I've been doing some writing about warp drive physics, and what the hardware will look like. It all starts with having opto-electronics that can induce acceleration fields. I don't think it will be possible to curve space-time because the energy requirements are unreasonably large (e.g., the Alcubierre drive requires the energy content equivalent to the planet Jupiter). Instead, I believe that transmitting redshift, rapidly and repeatedly (<1 millisecond), will cause hyper-space to curve. If hyperspace curves, it will produce an acceleration field. This will lead to warp drive technology.
https://sites.google.com/site/superluminaldrivephysics/
Acceleration field generator technology, which I call Blueshift technology, is all about emitting "shift photons". I expect there to be mathematics with df/dt terms. For example, a frequency shift from 400THz to 800THz, every millisecond, will have a df/dt = 4x10^17.
There will be a frequency analogue to the Newtonian force equation, F = ma, that will look like F = (h/c)(df/dt), where h is the Planck constant and c is the speed of light.
It will take a long time before the physics community discovers the connection between df/dt, and acceleration field generation with opto-electronics.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 17 2012, 12:26 AM)
I've been doing some writing about warp drive physics, and what the hardware will look like. It all starts with having opto-electronics that can induce acceleration fields. I don't think it will be possible to curve space-time because the energy requirements are unreasonably large (e.g., the Alcubierre drive requires the energy content equivalent to the planet Jupiter). Instead, I believe that transmitting redshift, rapidly and repeatedly (<1 millisecond), will cause hyper-space to curve. If hyperspace curves, it will produce an acceleration field. This will lead to warp drive technology.
https://sites.google.com/site/superluminaldrivephysics/
Acceleration field generator technology, which I call Blueshift technology, is all about emitting "shift photons". I expect there to be mathematics with df/dt terms. For example, a frequency shift from 400THz to 800THz, every millisecond, will have a df/dt = 4x10^17.
There will be a frequency analogue to the Newtonian force equation, F = ma, that will look like F = (h/c)(df/dt), where h is the Planck constant and c is the speed of light.
It will take a long time before the physics community discovers the connection between df/dt, and acceleration field generation with opto-electronics.
Consider a zero Ricciscalar solution for and Einstein tensor whose only nonzero terms are
G⁰⁰ = G⁰³ = G³⁰ = G³³ = (1/2)f(z-ct)(∂²g/∂x² + ∂²g/∂y²)
Where f can then be thought of as a function of cos functions of z-ct and g is a function of x and y
(The zero supersctipts corresponding to ct don't show well and the 3 superscript corresponds to the z coordinate)
The exact solution to Einstein’s field equations is
ds² = (1+fg)dct² – 2fgdctdz –dx² – dy² – (1-fg)dz²
this means the pp electromagnetic radiation solution includes within it the solutions for varying the wavelength or frequency equivalently through fourier analysis, something I just now realised. Essentially choosing f as a function of z-ct determines the frequencies in the light through fourier analysis. A given f corresponds to choosing the wave numbers k that go into the cos functions summing to the function.
https://sites.google.com/site/superluminaldrivephysics/
Acceleration field generator technology, which I call Blueshift technology, is all about emitting "shift photons". I expect there to be mathematics with df/dt terms. For example, a frequency shift from 400THz to 800THz, every millisecond, will have a df/dt = 4x10^17.
There will be a frequency analogue to the Newtonian force equation, F = ma, that will look like F = (h/c)(df/dt), where h is the Planck constant and c is the speed of light.
It will take a long time before the physics community discovers the connection between df/dt, and acceleration field generation with opto-electronics.
Consider a zero Ricciscalar solution for and Einstein tensor whose only nonzero terms are
G⁰⁰ = G⁰³ = G³⁰ = G³³ = (1/2)f(z-ct)(∂²g/∂x² + ∂²g/∂y²)
Where f can then be thought of as a function of cos functions of z-ct and g is a function of x and y
(The zero supersctipts corresponding to ct don't show well and the 3 superscript corresponds to the z coordinate)
The exact solution to Einstein’s field equations is
ds² = (1+fg)dct² – 2fgdctdz –dx² – dy² – (1-fg)dz²
this means the pp electromagnetic radiation solution includes within it the solutions for varying the wavelength or frequency equivalently through fourier analysis, something I just now realised. Essentially choosing f as a function of z-ct determines the frequencies in the light through fourier analysis. A given f corresponds to choosing the wave numbers k that go into the cos functions summing to the function.
