waves only cancel out very briefly as they go by each other; then you can see the waves again as they leave each other.
I found this video. I just thought it was fun to watch.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 1 2012, 09:58 AM)
The energy is still there. The waves only cancel out very briefly
No they do not!
No they do not!
QUOTE (Lady Elizabeth+Apr 1 2012, 10:01 AM)
No they do not!
Yes they do.
Yes they do.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 1 2012, 10:10 AM)
Yes they do.
Do not,
Do not,
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 1 2012, 04:51 AM)
waitedavid,
Actually, it was less than c, it was 0.1c (3x10^7 m/s). Klaatu drew a line through the "=0" sign, which basically meant there was a missing term. My control systems book is packed up right now. But that missing term should be a driving term.
A theory of everything (TOE) is supposed to unify QM and GR. I noticed that they both point to light (photons). The wave function of a photon is the simplest wave function: Psi = Aexp [i*omega*t]. Time dilation, both GR & SR, result from the speed of light restriction. Particles & anti-particles can be annihilated to produce light; but there is no anti-photon that annihilates light. Photons are the only particle whose energy content is a constant times it's frequency. These are clues that we have to work with light to directly interface with the space-time continuum.
Gravitational redshift & gravitational time dilation are clues that we have to frequency shift light to get back gravity (curvature in space-time). The missing term has to be a constant * df/dt.
But if you think the missing term could be something different, I'm all ears.
alexg,
Strange, it's like I'm becoming trained to ignore your posts.
Silly little Grey.
I tried to tell you where to find your fabled shift photon but you do not have ears.
I suppose I should not find it surprising your mind cannot hear.
But with them big ginormous eyes one would think you could read.
Actually, it was less than c, it was 0.1c (3x10^7 m/s). Klaatu drew a line through the "=0" sign, which basically meant there was a missing term. My control systems book is packed up right now. But that missing term should be a driving term.
A theory of everything (TOE) is supposed to unify QM and GR. I noticed that they both point to light (photons). The wave function of a photon is the simplest wave function: Psi = Aexp [i*omega*t]. Time dilation, both GR & SR, result from the speed of light restriction. Particles & anti-particles can be annihilated to produce light; but there is no anti-photon that annihilates light. Photons are the only particle whose energy content is a constant times it's frequency. These are clues that we have to work with light to directly interface with the space-time continuum.
Gravitational redshift & gravitational time dilation are clues that we have to frequency shift light to get back gravity (curvature in space-time). The missing term has to be a constant * df/dt.
But if you think the missing term could be something different, I'm all ears.
alexg,
Strange, it's like I'm becoming trained to ignore your posts.
Silly little Grey.
I tried to tell you where to find your fabled shift photon but you do not have ears.
I suppose I should not find it surprising your mind cannot hear.
But with them big ginormous eyes one would think you could read.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Apr 2 2012, 06:11 PM)
Silly little Grey.
I tried to tell you where to find your fabled shift photon but you do not have ears.
I suppose I should not find it surprising your mind cannot hear.
But with them big ginormous eyes one would think you could read.
If the physics community had the intelligence that they think they do, they would have arrived at the same conclusion that I did.
1. Warp drive methodology requires another term in the Einstein equations.
2. The laws of nature support, first and foremost, the properties of light.
3. Gravitational redshift is the relationship between light and gravity.
I tried to tell you where to find your fabled shift photon but you do not have ears.
I suppose I should not find it surprising your mind cannot hear.
But with them big ginormous eyes one would think you could read.
If the physics community had the intelligence that they think they do, they would have arrived at the same conclusion that I did.
1. Warp drive methodology requires another term in the Einstein equations.
2. The laws of nature support, first and foremost, the properties of light.
3. Gravitational redshift is the relationship between light and gravity.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 2 2012, 08:14 PM)
If the physics community had the intelligence that they think they do, they would have arrived at the same conclusion that I did.
1. Warp drive methodology requires another term in the Einstein equations.
2. The laws of nature support, first and foremost, the properties of light.
3. Gravitational redshift is the relationship between light and gravity.
DEE, DEE DEE
1. Warp drive methodology requires another term in the Einstein equations.
2. The laws of nature support, first and foremost, the properties of light.
3. Gravitational redshift is the relationship between light and gravity.
DEE, DEE DEE
QUOTE (Mazulu+)
If the physics community had the intelligence that they think they do, they would have arrived at the same conclusion that I did.
1. Warp drive methodology requires another term in the Einstein equations.
2. The laws of nature support, first and foremost, the properties of light.
3. Gravitational redshift is the relationship between light and gravity.
1. Warp drive methodology requires another term in the Einstein equations.
2. The laws of nature support, first and foremost, the properties of light.
3. Gravitational redshift is the relationship between light and gravity.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Apr 2 2012, 08:50 PM)
DEE, DEE DEE
That pretty much describes the attitude of the physics community towards research of warp drive methodology. This is no surprise given the vigorous amount of brainwashing done to you. Creative and innovative thinking are completely suppressed by nearly everyone in the physics community. Do you even realize that your thinking is completely suppressed. Predictably, you will have a nasty emotional response; go ahead.
That pretty much describes the attitude of the physics community towards research of warp drive methodology. This is no surprise given the vigorous amount of brainwashing done to you. Creative and innovative thinking are completely suppressed by nearly everyone in the physics community. Do you even realize that your thinking is completely suppressed. Predictably, you will have a nasty emotional response; go ahead.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 2 2012, 11:29 PM)
That pretty much describes the attitude of the physics community towards research of warp drive methodology. This is no surprise given the vigorous amount of brainwashing done to you. Creative and innovative thinking are completely suppressed by nearly everyone in the physics community. Do you even realize that your thinking is completely suppressed. Predictably, you will have a nasty emotional response; go ahead.
No that describes you. You are in the immortal words of Carlos Mencia a DEE, DEE DEE
No that describes you. You are in the immortal words of Carlos Mencia a DEE, DEE DEE
I have not been brainwashed I have seen the light and it does not move.
In time it is @ rest and it has no rest mass @ least in space.
If it did it could not move at the speed of light or time.
Time is a moving dimension it moves @ C relative to all mass in all directions.
Therefore Mass Moves @ C through time.
The only points @ which photons can change there position in time is when they interact with Matter stuff with a Rest Mass.
Therefore the only point which light Photons can couple with gravity is when changing position in time. So if you can maintain a photon in a transient state moving in time without forcing electrons to a higher orbit (giving off heat) you can couple space with time changing the speed of time (rate of acceleration) in a given direction or directions in space.
That is where superconductors come into play.
Not to mention It has been proven to work albeit on a small scale.
I am sure with tweaking and the insight Waitdavid has provided a focused EMP induced by a large spinning super conductor and an engineered electromagnetic field could be made to slow time in specific directions thereby slowing if not stopping matters speed through time momentarily along specific vectors inducing what you call a warp field.
Just think about it.
If matter moves through time @ C when @ rest in space then on the surface of the of the planet earth you are moving @ C - 9.80665 m/s along the up vector
You are literally moving 9.80665 m/s slower through time than if you were @ 0G in geosynchronous orbit. Time is moving slower for you because you are moving slower through time along a vector.
I think that is about as clear and simple as I can make it.
In time it is @ rest and it has no rest mass @ least in space.
If it did it could not move at the speed of light or time.
Time is a moving dimension it moves @ C relative to all mass in all directions.
Therefore Mass Moves @ C through time.
The only points @ which photons can change there position in time is when they interact with Matter stuff with a Rest Mass.
Therefore the only point which light Photons can couple with gravity is when changing position in time. So if you can maintain a photon in a transient state moving in time without forcing electrons to a higher orbit (giving off heat) you can couple space with time changing the speed of time (rate of acceleration) in a given direction or directions in space.
That is where superconductors come into play.
Not to mention It has been proven to work albeit on a small scale.
I am sure with tweaking and the insight Waitdavid has provided a focused EMP induced by a large spinning super conductor and an engineered electromagnetic field could be made to slow time in specific directions thereby slowing if not stopping matters speed through time momentarily along specific vectors inducing what you call a warp field.
Just think about it.
If matter moves through time @ C when @ rest in space then on the surface of the of the planet earth you are moving @ C - 9.80665 m/s along the up vector
You are literally moving 9.80665 m/s slower through time than if you were @ 0G in geosynchronous orbit. Time is moving slower for you because you are moving slower through time along a vector.
I think that is about as clear and simple as I can make it.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Apr 3 2012, 12:48 AM)
Time is a moving dimension it moves @ C relative to all mass in all directions.
How do you know? I've heard this idea before. What does it do for advancing technology? Nothing. It sounds like useless fluff.
How do you know? I've heard this idea before. What does it do for advancing technology? Nothing. It sounds like useless fluff.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Apr 3 2012, 12:48 AM)
Time is a moving dimension it moves @ C relative to all mass in all directions.
Therefore Mass Moves @ C through time.
Useless conjecture that does nothing for you.
Therefore Mass Moves @ C through time.
Useless conjecture that does nothing for you.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Apr 3 2012, 12:48 AM)
Therefore the only point which light Photons can couple with gravity is when changing position in time. So if you can maintain a photon in a transient state moving in time without forcing electrons to a higher orbit (giving off heat) you can couple space with time changing the speed of time (rate of acceleration) in a given direction or directions in space.
Photons do change position in time. They move at 300x10^6 meters every second.
Photons do change position in time. They move at 300x10^6 meters every second.
If the physics community is not ready to begin development of warp drive technology, then when? In 50 years? In a 100 years? In a 1000 years?
The other issue I have is: why do you not see that the laws of physics are there to, first and foremost, support the properties of light?
Permitivity*permeability*c^2=1
E = hf
Psi(photon) = exp^i(omega*t)
Time dilation t'/t = 1/sqrt{1 - v^2/c^2}
Space-time interval s^2 = Delta r^2 - c^2 t^2
I don't see anything here that refers to the velocity or energy of a neutrino, or a proton, or a muon. Everything here refers to the velocity & energy of light.
The other issue I have is: why do you not see that the laws of physics are there to, first and foremost, support the properties of light?
Permitivity*permeability*c^2=1
E = hf
Psi(photon) = exp^i(omega*t)
Time dilation t'/t = 1/sqrt{1 - v^2/c^2}
Space-time interval s^2 = Delta r^2 - c^2 t^2
I don't see anything here that refers to the velocity or energy of a neutrino, or a proton, or a muon. Everything here refers to the velocity & energy of light.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 2 2012, 08:14 PM)
If the physics community had the intelligence that they think they do, they would have arrived at the same conclusion that I did.
1. Warp drive methodology requires another term in the Einstein equations.
2. The laws of nature support, first and foremost, the properties of light.
3. Gravitational redshift is the relationship between light and gravity.
So you actually expect trained physicists to be as ignorantly stupid as you. Wrong again goofball.
1. Warp drive methodology requires another term in the Einstein equations.
2. The laws of nature support, first and foremost, the properties of light.
3. Gravitational redshift is the relationship between light and gravity.
So you actually expect trained physicists to be as ignorantly stupid as you. Wrong again goofball.
E=MC^2/SQRT 1-V^2/C^2
The math says so
Pretend you are a photon If V velocity for Light (YOU) is the Speed of light
SQRT 1-V^2/C^2=0 TIME stops If time stops for light. Light is @ rest in TIME. It is moving @ the same speed as time relative to any mass and that is tada C the Constant.
But then you say it moves through space so it is not @ rest.
To which I say it is TIME that is moving not the light the light is just sitting there doing nothing until some MASS runs into it changing its position in TIME or more appropriately changing it's reference frame to the MASS it collided with which is moving away from the MASS @ C.
What happens after that depends on the MASS and its' motion in space Relative to the source (Special Relativity), motion relative to time (General Relativity) and its various wave functions which determine the extent to which it is quantized/packetized(absorbed, emitted and/or reflected).
The math says so
Pretend you are a photon If V velocity for Light (YOU) is the Speed of light
SQRT 1-V^2/C^2=0 TIME stops If time stops for light. Light is @ rest in TIME. It is moving @ the same speed as time relative to any mass and that is tada C the Constant.
But then you say it moves through space so it is not @ rest.
To which I say it is TIME that is moving not the light the light is just sitting there doing nothing until some MASS runs into it changing its position in TIME or more appropriately changing it's reference frame to the MASS it collided with which is moving away from the MASS @ C.
What happens after that depends on the MASS and its' motion in space Relative to the source (Special Relativity), motion relative to time (General Relativity) and its various wave functions which determine the extent to which it is quantized/packetized(absorbed, emitted and/or reflected).
What about harnessing the power of a Coronal Mass Ejection?
Some sort of focusing technique??? The recent photos of the Sun show us what a fearful place it really is. There is the power source - what can you do with it?
Some sort of focusing technique??? The recent photos of the Sun show us what a fearful place it really is. There is the power source - what can you do with it?
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Apr 3 2012, 04:50 AM)
E=MC^2/SQRT 1-V^2/C^2
This is probably why the physics community is lost in East Bumfuck. The energy of a photon is just E=hf. This other stuff you wrote only works for particles with mass. Photons don't have mass.
This is probably why the physics community is lost in East Bumfuck. The energy of a photon is just E=hf. This other stuff you wrote only works for particles with mass. Photons don't have mass.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Apr 3 2012, 04:50 AM)
The math says so
Pretend you are a photon If V velocity for Light (YOU) is the Speed of light
SQRT 1-V^2/C^2=0 TIME stops If time stops for light. Light is @ rest in TIME. It is moving @ the same speed as time relative to any mass and that is tada C the Constant.
But then you say it moves through space so it is not @ rest.
To which I say it is TIME that is moving not the light the light is just sitting there doing nothing until some MASS runs into it changing its position in TIME or more appropriately changing it's reference frame to the MASS it collided with which is moving away from the MASS @ C.
What happens after that depends on the MASS and its' motion in space Relative to the source (Special Relativity), motion relative to time (General Relativity) and its various wave functions which determine the extent to which it is quantized/packetized(absorbed, emitted and/or reflected
To say that time is moving is just jibberish. Time evolves second by second. You can observe time dilation of other frames that are traveling close to c, or are in a strong gravity field.
Don't think of the photon as a particle with mass. That's why the physics community is stuck.
Pretend you are a photon If V velocity for Light (YOU) is the Speed of light
SQRT 1-V^2/C^2=0 TIME stops If time stops for light. Light is @ rest in TIME. It is moving @ the same speed as time relative to any mass and that is tada C the Constant.
But then you say it moves through space so it is not @ rest.
To which I say it is TIME that is moving not the light the light is just sitting there doing nothing until some MASS runs into it changing its position in TIME or more appropriately changing it's reference frame to the MASS it collided with which is moving away from the MASS @ C.
What happens after that depends on the MASS and its' motion in space Relative to the source (Special Relativity), motion relative to time (General Relativity) and its various wave functions which determine the extent to which it is quantized/packetized(absorbed, emitted and/or reflected
To say that time is moving is just jibberish. Time evolves second by second. You can observe time dilation of other frames that are traveling close to c, or are in a strong gravity field.
Don't think of the photon as a particle with mass. That's why the physics community is stuck.
Jane you ignorant slut!
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 3 2012, 05:24 AM)
This is probably why the physics community is lost in East Bumfuck. The energy of a photon is just E=hf. This other stuff you wrote only works for particles with mass. Photons don't have mass.
Photons cannot change their frame of reference precisely because they do not have mass.
Photons cannot change their frame of reference precisely because they do not have mass.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 3 2012, 05:24 AM)
To say that time is moving is just jibberish. Time evolves second by second. You can observe time dilation of other frames that are traveling close to c, or are in a strong gravity field.
Ask yourself how you can observe this if you are a photon with no rest MASS moving @ C.
Hint: You cannot for you the TIME dilation of which you speak has STOPPED the flow of TIME. Why?
Then ask yourself what can measure these effects. Hint things that are NOT moving @ C through SPACE these are things that have MASS
Ask yourself how you can observe this if you are a photon with no rest MASS moving @ C.
Hint: You cannot for you the TIME dilation of which you speak has STOPPED the flow of TIME. Why?
Then ask yourself what can measure these effects. Hint things that are NOT moving @ C through SPACE these are things that have MASS
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 3 2012, 05:24 AM)
Don't think of the photon as a particle with mass. That's why the physics community is stuck.
Light has no rest MASS so I don't
Light has no rest MASS so I don't
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Apr 3 2012, 01:32 PM)
Jane you ignorant slut!
Who is Jane? Are you arguing with voices in your head?
Who is Jane? Are you arguing with voices in your head?
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Apr 3 2012, 01:32 PM)
Photons cannot change their frame of reference precisely because they do not have mass. Ask yourself how you can observe this if you are a photon with no rest MASS moving @ C. Hint: You cannot for you the TIME dilation of which you speak has STOPPED the flow of TIME. Why? Then ask yourself what can measure these effects. Hint things that are NOT moving @ C through SPACE these are things that have MASS Light has no rest MASS so I don't
In your argument you refer to light or one of it's properties seven times. You also referred to time dilation which occurs because the speed of light is not infinite. Light dictates how we measure time. One second is defined by the international system of units as 9.192631770 x 10 9 cycles of the radiation produced by the transition between two levels of Cesium 133. One meter is the distance traveled by a ray of electromagnetic (EM) energy through a vacuum in 1/299,792,458 (3.33564095 x 10 -9 ) second. There was light before any other particle at the instant of the big bang. Without light, there would be nothingness.
Last I heard, the physics community doesn't have any idea how to induce a local curvature in space time for purposes of propulsion. Since light is so dominant in physics, and gravitational redshift offers a clue as to how gravity interfaces with light, then it makes sense to perform an experiment. We should generate a frequency shift of light, and measure for changes in the gravity field down to 1ppm.