QUOTE (waitedavid137+Mar 17 2012, 08:26 AM)
Consider a zero Ricciscalar solution for and Einstein tensor whose only nonzero terms are
G⁰⁰ = G⁰³ = G³⁰ = G³³ = (1/2)f(z-ct)(∂²g/∂x² + ∂²g/∂y²)
Where f can then be thought of as a function of cos functions of z-ct and g is a function of x and y
(The zero supersctipts corresponding to ct don't show well and the 3 superscript corresponds to the z coordinate)
The exact solution to Einstein’s field equations is
ds² = (1+fg)dct² – 2fgdctdz –dx² – dy² – (1-fg)dz²
this means the pp electromagnetic radiation solution includes within it the solutions for varying the wavelength or frequency equivalently through fourier analysis, something I just now realised. Essentially choosing f as a function of z-ct determines the frequencies in the light through fourier analysis. A given f corresponds to choosing the wave numbers k that go into the cos functions summing to the function.
Heres something else I realised thats really weird. Though the group wave f has to be any nonnegative everywhere function so that the energy density is nonnegative, there will be phase waves in that fourier analysis of f which correspond to negative energy density solutions every time the cos function drops below 0. This indicates general relativity not only allows, but requires the existence of phase wave solutions that would correspond to negative energy densities in places even though the actual net energy density corresponding to the fourier sums solution will always be nonnegative. Weird.
G⁰⁰ = G⁰³ = G³⁰ = G³³ = (1/2)f(z-ct)(∂²g/∂x² + ∂²g/∂y²)
Where f can then be thought of as a function of cos functions of z-ct and g is a function of x and y
(The zero supersctipts corresponding to ct don't show well and the 3 superscript corresponds to the z coordinate)
The exact solution to Einstein’s field equations is
ds² = (1+fg)dct² – 2fgdctdz –dx² – dy² – (1-fg)dz²
this means the pp electromagnetic radiation solution includes within it the solutions for varying the wavelength or frequency equivalently through fourier analysis, something I just now realised. Essentially choosing f as a function of z-ct determines the frequencies in the light through fourier analysis. A given f corresponds to choosing the wave numbers k that go into the cos functions summing to the function.
Heres something else I realised thats really weird. Though the group wave f has to be any nonnegative everywhere function so that the energy density is nonnegative, there will be phase waves in that fourier analysis of f which correspond to negative energy density solutions every time the cos function drops below 0. This indicates general relativity not only allows, but requires the existence of phase wave solutions that would correspond to negative energy densities in places even though the actual net energy density corresponding to the fourier sums solution will always be nonnegative. Weird.
Since the only natural phenomenon that warps space-time is gravity and the mechanical solution to gravity seems to be off the table or at least very elusive warp drive is off the table.
Although it would seem that the way super conductors can be used to induce a
gravitomagnetic london moment (in effect warping space time in their local vicinity) could be used on a much grander scale to warp space time.
silly virtual photons.
Although it would seem that the way super conductors can be used to induce a
gravitomagnetic london moment (in effect warping space time in their local vicinity) could be used on a much grander scale to warp space time.
silly virtual photons.
QUOTE (waitedavid137+Mar 17 2012, 03:52 PM)
Heres something else I realised thats really weird. Though the group wave f has to be any nonnegative everywhere function so that the energy density is nonnegative, there will be phase waves in that fourier analysis of f which correspond to negative energy density solutions every time the cos function drops below 0. This indicates general relativity not only allows, but requires the existence of phase wave solutions that would correspond to negative energy densities in places even though the actual net energy density corresponding to the fourier sums solution will always be nonnegative. Weird.