More likely than not, you will all respond with emotional attacks because you don't have any better ideas.
In your argument you refer to light or one of it's properties seven times. You also referred to time dilation which occurs because the speed of light is not infinite. Light dictates how we measure time. One second is defined by the international system of units as 9.192631770 x 10 9 cycles of the radiation produced by the transition between two levels of Cesium 133. One meter is the distance traveled by a ray of electromagnetic (EM) energy through a vacuum in 1/299,792,458 (3.33564095 x 10 -9 ) second. There was light before any other particle at the instant of the big bang. Without light, there would be nothingness.
Last I heard, the physics community doesn't have any idea how to induce a local curvature in space time for purposes of propulsion. Since light is so dominant in physics, and gravitational redshift offers a clue as to how gravity interfaces with light, then it makes sense to perform an experiment. We should generate a frequency shift of light, and measure for changes in the gravity field down to 1ppm.
More likely than not, you will all respond with emotional attacks because you don't have any better ideas.
I see you are not a fan of classic Saturday Night Live.
Jane Curtin and Dan Aykroyd did a skit called Point Counter Point.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k80nW6AOhTs
Ah the good old days.
If you had read the paper I posted on Gravitomagnetic London Moment you might realize the physics community Does have an idea how to induce external local accelerations (change the rate of time relative to a local frame). What you call inducing a local curvature in space-time and it is not yours.
Jane Curtin and Dan Aykroyd did a skit called Point Counter Point.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k80nW6AOhTs
Ah the good old days.
If you had read the paper I posted on Gravitomagnetic London Moment you might realize the physics community Does have an idea how to induce external local accelerations (change the rate of time relative to a local frame). What you call inducing a local curvature in space-time and it is not yours.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Apr 3 2012, 07:35 PM)
I see you are not a fan of classic Saturday Night Live. Jane Curtin and Dan Aykroyd did a skit called Point Counter Point.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k80nW6AOhTs Ah the good old days.
You need to spend more time debating with other people who do not share your thoughts, your memories, your brain.
Gravitomagnetic London Moment and the Graviton Mass
inside a Superconductor
http://arxiv.org/ftp/cond-mat/papers/0602/0602591.pdf
This paper is interesting as well as it briefly Mentions HV discharges on Ceramic Superconductors producing Gravity Waves among other things.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k80nW6AOhTs Ah the good old days.
You need to spend more time debating with other people who do not share your thoughts, your memories, your brain.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Apr 3 2012, 07:35 PM)
If you had read the paper I posted on Gravitomagnetic London Moment you might realize the physics community Does have an idea how to induce external local accelerations (change the rate of time relative to a local frame). What you call inducing a local curvature in space-time and it is not yours.
"...change the rate of time relative to a local frame..."? What do you think frequency shifting does? A frequency shift, from 400 to 800THz, with an unbroken phase, is an attempt to induce a time dilation. Can you please post this paper? I'd like to read more about "changing the rate of time on a local frame".
"...change the rate of time relative to a local frame..."? What do you think frequency shifting does? A frequency shift, from 400 to 800THz, with an unbroken phase, is an attempt to induce a time dilation. Can you please post this paper? I'd like to read more about "changing the rate of time on a local frame".
Gravitomagnetic London Moment and the Graviton Mass
inside a Superconductor
http://arxiv.org/ftp/cond-mat/papers/0602/0602591.pdf
This paper is interesting as well as it briefly Mentions HV discharges on Ceramic Superconductors producing Gravity Waves among other things.
This one is interesting because it has a formula that Accurately Predicts the Transition temperature of a super and if the author knows it or not a way to Accurately test design a superconductor with maximum Virtual Photon Mass (Graviton Mass) @ the highest possible Transition Temperature.
http://lanl.arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1202/1202.2480.pdf
http://lanl.arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1202/1202.2480.pdf
Ed,
I was looking for some mention of the word "time", particularly something about "...change the rate of time relative to a local frame...". Time is mentioned only casually in one article, and not at all in the other two. How very dissapointing. Since gravitational time dilation occurs in the gravity well of a black hole, I thought you were going to say that spinning superconductors somehow attempt to reproduce a gravitational time dilation between two reference frames.
It would be a reasonable strategy to attempt to induce a time dilation between two points in space. If this was done successfully, one might expect to measure a gravity field as well. This is why I had suggested using frequency shift emissions.
I was looking for some mention of the word "time", particularly something about "...change the rate of time relative to a local frame...". Time is mentioned only casually in one article, and not at all in the other two. How very dissapointing. Since gravitational time dilation occurs in the gravity well of a black hole, I thought you were going to say that spinning superconductors somehow attempt to reproduce a gravitational time dilation between two reference frames.
It would be a reasonable strategy to attempt to induce a time dilation between two points in space. If this was done successfully, one might expect to measure a gravity field as well. This is why I had suggested using frequency shift emissions.
Ed,
I see a problem with spinning superconductors as a way to curve space-time. The only measurements that they seem to take, as evidence of gravitational effects, is that the electron and Cooper pair seem to have a different mass. In solid state and semiconductor physics, there are electron whose mass is different from that of the electron in free space. But this is only due to the effect of the crystal that either helps the electron accelerate (makes electron mass smaller) or impairs the acceleration of an electron (makes electron mass larger).
How is that different from what they're doing with spinning magnets?
I see a problem with spinning superconductors as a way to curve space-time. The only measurements that they seem to take, as evidence of gravitational effects, is that the electron and Cooper pair seem to have a different mass. In solid state and semiconductor physics, there are electron whose mass is different from that of the electron in free space. But this is only due to the effect of the crystal that either helps the electron accelerate (makes electron mass smaller) or impairs the acceleration of an electron (makes electron mass larger).
How is that different from what they're doing with spinning magnets?
If you read the first paper and go to the end you can see a clear indication of non acceleration outside the superconductor. This is an indication of as you call it Space time bending. what I call time moving @ different rates in different directions. as measured by the accelerometers.
The problem as I see it is to get the accelerations to line up in 1 direction.
The different extra Mass is Virtual Photons (gravitons if you if you like) and the measurement is not directly measured it is inferred (calculated) by Coulombs LAW using the external accelerations. The accelerometers do not measure Magnetism and are in fact designed to to ignore Magnetism.
Coulombs Law Brings up the 3rd paper which explains the coupling as coulomb coupling via virtual photons between the protons and electrons it has the math and measurements to back it up and nice graphical representations.
As far as the 1 direction thing goes if a pulsed magnetic field can be introduced to make the virtual photons pile up in 1 spot ( increasing their acceleration and virtual Mass by causing them to stop) and a hv pulses between magnetic pulses can be applied to further increase the mass of the virtual photons before they get stopped you just might be able to amplify and cause the photons to collect along 1 vector further slowing time along the 1 vector to a usable level. Then it is just a matter of scale.
The problem as I see it is to get the accelerations to line up in 1 direction.
QUOTE
Ed,
I see a problem with spinning superconductors as a way to curve space-time. The only measurements that they seem to take, as evidence of gravitational effects, is that the electron and Cooper pair seem to have a different mass. In solid state and semiconductor physics, there are electron whose mass is different from that of the electron in free space. But this is only due to the effect of the crystal that either helps the electron accelerate (makes electron mass smaller) or impairs the acceleration of an electron (makes electron mass larger).
How is that different from what they're doing with spinning magnets?
I see a problem with spinning superconductors as a way to curve space-time. The only measurements that they seem to take, as evidence of gravitational effects, is that the electron and Cooper pair seem to have a different mass. In solid state and semiconductor physics, there are electron whose mass is different from that of the electron in free space. But this is only due to the effect of the crystal that either helps the electron accelerate (makes electron mass smaller) or impairs the acceleration of an electron (makes electron mass larger).
How is that different from what they're doing with spinning magnets?
The different extra Mass is Virtual Photons (gravitons if you if you like) and the measurement is not directly measured it is inferred (calculated) by Coulombs LAW using the external accelerations. The accelerometers do not measure Magnetism and are in fact designed to to ignore Magnetism.
Coulombs Law Brings up the 3rd paper which explains the coupling as coulomb coupling via virtual photons between the protons and electrons it has the math and measurements to back it up and nice graphical representations.
As far as the 1 direction thing goes if a pulsed magnetic field can be introduced to make the virtual photons pile up in 1 spot ( increasing their acceleration and virtual Mass by causing them to stop) and a hv pulses between magnetic pulses can be applied to further increase the mass of the virtual photons before they get stopped you just might be able to amplify and cause the photons to collect along 1 vector further slowing time along the 1 vector to a usable level. Then it is just a matter of scale.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Apr 4 2012, 02:57 AM)
If you read the first paper and go to the end you can see a clear indication of non acceleration outside the superconductor. This is an indication of as you call it Space time bending. what I call time moving @ different rates in different directions. as measured by the accelerometers.
The problem as I see it is to get the accelerations to line up in 1 direction.
The different extra Mass is Virtual Photons (gravitons if you if you like) and the measurement is not directly measured it is inferred (calculated) by Coulombs LAW using the external accelerations. The accelerometers do not measure Magnetism and are in fact designed to to ignore Magnetism.
Coulombs Law Brings up the 3rd paper which explains the coupling as coulomb coupling via virtual photons between the protons and electrons it has the math and measurements to back it up and nice graphical representations.
As far as the 1 direction thing goes if a pulsed magnetic field can be introduced to make the virtual photons pile up in 1 spot ( increasing their acceleration and virtual Mass by causing them to stop) and a hv pulses between magnetic pulses can be applied to further increase the mass of the virtual photons before they get stopped you just might be able to amplify and cause the photons to collect along 1 vector further slowing time along the 1 vector to a usable level. Then it is just a matter of scale.
Mass of virtual particles? Is that inertial mass or gravitational mass? Inertial mass is defined as resistance to a change in speed. Why do photons need to have a mass in this superconductivity experiment?
The problem as I see it is to get the accelerations to line up in 1 direction.
The different extra Mass is Virtual Photons (gravitons if you if you like) and the measurement is not directly measured it is inferred (calculated) by Coulombs LAW using the external accelerations. The accelerometers do not measure Magnetism and are in fact designed to to ignore Magnetism.
Coulombs Law Brings up the 3rd paper which explains the coupling as coulomb coupling via virtual photons between the protons and electrons it has the math and measurements to back it up and nice graphical representations.
As far as the 1 direction thing goes if a pulsed magnetic field can be introduced to make the virtual photons pile up in 1 spot ( increasing their acceleration and virtual Mass by causing them to stop) and a hv pulses between magnetic pulses can be applied to further increase the mass of the virtual photons before they get stopped you just might be able to amplify and cause the photons to collect along 1 vector further slowing time along the 1 vector to a usable level. Then it is just a matter of scale.
Mass of virtual particles? Is that inertial mass or gravitational mass? Inertial mass is defined as resistance to a change in speed. Why do photons need to have a mass in this superconductivity experiment?
People, don't be so hard on Mazulu.
When I read of Mazulu's wonderful blueshift technology I feel like dancing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQ2nVL1-XFk
When I read of Mazulu's wonderful blueshift technology I feel like dancing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQ2nVL1-XFk
Laser light falls into a black hole gravity well; it blueshifts. Could it work in reverse? For a frequency f(t) = [df/dt]t + f_0, where df/dt is very very large, 400THz to 800THz inside of 100ms, can we get back a gravity field? If there are no phase discontinuities, then I think we should. If this idea works, then we could build a gravity drive.
What about corkscrew forces? Corkscrew forces are a kind of gravity force that can screw or unscrew screws. How could we create those? Let's look at the polarization of waves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarization_(waves)
Circular polarized light that falls into a gravity well will not only blueshift, but it's polarization frequency will accelerate as well. If we could synthesize an increase in the frequency of circular polarized light, we might be able to generate corkscrew forces. They wouldn't be useful for hyperdrives or gravity drives, but they could have other uses. You might find novelty frequency shift devices that perform like screwdrivers.
The physics community might be able to build one in about 300 years.
What about corkscrew forces? Corkscrew forces are a kind of gravity force that can screw or unscrew screws. How could we create those? Let's look at the polarization of waves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarization_(waves)
Circular polarized light that falls into a gravity well will not only blueshift, but it's polarization frequency will accelerate as well. If we could synthesize an increase in the frequency of circular polarized light, we might be able to generate corkscrew forces. They wouldn't be useful for hyperdrives or gravity drives, but they could have other uses. You might find novelty frequency shift devices that perform like screwdrivers.
The physics community might be able to build one in about 300 years.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 11 2012, 05:32 AM)
The physics community might be able to build one in about 300 years.
In a much similar way;- you may develop a brain in about 300 trillion geologic periods.
In a much similar way;- you may develop a brain in about 300 trillion geologic periods.
QUOTE (Lady Elizabeth+Apr 11 2012, 06:43 AM)
In a much similar way;- you may develop a brain in about 300 trillion geologic periods.
I needed a good laugh!
I needed a good laugh!
We're getting closer to a driving term that will be added to the Einstein equations. This driving term will include all of the things that you can do with light: frequency shift, polarization shift, ... that will induce a localized gravity field (space-time curvature).
We have the stress energy tensor and the cosmological constant term. To those, we will add a frequency shift-warp drive term.
We have the stress energy tensor and the cosmological constant term. To those, we will add a frequency shift-warp drive term.
I have a test of special relativity that should determine if warp travel is possible and weather or not the sperelativistic effects of the twin paradox can be avoided.
Don't know if it has been done maybe someone else knows.
It's really quite simple.
1. Put an accurate clock on a satellite.
2. Put it on a trajectory that will make it fall in to the Sun.
3. Measure clock rate throughout the trajectory.
My assumption is that the clock in the probe should not be appreciably slower @ the beginning of the free fall trajectory than it is @ the end of the trajectory despite the gravitational induced speed increase because it will be in a moving rest frame shielded from the effects of special relativity by the suns' gravitational pull similar to the way a warp drive would work.
I haven't done the math on this I just wanted to write it down while it was fresh in the brain.
Don't know if it has been done maybe someone else knows.
It's really quite simple.
1. Put an accurate clock on a satellite.
2. Put it on a trajectory that will make it fall in to the Sun.
3. Measure clock rate throughout the trajectory.
My assumption is that the clock in the probe should not be appreciably slower @ the beginning of the free fall trajectory than it is @ the end of the trajectory despite the gravitational induced speed increase because it will be in a moving rest frame shielded from the effects of special relativity by the suns' gravitational pull similar to the way a warp drive would work.
I haven't done the math on this I just wanted to write it down while it was fresh in the brain.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Apr 11 2012, 10:53 AM)
I have a test of special relativity that should determine if warp travel is possible and weather or not the sperelativistic effects of the twin paradox can be avoided.
Don't know if it has been done maybe someone else knows.
It's really quite simple.
1. Put an accurate clock on a satellite.
2. Put it on a trajectory that will make it fall in to the Sun.
3. Measure clock rate throughout the trajectory.
My assumption is that the clock in the probe should not be appreciably slower @ the beginning of the free fall trajectory than it is @ the end of the trajectory despite the gravitational induced speed increase because it will be in a moving rest frame shielded from the effects of special relativity by the suns' gravitational pull similar to the way a warp drive would work.
I haven't done the math on this I just wanted to write it down while it was fresh in the brain.
Why burn up a perfectly god satellite when you can use Keppler's law to achieve a very high velocity for several seconds using the right orbit. You can whip that satellite around the sun.
Don't know if it has been done maybe someone else knows.
It's really quite simple.
1. Put an accurate clock on a satellite.
2. Put it on a trajectory that will make it fall in to the Sun.
3. Measure clock rate throughout the trajectory.
My assumption is that the clock in the probe should not be appreciably slower @ the beginning of the free fall trajectory than it is @ the end of the trajectory despite the gravitational induced speed increase because it will be in a moving rest frame shielded from the effects of special relativity by the suns' gravitational pull similar to the way a warp drive would work.
I haven't done the math on this I just wanted to write it down while it was fresh in the brain.
Why burn up a perfectly god satellite when you can use Keppler's law to achieve a very high velocity for several seconds using the right orbit. You can whip that satellite around the sun.
Sure you could I just wanted to get the maximum achievable speed relative to the earth while maintaining the simplest non internally accelerating rest frame. It probably wouldn't last very far beyond the orbit of mercury anyway.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Apr 11 2012, 10:53 AM)
I have a test of special relativity that should determine if warp travel is possible and weather or not the sperelativistic effects of the twin paradox can be avoided.
Don't know if it has been done maybe someone else knows.
It's really quite simple.
1. Put an accurate clock on a satellite.
2. Put it on a trajectory that will make it fall in to the Sun.
3. Measure clock rate throughout the trajectory.
My assumption is that the clock in the probe should not be appreciably slower @ the beginning of the free fall trajectory than it is @ the end of the trajectory despite the gravitational induced speed increase because it will be in a moving rest frame shielded from the effects of special relativity by the suns' gravitational pull similar to the way a warp drive would work.
I haven't done the math on this I just wanted to write it down while it was fresh in the brain.
Muons coming into the atmosphere are a good way to prove that time dilation occurs. Muons are last about 2.2 seconds. But they last longer when they travel at relativistic speeds. Why do you need a clock and a satellite if you have a muon with a known lifetime.
OK, so how does this prove that warp travel is possible?
Don't know if it has been done maybe someone else knows.
It's really quite simple.
1. Put an accurate clock on a satellite.
2. Put it on a trajectory that will make it fall in to the Sun.
3. Measure clock rate throughout the trajectory.
My assumption is that the clock in the probe should not be appreciably slower @ the beginning of the free fall trajectory than it is @ the end of the trajectory despite the gravitational induced speed increase because it will be in a moving rest frame shielded from the effects of special relativity by the suns' gravitational pull similar to the way a warp drive would work.