If shift photon emissions really could be used for propulsion, then there would be a technical challenge having to do with phase(s). When we attempt to synthesize a shift photon from, let's say n distinct frequencies, does the phase of the ith frequency have to line up with the i+1th frequency in order to induce a gravity field? I had hoped that the laws of physics might be lenient on this. Or perhaps the laws of physics are strict such that, they require the phase of the ith frequency to line up with the i+1th frequency before a shift photon will produce ab acceleration field. After all, when a photon falls into the gravity well of a black hole, the photon will blueshift all the way in without a break in phase. So if we wanted to try it in reverse, if we wanted to get a gravity field back by synthesizing a frequency shifting photon, then the phase of each frequency step might have to line up. We wouldn't know for sure until we ran experiments.
BTW, it is the change in negative energy densities that produce forces (acceleration fields). F=ma=-gradient U = - dU/dx i-direction + ...
If shift photon emissions really could be used for propulsion, then there would be a technical challenge having to do with phase(s). When we attempt to synthesize a shift photon from, let's say n distinct frequencies, does the phase of the ith frequency have to line up with the i+1th frequency in order to induce a gravity field? I had hoped that the laws of physics might be lenient on this. Or perhaps the laws of physics are strict such that, they require the phase of the ith frequency to line up with the i+1th frequency before a shift photon will produce ab acceleration field. After all, when a photon falls into the gravity well of a black hole, the photon will blueshift all the way in without a break in phase. So if we wanted to try it in reverse, if we wanted to get a gravity field back by synthesizing a frequency shifting photon, then the phase of each frequency step might have to line up. We wouldn't know for sure until we ran experiments.
BTW, it is the change in negative energy densities that produce forces (acceleration fields). F=ma=-gradient U = - dU/dx i-direction + ...
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Mar 17 2012, 07:06 PM)
Since the only natural phenomenon that warps space-time is gravity and the mechanical solution to gravity seems to be off the table or at least very elusive warp drive is off the table.
Although it would seem that the way super conductors can be used to induce a
gravitomagnetic london moment (in effect warping space time in their local vicinity) could be used on a much grander scale to warp space time.
silly virtual photons.
Warping space-time has unreasonably large energy requirements. But warping hyperspace might take less energy. If a warp in hyperspace could be induced by a hyper-drive engine built in space-time, there is a chance that the warp drive engine could be pulled out of space-time (yanked out) by the induced acceleration field. The globule of space-time that surrounds the warp drive engine could be separated from the space-time of the universe. If that were to occur, then the warp drive engine would escape the grasp of relativity. Then, the globule of space-time is treated as a massive object of hyperspace. It would have a hyperspace mass of m' = m(c/c')^2, where c' is the speed of light for hyper-space.
The existence of a hyper-space would make superluminal travel significantly easier.
Although it would seem that the way super conductors can be used to induce a
gravitomagnetic london moment (in effect warping space time in their local vicinity) could be used on a much grander scale to warp space time.
silly virtual photons.
Warping space-time has unreasonably large energy requirements. But warping hyperspace might take less energy. If a warp in hyperspace could be induced by a hyper-drive engine built in space-time, there is a chance that the warp drive engine could be pulled out of space-time (yanked out) by the induced acceleration field. The globule of space-time that surrounds the warp drive engine could be separated from the space-time of the universe. If that were to occur, then the warp drive engine would escape the grasp of relativity. Then, the globule of space-time is treated as a massive object of hyperspace. It would have a hyperspace mass of m' = m(c/c')^2, where c' is the speed of light for hyper-space.
The existence of a hyper-space would make superluminal travel significantly easier.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Mar 17 2012, 12:06 PM)
Since the only natural phenomenon that warps space-time is gravity and the mechanical solution to gravity seems to be off the table or at least very elusive warp drive is off the table...
You don't get to decide what I choose to talk about.
You don't get to decide what I choose to talk about.
I interpret the event horizon of a black hole to be the boundary at which space-time can no longer exist alongside hyperspace. Hyper-space could exist all around us, but we don't interact with it. Inside the event horizon, there is only hyperspace, but no space-time. To this end, the laws of physics are upheld by hyperspace, alone.
Well that's meaningless.