I haven't done the math on this I just wanted to write it down while it was fresh in the brain.
Muons coming into the atmosphere are a good way to prove that time dilation occurs. Muons are last about 2.2 seconds. But they last longer when they travel at relativistic speeds. Why do you need a clock and a satellite if you have a muon with a known lifetime.
OK, so how does this prove that warp travel is possible?
You are missing the point.
The point would be to prove that speed increase without acceleration time dilation is possible. Otherwise what would be the point of warp drive?
That is why you would want the satellite to free fall into the sun in a retrograde orbit.
The point would be to prove that speed increase without acceleration time dilation is possible. Otherwise what would be the point of warp drive?
That is why you would want the satellite to free fall into the sun in a retrograde orbit.
Between any two reference frames, inertial or non-inertial, there exists time dilation. Warp drive physics is possible when we recognize that the time dilation between to reference frames is really a time dilation field. Knowing this, we can rewrite the first sentence to say:
Between any two reference frames, inertial or not, there exists a time dilation field.
In order for a gravity field generator or a warp drive engine to work, it must generate a time dilation field. One way to generate a time dilation field is to emit a frequency shift, rapidly and repeatedly. The equation that describes the frequency shift is: Frequency f(t) = [df/dt]t + f_0. I would suggest that f_0 = 400THz, and df/dt = [800-400THz]/100ms. An artificial frequency shift will induce a time dilation field.
Now you can build a warp drive.
Between any two reference frames, inertial or not, there exists a time dilation field.
In order for a gravity field generator or a warp drive engine to work, it must generate a time dilation field. One way to generate a time dilation field is to emit a frequency shift, rapidly and repeatedly. The equation that describes the frequency shift is: Frequency f(t) = [df/dt]t + f_0. I would suggest that f_0 = 400THz, and df/dt = [800-400THz]/100ms. An artificial frequency shift will induce a time dilation field.
Now you can build a warp drive.
So now the flashing lights will cause time dilation. The usual total nonsense.
QUOTE (AlexG+Apr 12 2012, 03:44 AM)
So now the flashing lights will cause time dilation. The usual total nonsense.
Not flashing lights, frequency shifted light. The frequency shift induces a time dilation field. The time dilation field acts like a gravity field. And then, viola! You can build hover crafts, fusion power plants, resillient surface to space vehicles, and warp drives for a subluminal mission to Mars.
Not flashing lights, frequency shifted light. The frequency shift induces a time dilation field. The time dilation field acts like a gravity field. And then, viola! You can build hover crafts, fusion power plants, resillient surface to space vehicles, and warp drives for a subluminal mission to Mars.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Apr 12 2012, 03:35 AM)
You are missing the point.
The point would be to prove that speed increase without acceleration time dilation is possible. Otherwise what would be the point of warp drive?
That is why you would want the satellite to free fall into the sun in a retrograde orbit.
You want your spaceship to "fall" along the geodesic that your warp engines induced. In doing so, your spaceship accelerates wrt planets, stars, objects outside the spaceship, but your astronauts experience weightlessness.
The point would be to prove that speed increase without acceleration time dilation is possible. Otherwise what would be the point of warp drive?
That is why you would want the satellite to free fall into the sun in a retrograde orbit.
You want your spaceship to "fall" along the geodesic that your warp engines induced. In doing so, your spaceship accelerates wrt planets, stars, objects outside the spaceship, but your astronauts experience weightlessness.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 12 2012, 05:25 AM)
Not flashing lights, frequency shifted light. The frequency shift induces a time dilation field.
Maz,
I've an even better idea;-
I call it 'Clock Drive' .... instead of all those LED arrays, just have an open face chronometer (rather fancy a SCHNEIDER Chalet House with Beer drinker) 'cuckoo' job.
Here's how it works;-
Install device aboard star-ship, and physically impede minute hand movement utilizing ones index finger. This slowing down of time creates a space warp in the direction clock face is pointing.
ps;- In addition, increasing pressure to clock hand (such that it sweeps retrograde), naturally induces time warp.
Maz,
I've an even better idea;-
I call it 'Clock Drive' .... instead of all those LED arrays, just have an open face chronometer (rather fancy a SCHNEIDER Chalet House with Beer drinker) 'cuckoo' job.
Here's how it works;-
Install device aboard star-ship, and physically impede minute hand movement utilizing ones index finger. This slowing down of time creates a space warp in the direction clock face is pointing.
ps;- In addition, increasing pressure to clock hand (such that it sweeps retrograde), naturally induces time warp.
QUOTE (Lady Elizabeth+Apr 12 2012, 05:58 AM)
Maz,
I've an even better idea;-
I call it 'Clock Drive' .... instead of all those LED arrays, just have an open face chronometer (rather fancy a SCHNEIDER Chalet House with Beer drinker) 'cuckoo' job.
Here's how it works;-
Install device aboard star-ship, and physically impede minute hand movement utilizing ones index finger. This slowing down of time creates a space warp in the direction clock face is pointing.
ps;- In addition, increasing pressure to clock hand (such that it sweeps retrograde), naturally induces time warp.
You are such a character.
I wish I could articulate more clearly to you why frequency shift will induce gravity fields. It helps if you know what the space-time continuum is made of and what the quantum vacuum is made of; space-time and the quantum vacuum are two facets of the same thing.
At the moment of the big bang, everything was quantum entangled with everything else. This total quantum entanglement survives today, it is called the space-time continuum. If you look closely enough, it is the quantum vacuum. That is all you have to work with; lots of matter, lots of energy, and this quantum entanglement mesh.
Gravity causes gravitational time dilation which causes gravitational redshift; in principle there should be a wave function that includes time dilation and all possible frequency shifts that can occur. A synthesized frequency shift should be able reproduce at least part of this wave-function. You should be able to get back at least some of the gravity by reproducing the wave-function.
There is another consideration. The Einstein equations may be an equilibrium state for the space-time continuum/quantum vacuum. Wide range frequency shifts in very short time periods may be enough to disturb the local space-time away from equilibrium.
I've an even better idea;-
I call it 'Clock Drive' .... instead of all those LED arrays, just have an open face chronometer (rather fancy a SCHNEIDER Chalet House with Beer drinker) 'cuckoo' job.
Here's how it works;-
Install device aboard star-ship, and physically impede minute hand movement utilizing ones index finger. This slowing down of time creates a space warp in the direction clock face is pointing.
ps;- In addition, increasing pressure to clock hand (such that it sweeps retrograde), naturally induces time warp.
You are such a character.
I wish I could articulate more clearly to you why frequency shift will induce gravity fields. It helps if you know what the space-time continuum is made of and what the quantum vacuum is made of; space-time and the quantum vacuum are two facets of the same thing.
At the moment of the big bang, everything was quantum entangled with everything else. This total quantum entanglement survives today, it is called the space-time continuum. If you look closely enough, it is the quantum vacuum. That is all you have to work with; lots of matter, lots of energy, and this quantum entanglement mesh.
Gravity causes gravitational time dilation which causes gravitational redshift; in principle there should be a wave function that includes time dilation and all possible frequency shifts that can occur. A synthesized frequency shift should be able reproduce at least part of this wave-function. You should be able to get back at least some of the gravity by reproducing the wave-function.
There is another consideration. The Einstein equations may be an equilibrium state for the space-time continuum/quantum vacuum. Wide range frequency shifts in very short time periods may be enough to disturb the local space-time away from equilibrium.
If someone wanted to perform the frequency shift experiment to test whether or not it can produce a gravity field, this is what I would suggest. Build the circuit on a gallium arsenide wafer. By varying the ratio of gallium_x to aluminum_1-x, you can vary the bandgap and obtain a range of frequencies. Fill up the wafer die with light emitting diodes with 16 different frequencies. Design a circuit that will step through each frequency "step", from lowest frequency to highest frequency. You won't be able to match up the phase between frequency steps, but you can still get proof of concept. The 16 different frequency LED's should be evenly dispersed throughout the die. When the GaAs wafer is completed, wire a clock and a voltage supply to each die on the wafer. The wafer is fragile, so I recommend dipping the wafer in polyacrylic glass. The faster you step through all 16 frequencies, the better. Use the fastest clock available. You are trying to simulate a linear frequency shift of
f(t) = [df/dt]t+f_0. Do this and you have a gravity field generator.
There are jewelery scales that can read down to the micro gram. Place a 100g weight on the scale. Direct the gravity field generator at the scale. The goal is to get the generator to cause a deviation in the weight of the 100g weight.
f(t) = [df/dt]t+f_0. Do this and you have a gravity field generator.
There are jewelery scales that can read down to the micro gram. Place a 100g weight on the scale. Direct the gravity field generator at the scale. The goal is to get the generator to cause a deviation in the weight of the 100g weight.
Such stupid nonsense.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 12 2012, 06:07 AM)
There are jewelery scales that can read down to the micro gram. Place a 100g weight on the scale. Direct the gravity field generator at the scale. The goal is to get the generator to cause a deviation in the weight of the 100g weight.
You should get two ring-shaped magnets; one bigger in size so you can place one inside the other. Spin the two rings in opposite directions. The magnetic shear should cause a disturbance in the force, which will result in the opening of a wormhole. When you pray to the wormhole, the Octopus King will grant you 3 wishes.
You should get two ring-shaped magnets; one bigger in size so you can place one inside the other. Spin the two rings in opposite directions. The magnetic shear should cause a disturbance in the force, which will result in the opening of a wormhole. When you pray to the wormhole, the Octopus King will grant you 3 wishes.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Apr 12 2012, 02:53 PM)
You should get two ring-shaped magnets; one bigger in size so you can place one inside the other. Spin the two rings in opposite directions. The magnetic shear should cause a disturbance in the force, which will result in the opening of a wormhole. When you pray to the wormhole, the Octopus King will grant you 3 wishes.
FBM
..... comprehensively hate competition of the piss-take variety.
Ok, I lose this time.
FBM
..... comprehensively hate competition of the piss-take variety.Ok, I lose this time.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Apr 12 2012, 02:53 PM)
You should get two ring-shaped magnets; one bigger in size so you can place one inside the other. Spin the two rings in opposite directions. The magnetic shear should cause a disturbance in the force, which will result in the opening of a wormhole. When you pray to the wormhole, the Octopus King will grant you 3 wishes.
QUOTE (AlexG+)
Such stupid nonsense.
Photons blue shift when they fall into a black hole. In a moment of inspiration, I thought: why can't we run this process in reverse? Why can't we synthesize a frequency shift of light, and get back gravity? We can synthesize sinusoidal voltages with a DAC, and then radiate it out of an antenna. Sure it would fly in the face of centuries of established mathematical physics; but since when do stuffy old men tell nature what it can and cannot do? Besides, nobody in the physics community has any better ideas. Physicists only know how to brainwash the public into believing in time travel, 20 dimensional super-strings and other kinds of bullshit. Physicists are experts at brainwashing the public into believing that superluminal travel is impossible.
Creativity and imagination are an evolutionary advantage; it will be the physics community that drives the human race to extinction.
Photons blue shift when they fall into a black hole. In a moment of inspiration, I thought: why can't we run this process in reverse? Why can't we synthesize a frequency shift of light, and get back gravity? We can synthesize sinusoidal voltages with a DAC, and then radiate it out of an antenna. Sure it would fly in the face of centuries of established mathematical physics; but since when do stuffy old men tell nature what it can and cannot do? Besides, nobody in the physics community has any better ideas. Physicists only know how to brainwash the public into believing in time travel, 20 dimensional super-strings and other kinds of bullshit. Physicists are experts at brainwashing the public into believing that superluminal travel is impossible.
Creativity and imagination are an evolutionary advantage; it will be the physics community that drives the human race to extinction.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 12 2012, 02:26 PM)
Photons blue shift when they fall into a black hole.
Akin to a ball gaining energy as it rolls down a hill.
Can you throw a ball in the air and create a hill?
Can you throw a ball in the air and create a hill?
We can synthesize sinusoidal voltages with a DAC, and then radiate it out of an antenna. Sure it would fly in the face of centuries of established mathematical physics; but since when do stuffy old men tell nature what it can and cannot do?
They spent their lives discovering what nature can and can't do, and provided you with the fruits of their efforts.
This perception is caused by the fact that you don't follow or study physics.
This perception is caused by the fact that you don't follow or study physics.
Physicists only know how to brainwash the public into believing in time travel, 20 dimensional super-strings and other kinds of bullshit.
See above.
See above again.
See above again.
Creativity and imagination are an evolutionary advantage; it will be the physics community that drives the human race to extinction.
Your finger-painting approach to science can in no way be construed as "creative" or "imaginative."
Akin to a ball gaining energy as it rolls down a hill.
QUOTE
In a moment of inspiration, I thought: why can't we run this process in reverse? Why can't we synthesize a frequency shift of light, and get back gravity?
Can you throw a ball in the air and create a hill?
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| In a moment of inspiration, I thought: why can't we run this process in reverse? Why can't we synthesize a frequency shift of light, and get back gravity? |
Can you throw a ball in the air and create a hill?
We can synthesize sinusoidal voltages with a DAC, and then radiate it out of an antenna. Sure it would fly in the face of centuries of established mathematical physics; but since when do stuffy old men tell nature what it can and cannot do?
They spent their lives discovering what nature can and can't do, and provided you with the fruits of their efforts.
QUOTE
Besides, nobody in the physics community has any better ideas.
This perception is caused by the fact that you don't follow or study physics.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Besides, nobody in the physics community has any better ideas. |
This perception is caused by the fact that you don't follow or study physics.
Physicists only know how to brainwash the public into believing in time travel, 20 dimensional super-strings and other kinds of bullshit.
See above.
QUOTE
Physicists are experts at brainwashing the public into believing that superluminal travel is impossible.
See above again.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Physicists are experts at brainwashing the public into believing that superluminal travel is impossible. |
See above again.
Creativity and imagination are an evolutionary advantage; it will be the physics community that drives the human race to extinction.
Your finger-painting approach to science can in no way be construed as "creative" or "imaginative."
Are you interested in warp drive or gravity field generator technology? What conclusion can I draw? Surely you must realize that the Einstein equations, as they are written now, do not allow such technology; there must be a missing term. So what does a reasonable person do if they are missing something that they want? They look for it.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Apr 12 2012, 06:40 PM)
Akin to a ball gaining energy as it rolls down a hill. Can you throw a ball in the air and create a hill?
Do you think that hills make things fall?
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Apr 12 2012, 06:40 PM)
They spent their lives discovering what nature can and can't do, and provided you with the fruits of their efforts.
It is misguided to believe that you completely understand nature. Obviously, you do not.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Apr 12 2012, 06:40 PM)
This perception is caused by the fact that you don't follow or study physics.
Are you referring to spinning superconductors?
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Apr 12 2012, 06:40 PM)
Your finger-painting approach to science can in no way be construed as "creative" or "imaginative."
And your failure to unify QM & GR cannot be construed as complete understanding. If you think your understanding of nature is complete, then you are deluded.
And your failure to unify QM & GR cannot be construed as complete understanding. If you think your understanding of nature is complete, then you are deluded.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 12 2012, 04:26 PM)
Are you interested in warp drive or gravity field generator technology? What conclusion can I draw? Surely you must realize that the Einstein equations, as they are written now, do not allow such technology; there must be a missing term. So what does a reasonable person do if they are missing something that they want? They look for it.
The fact that you want these things to exist does not make Einstein wrong.
It's an analogy. When you throw things into the air, do they release "gravity?"
It's an analogy. When you throw things into the air, do they release "gravity?"
It is misguided to believe that you completely understand nature. Obviously, you do not.
I didn't say that I do, only that scientists know more about this than anyone else, especially you.
The fact that you think you've accomplished anything whatsoever is hilarious and unfortunate.
The fact that you want these things to exist does not make Einstein wrong.
QUOTE
Do you think that hills make things fall?
It's an analogy. When you throw things into the air, do they release "gravity?"
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Do you think that hills make things fall? |
It's an analogy. When you throw things into the air, do they release "gravity?"
It is misguided to believe that you completely understand nature. Obviously, you do not.
I didn't say that I do, only that scientists know more about this than anyone else, especially you.
QUOTE
And your failure to unify QM & GR cannot be construed as complete understanding. If you think your understanding of nature is complete, then you are deluded.
The fact that you think you've accomplished anything whatsoever is hilarious and unfortunate.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Apr 12 2012, 08:40 PM)
The fact that you want these things to exist does not make Einstein wrong.
It's an analogy. When you throw things into the air, do they release "gravity?"
I didn't say that I do, only that scientists know more about this than anyone else, especially you.
The fact that you think you've accomplished anything whatsoever is hilarious and unfortunate.
A warp drive is only possible if there exists another term in the Einstein equations. If there is a missing term, that wouldn't make Einstein wrong.
You lost me on how throwing things in the air creates gravity. You lost me on the rest your conversation.
It's an analogy. When you throw things into the air, do they release "gravity?"
I didn't say that I do, only that scientists know more about this than anyone else, especially you.
The fact that you think you've accomplished anything whatsoever is hilarious and unfortunate.
A warp drive is only possible if there exists another term in the Einstein equations. If there is a missing term, that wouldn't make Einstein wrong.
You lost me on how throwing things in the air creates gravity. You lost me on the rest your conversation.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 13 2012, 01:47 AM)
You lost me on how throwing things in the air creates gravity. You lost me on the rest your conversation.
You merely infuriate with crass assumptions plucked from a diarrheic diaper.
Go shake ya rattle elsewhere, we're really a tad naused-up with your nonsense now.