Mazulu will now attempt to build a warp drive using a nine volt battery and flashing lights.
Mazulu will now attempt to build a warp drive using a nine volt battery and flashing lights.
QUOTE (AlexG+Mar 17 2012, 08:10 PM)
Mazulu will now attempt to build a warp drive using a nine volt battery and flashing lights.
Good to hear he's progressed from clockwork and crayons.
Good to hear he's progressed from clockwork and crayons.
Like I said, it will take a long time for the physics community to make progress.
Let me tell you about the hardware of shift photon emission sources. What do you get when you cross a light emitting diode with a BGA (ball grid array) IC chip? Replace the black packaging of an IC chip with a transparent material. Next, replace the transistors with Gallium Aluminum Arsenide light emitting materials. You could very easily come up with a BGA LED chip with 8, 16, 32 or 64 distinct frequencies in the 400 to 800 THz range.
Next, you take your spaceship, or acceleration field generator surface, and you tessellate it with thousands of 64-LED chips. A clock in the megahertz range would cause the 64-LED chips to emit shift photons with 64 frequency steps, from 400 to 800THz.
The powerful acceleration fields of a black hole will cause light to frequency shift when it travels along the black hole's radius. The question is: will shift photon generators induce a gravity field? Do the laws of physics observe a symmetry between gravitational potential energy and photon frequency shift?
The Einstein equations are a technological dead end. They tell us that superluminal travel to other star systems is IMPOSSIBLE. Physics research is about to stall, leaving the human race trapped on planet earth. If you ever hope to go to Mars or to travel to the stars, you will have to try something else. You will have to perform innovative experiments.
Next, you take your spaceship, or acceleration field generator surface, and you tessellate it with thousands of 64-LED chips. A clock in the megahertz range would cause the 64-LED chips to emit shift photons with 64 frequency steps, from 400 to 800THz.
The powerful acceleration fields of a black hole will cause light to frequency shift when it travels along the black hole's radius. The question is: will shift photon generators induce a gravity field? Do the laws of physics observe a symmetry between gravitational potential energy and photon frequency shift?
The Einstein equations are a technological dead end. They tell us that superluminal travel to other star systems is IMPOSSIBLE. Physics research is about to stall, leaving the human race trapped on planet earth. If you ever hope to go to Mars or to travel to the stars, you will have to try something else. You will have to perform innovative experiments.
Not this old nonsense again.
Yes, same old garbage.
Mazulu hasn't made any progress towards sanity.
Mazulu hasn't made any progress towards sanity.
Good luck with the LED thing. My TV has not yet warped space close enough to my couch to allow me to change the channel without the remote yet.
Is it possible to entangle photons with different wavelengths?
When you say hyperspace I think the 1 frame of reference that contains all reference frames if there is such a thing. Is that what you mean?
Is it possible to entangle photons with different wavelengths?
When you say hyperspace I think the 1 frame of reference that contains all reference frames if there is such a thing. Is that what you mean?
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Mar 18 2012, 04:38 AM)
Is it possible to entangle photons with different wavelengths?
It's a good question, I've wondered that myself.
Nature doesn't seem to work like that. I think of hyper-space as a coexisting space-time with its own speed of light c' >> c.
Sooner or later, theoretical physicists will take a closer look at hyperspace physics; someone will come up with experiments to try. The old fossils of the scientific community will become irrelevant and useless. They will go out like a dying flame, forgotten by history; dusty corpses of spent vitriol, wasted lives.
It's a good question, I've wondered that myself.
QUOTE
When you say hyperspace I think the 1 frame of reference that contains all reference frames if there is such a thing. Is that what you mean?
Nature doesn't seem to work like that. I think of hyper-space as a coexisting space-time with its own speed of light c' >> c.
Sooner or later, theoretical physicists will take a closer look at hyperspace physics; someone will come up with experiments to try. The old fossils of the scientific community will become irrelevant and useless. They will go out like a dying flame, forgotten by history; dusty corpses of spent vitriol, wasted lives.
There is no 'hyperspace physics', you nitwit.