You merely infuriate with crass assumptions plucked from a diarrheic diaper.
Go shake ya rattle elsewhere, we're really a tad naused-up with your nonsense now.
QUOTE (Lady Elizabeth+Apr 13 2012, 02:26 AM)
You merely infuriate with crass assumptions plucked from a diarrheic diaper.
Go shake ya rattle elsewhere, we're really a tad naused-up with your nonsense now.
Are you mad at me? Did I commit a faux paux? Is it scientific heresy to even suggest that the Einstein equations are missing a term? I'm not criticizing Einstein.
Is it blasphemy to ask why the physics community is utterly disinterested in discovering warp drive technology? Is it an offense to ask the physics community to go look for it? Gravity field generators would solve a lot of our economic and energy problems.
Or is it that you can't extrapolate to new physics?
Go shake ya rattle elsewhere, we're really a tad naused-up with your nonsense now.
Are you mad at me?
Did I commit a faux paux? Is it scientific heresy to even suggest that the Einstein equations are missing a term? I'm not criticizing Einstein. Is it blasphemy to ask why the physics community is utterly disinterested in discovering warp drive technology? Is it an offense to ask the physics community to go look for it? Gravity field generators would solve a lot of our economic and energy problems.
Or is it that you can't extrapolate to new physics?
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 12 2012, 09:47 PM)
You lost me on how throwing things in the air creates gravity.
Really? You didn't see the obvious mockery?
Shifting the frequency of a photon isn't going to create gravity particles any more than throwing a ball in the air.
A ball falls to the Earth and gains energy in the form of momentum.
A photon falls into a black hole and gains energy in the form of frequency.
It's the same thing.
Really? You didn't see the obvious mockery?
Shifting the frequency of a photon isn't going to create gravity particles any more than throwing a ball in the air.
A ball falls to the Earth and gains energy in the form of momentum.
A photon falls into a black hole and gains energy in the form of frequency.
It's the same thing.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 12 2012, 10:32 PM)
Are you mad at me? Did I commit a faux paux? Is it scientific heresy to even suggest that the Einstein equations are missing a term? I'm not criticizing Einstein.
Is it blasphemy to ask why the physics community is utterly disinterested in discovering warp drive technology? Is it an offense to ask the physics community to go look for it? Gravity field generators would solve a lot of our economic and energy problems.
Or is it that you can't extrapolate to new physics?
Mentally incontinent.
Did I commit a faux paux? Is it scientific heresy to even suggest that the Einstein equations are missing a term? I'm not criticizing Einstein. Is it blasphemy to ask why the physics community is utterly disinterested in discovering warp drive technology? Is it an offense to ask the physics community to go look for it? Gravity field generators would solve a lot of our economic and energy problems.
Or is it that you can't extrapolate to new physics?
Mentally incontinent.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Apr 13 2012, 04:04 AM)
Really? You didn't see the obvious mockery? Shifting the frequency of a photon isn't going to create gravity particles any more than throwing a ball in the air.
A ball falls to the Earth and gains energy in the form of momentum.
A photon falls into a black hole and gains energy in the form of frequency.
It's the same thing.
There are a few subtleties that you haven't considered. First, your understanding of gravity is based upon a mathematical model; but you don't have a conceptual understanding of what the space-time continuum really is, physically. If you knew that it was made out of quantum entanglements, you would realize that a photon falling into a black hole is just a particular kind of wave-function. When you generate a frequency shift, you reproduce that same wave-function. That wave-function, in either case, is entangled with the space-time continuum of the universe. The wave-function that you generated is already entangled with space-time; the result is a curvature in space-time or a gravity field.
A ball falls to the Earth and gains energy in the form of momentum.
A photon falls into a black hole and gains energy in the form of frequency.
It's the same thing.
There are a few subtleties that you haven't considered. First, your understanding of gravity is based upon a mathematical model; but you don't have a conceptual understanding of what the space-time continuum really is, physically. If you knew that it was made out of quantum entanglements, you would realize that a photon falling into a black hole is just a particular kind of wave-function. When you generate a frequency shift, you reproduce that same wave-function. That wave-function, in either case, is entangled with the space-time continuum of the universe. The wave-function that you generated is already entangled with space-time; the result is a curvature in space-time or a gravity field.
Word salad that's sat on the counter for three days, turning into slop. It's begun to melt into a shitty brown slime, and has a distinctive, unpleasant aroma.
QUOTE (AlexG+Apr 13 2012, 06:12 AM)
Word salad that's sat on the counter for three days, turning into slop. It's begun to melt into a shitty brown slime, and has a distinctive, unpleasant aroma.
@AlexG - This is supposed to be a science forum not a cooking show!
@AlexG - This is supposed to be a science forum not a cooking show!
Nope! not word salad. It's a simplification (God knows you need it). What is the space-time continuum made of? I dunno. Space itself is filled with the quantum vacuum. Let's say that space-time is made out of quantum wave-functions. But wave-functions are a mathematical device, they're not real. Why not? Let's say that they're quasi-real. Do that, and here is what you get. The space-time continuum is made of quasi-real wave-functions of the form e^i pi = cos pi + i sin pi. When a photon goes by, it's a wave traveling at the speed of light. When lots of photons go by, you get a Classical Poynting vector.
If the space-time continuum is made of wave-functions, then you can use QM properties to explain GR questions, you can use GR properties to explain QM properties.
Oh! And one more thing. This idea is testable. Gravity frequency shifts light, which is a wave function that couples light to gravity. If you reproduce that wave-function by frequency shifting light, you get back the gravity field that the light is coupled to.
Do this, and suddenly everything is made out of wave-functions and energy. Even particles of matter are just clusters of wave-functions with energy trapped inside: E = mc^2. In particle-anti-particle annihilation, the particle wave-function is exactly canceled by the anti-particle, and energy is released as gamma rays.
If you don't do it this way, then you won't know how to come up with a warp drive theory or a warp drive technology.
If the space-time continuum is made of wave-functions, then you can use QM properties to explain GR questions, you can use GR properties to explain QM properties.
Oh! And one more thing. This idea is testable. Gravity frequency shifts light, which is a wave function that couples light to gravity. If you reproduce that wave-function by frequency shifting light, you get back the gravity field that the light is coupled to.
Do this, and suddenly everything is made out of wave-functions and energy. Even particles of matter are just clusters of wave-functions with energy trapped inside: E = mc^2. In particle-anti-particle annihilation, the particle wave-function is exactly canceled by the anti-particle, and energy is released as gamma rays.
If you don't do it this way, then you won't know how to come up with a warp drive theory or a warp drive technology.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Apr 13 2012, 04:04 AM)
Really? You didn't see the obvious mockery?
Shifting the frequency of a photon isn't going to create gravity particles any more than throwing a ball in the air.
A ball falls to the Earth and gains energy in the form of momentum.
A photon falls into a black hole and gains energy in the form of frequency.
It's the same thing.
Yup, this guy's seriously pathetic ...... not even aware of the concept of ridicule, even when delivered @ mindshatteringly mammoth magnitudes.
Are we dealing with a syndromic imbecile of unicellular intellect?
I guess we could all be guilty of abusing the mentally retarded.
Shifting the frequency of a photon isn't going to create gravity particles any more than throwing a ball in the air.
A ball falls to the Earth and gains energy in the form of momentum.
A photon falls into a black hole and gains energy in the form of frequency.
It's the same thing.
Yup, this guy's seriously pathetic ...... not even aware of the concept of ridicule, even when delivered @ mindshatteringly mammoth magnitudes.
Are we dealing with a syndromic imbecile of unicellular intellect?
I guess we could all be guilty of abusing the mentally retarded.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 13 2012, 08:07 AM)
Nope! not word salad. It's a simplification (God knows you need it). What is the space-time continuum made of? I dunno. Space itself is filled with the quantum vacuum. Let's say that space-time is made out of quantum wave-functions. But wave-functions are a mathematical device, they're not real. Why not? Let's say that they're quasi-real. Do that, and here is what you get. The space-time continuum is made of quasi-real wave-functions of the form e^i pi = cos pi + i sin pi. When a photon goes by, it's a wave traveling at the speed of light. When lots of photons go by, you get a Classical Poynting vector.
If the space-time continuum is made of wave-functions, then you can use QM properties to explain GR questions, you can use GR properties to explain QM properties.
Oh! And one more thing. This idea is testable. Gravity frequency shifts light, which is a wave function that couples light to gravity. If you reproduce that wave-function by frequency shifting light, you get back the gravity field that the light is coupled to.
Do this, and suddenly everything is made out of wave-functions and energy. Even particles of matter are just clusters of wave-functions with energy trapped inside: E = mc^2. In particle-anti-particle annihilation, the particle wave-function is exactly canceled by the anti-particle, and energy is released as gamma rays.
If you don't do it this way, then you won't know how to come up with a warp drive theory or a warp drive technology.
Delusional. The thing that saves you from complete imbecility is mental illness.
If the space-time continuum is made of wave-functions, then you can use QM properties to explain GR questions, you can use GR properties to explain QM properties.
Oh! And one more thing. This idea is testable. Gravity frequency shifts light, which is a wave function that couples light to gravity. If you reproduce that wave-function by frequency shifting light, you get back the gravity field that the light is coupled to.
Do this, and suddenly everything is made out of wave-functions and energy. Even particles of matter are just clusters of wave-functions with energy trapped inside: E = mc^2. In particle-anti-particle annihilation, the particle wave-function is exactly canceled by the anti-particle, and energy is released as gamma rays.
If you don't do it this way, then you won't know how to come up with a warp drive theory or a warp drive technology.
Delusional. The thing that saves you from complete imbecility is mental illness.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 13 2012, 01:35 AM)
First, your understanding of gravity is based upon a mathematical model; but you don't have a conceptual understanding of what the space-time continuum really is, physically. If you knew that it was made out of quantum entanglements, you would realize that a photon falling into a black hole is just a particular kind of wave-function.
When you generate a frequency shift, you reproduce that same wave-function. That wave-function, in either case, is entangled with the space-time continuum of the universe. The wave-function that you generated is already entangled with space-time; the result is a curvature in space-time or a gravity field.
For your level of understanding, I would leave the string theory out of this one.
You sound like badly-written technobabble from Star Trek.
When you generate a frequency shift, you reproduce that same wave-function. That wave-function, in either case, is entangled with the space-time continuum of the universe. The wave-function that you generated is already entangled with space-time; the result is a curvature in space-time or a gravity field.
For your level of understanding, I would leave the string theory out of this one.
You sound like badly-written technobabble from Star Trek.
Mazulu, how come Gamma rays don't warp space time?
After all they are the most 'Frequency Shifted' form of photons and yet no warping.
Is that just because gamma rays are ignorant and don't know that they should be warping space time?
I know they did not get the memo. Maybe you should send them one.
After all they are the most 'Frequency Shifted' form of photons and yet no warping.
Is that just because gamma rays are ignorant and don't know that they should be warping space time?
I know they did not get the memo. Maybe you should send them one.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Apr 13 2012, 03:22 PM)
Mazulu, how come Gamma rays don't warp space time? After all they are the most 'Frequency Shifted' form of photons and yet no warping.
Ed, you are one if the few people on this website who has enough intelligence to ask a good question.
Gamma rays are just high energy photons with a negligible ability to warp space. But frequency shift is different. Frequency shift looks like this. Look at the picture. The shorter you can make this frequency shift, the more localized the effect will be. A frequency shift of
A frequency shift of 1 millisecond will be localized within 300 km.
A frequency shift of 1 microsecond will be localized within 300 meters,
A frequency shift of 100 nanoseconds will be localized within 30 meters,
A frequency shift of 10 nanoseconds will be localized within 3 meters.
That's why the frequency shift time, Delta t, has to be as short as possible.
Gamma rays are just high energy photons with a negligible ability to warp space. But frequency shift is different. Frequency shift looks like this. Look at the picture. The shorter you can make this frequency shift, the more localized the effect will be. A frequency shift of
A frequency shift of 1 millisecond will be localized within 300 km.
A frequency shift of 1 microsecond will be localized within 300 meters,
A frequency shift of 100 nanoseconds will be localized within 30 meters,
A frequency shift of 10 nanoseconds will be localized within 3 meters.
That's why the frequency shift time, Delta t, has to be as short as possible.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+)
For your level of understanding, I would leave the string theory out of this one. You sound like badly-written technobabble from Star Trek.
Your tune will change when physics becomes results oriented. Which one of us has an experimentally verifiable warp drive theory?
QUOTE (brucep+)
Delusional. The thing that saves you from complete imbecility is mental illness.
Grouch.
QUOTE (Lady Elizabeth+)
Yup, this guy's seriously pathetic ...... not even aware of the concept of ridicule, even when delivered @ mindshatteringly mammoth magnitudes. blink.gif Are we dealing with a syndromic imbecile of unicellular intellect? I guess we could all be guilty of abusing the mentally retarded. sad.gif
You still don't realize this isn't cosmetology.
It is so bizarre how the simplest concept of cause and effect eludes you.
It baffles the mind.
If you shoot a mirror @ a light source very fast you will shift the frequency of the reflected light. That will not warp space time.
@ best you might be able to tell the speed of the mirror by the frequency shift of the returning light.
OOOoh you made red light green what an amazing achievement.
You have proven the Doppler effect.
It baffles the mind.
If you shoot a mirror @ a light source very fast you will shift the frequency of the reflected light. That will not warp space time.
@ best you might be able to tell the speed of the mirror by the frequency shift of the returning light.
OOOoh you made red light green what an amazing achievement.
You have proven the Doppler effect.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 13 2012, 01:11 PM)
Your tune will change when physics becomes results oriented.
What does that even mean?
Don't you mean falsifiable?
Didn't you read my wormhole theory? That's just as legitimate as yours.
What does that even mean?
QUOTE
Which one of us has an experimentally verifiable warp drive theory?
Don't you mean falsifiable?
Didn't you read my wormhole theory? That's just as legitimate as yours.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Apr 13 2012, 07:22 PM)
What does that even mean?
Don't you mean falsifiable?
Didn't you read my wormhole theory? That's just as legitimate as yours.
I just read it. lol
Mazulus' first wish
O great Octopus king I wish for frequency shifted photons to warp space time.
Octopus king replies Are you sure you want that.
Mazulu Replies YES!
The Octopus King Grants his wish and the entire universe instantly collapses into a 1 dimensional singularity. Mazulu is never heard from again as there is no one to hear.
good stuff.
Don't you mean falsifiable?
Didn't you read my wormhole theory? That's just as legitimate as yours.
I just read it. lol
Mazulus' first wish
O great Octopus king I wish for frequency shifted photons to warp space time.
Octopus king replies Are you sure you want that.
Mazulu Replies YES!
The Octopus King Grants his wish and the entire universe instantly collapses into a 1 dimensional singularity. Mazulu is never heard from again as there is no one to hear.
good stuff.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Apr 13 2012, 07:22 PM)
What does that even mean?
Don't you mean falsifiable?
Didn't you read my wormhole theory? That's just as legitimate as yours.
You can calculate wormholes all you like. But how are you gonna get space-time to curve the way you want it to? You need a gravity field generator.
Don't you mean falsifiable?
Didn't you read my wormhole theory? That's just as legitimate as yours.
You can calculate wormholes all you like. But how are you gonna get space-time to curve the way you want it to? You need a gravity field generator.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Apr 12 2012, 10:53 AM)
You should get two ring-shaped magnets; one bigger in size so you can place one inside the other. Spin the two rings in opposite directions. The magnetic shear should cause a disturbance in the force, which will result in the opening of a wormhole. When you pray to the wormhole, the Octopus King will grant you 3 wishes.
Quoted for your convenience.
Quoted for your convenience.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Apr 13 2012, 09:17 PM)
Quoted for your convenience.
Ignoring your sarcasm, why would spinning magnets in opposite direction curve space-time. Which one of us has a simple and reasonable explanation as to why there idea will work?
Ignoring your sarcasm, why would spinning magnets in opposite direction curve space-time. Which one of us has a simple and reasonable explanation as to why there idea will work?
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 13 2012, 05:37 PM)
Ignoring your sarcasm, why would spinning magnets in opposite direction curve space-time. Which one of us has a simple and reasonable explanation as to why there idea will work?
Neither, because both ideas are equally bunk.
Neither, because both ideas are equally bunk.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Apr 13 2012, 09:43 PM)
Neither, because both ideas are equally bunk.
It's important to test your limitations. If you start by assuming that something is impossible, you never grow and you never overcome. Mathematical physics is useful, unless you use it to reinforce your limitations.
It's important to test your limitations. If you start by assuming that something is impossible, you never grow and you never overcome. Mathematical physics is useful, unless you use it to reinforce your limitations.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Apr 13 2012, 09:28 PM)
It's important to test your limitations. If you start by assuming that something is impossible, you never grow and you never overcome. Mathematical physics is useful, unless you use it to reinforce your limitations.
Do you have something against my magnetic wormhole theory?
Do you have something against my magnetic wormhole theory?
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Apr 14 2012, 02:04 AM)
Do you have something against my magnetic wormhole theory?
Well assuming it does actually work where will it take you?
Well assuming it does actually work where will it take you?
QUOTE (Robittybob1+Apr 13 2012, 10:52 PM)
Well assuming it does actually work where will it take you?
Well, given that the Octopus King lives on the other side, I'm going to say somewhere under the ocean.
Well, given that the Octopus King lives on the other side, I'm going to say somewhere under the ocean.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Apr 14 2012, 02:53 AM)
Well, given that the Octopus King lives on the other side, I'm going to say somewhere under the ocean.
Well at least that is a start. A start is often the difficult bit.
Well at least that is a start. A start is often the difficult bit.
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.