QUOTE (AlexG+Mar 18 2012, 05:53 AM)
There is no 'hyperspace physics', you nitwit.
There will be after you're gone.
There will be after you're gone.
Insanity running rampant.
QUOTE (AlexG+Mar 18 2012, 07:49 AM)
Insanity running rampant.
Are you saying that photon frequency shift has nothing to do with acceleration fields?
Are you saying that photon frequency shift has nothing to do with acceleration fields?
QUOTE (waitedavid137+Mar 17 2012, 07:41 PM)
You don't get to decide what I choose to talk about.
Sorry, I didn't mean to tell you what not to discuss. Please don't take what I said the wrong way it wasn't a criticism of you or your ideas or math.
I was just simply pointing out that I cannot build a math drive I as an engineer I need physical electrical mechanical devices to make it work.
The math is great it will tell me what I can do with the warp drive once it is built, how to modify materials, physical dimensions and electronics to make it work better.
Mazulu, I don't think an LED television or any other array of LED's will do the trick no matter how many pixels it has or the wavelengths the use.
The only reason I mentioned entanglement of light @ different wavelengths is because if 1 frame exists where all events happen @ the same time then entangling coherent (LASER) light @ different wavelengths so so that all frames are entangled could produce the warped effect you want to achieve.
I seriously think this is impossible. Moire likely that you just make a hot spot on a piece of paper.
Wait a minute just got an idea if one could entangle different wavelengths of light one might possibly modulate entanglement so that stray photons could be used for communication as long as the photons matched the modulation the modulation could be used to decode the signal. Probably a stupid idea.
Sorry, I didn't mean to tell you what not to discuss. Please don't take what I said the wrong way it wasn't a criticism of you or your ideas or math.
I was just simply pointing out that I cannot build a math drive I as an engineer I need physical electrical mechanical devices to make it work.
The math is great it will tell me what I can do with the warp drive once it is built, how to modify materials, physical dimensions and electronics to make it work better.
Mazulu, I don't think an LED television or any other array of LED's will do the trick no matter how many pixels it has or the wavelengths the use.
The only reason I mentioned entanglement of light @ different wavelengths is because if 1 frame exists where all events happen @ the same time then entangling coherent (LASER) light @ different wavelengths so so that all frames are entangled could produce the warped effect you want to achieve.
I seriously think this is impossible. Moire likely that you just make a hot spot on a piece of paper.
Wait a minute just got an idea if one could entangle different wavelengths of light one might possibly modulate entanglement so that stray photons could be used for communication as long as the photons matched the modulation the modulation could be used to decode the signal. Probably a stupid idea.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Mar 18 2012, 03:20 PM)
Wait a minute just got an idea if one could entangle different wavelengths of light one might possibly modulate entanglement so that stray photons could be used for communication as long as the photons matched the modulation the modulation could be used to decode the signal. Probably a stupid idea.
Ed,
Don't let worthless trash like Alexg make you feel stupid. Your brain is doing its job of coming up with new ideas. Innovation is what drives the market place, it creates wealth and cool gadgets. Innovation is what makes the world a better place, not woo woo criticism.
This is exactly why I came up with the shift photon emitter idea as a way to curve space-time (and/or curve hyperspace). Redshift (photon frequency shift) and gravity are definitely related. We know that gravity causes light to frequency shift. If it works the other way then there is a lot to gain.
The shift photon originated as an ad hoc way to unify quantum mechanics and general relativity. After all, the photon is a common particle in QM (the only particle with energy E ~ frequency. Gravity (general relativity) includes gravitational redshift and gravitational time dilation. The common theme between QM and GR was that frequency shift, h(f_f - f_i) equals a change in gravitational potential energy.
Thus it makes sense to perform experiments by synthesizing shift photons to see if they give you back a gravitational potential.
This is exactly why I came up with the shift photon emitter idea as a way to curve space-time (and/or curve hyperspace). Redshift (photon frequency shift) and gravity are definitely related. We know that gravity causes light to frequency shift. If it works the other way then there is a lot to gain.
The shift photon originated as an ad hoc way to unify quantum mechanics and general relativity. After all, the photon is a common particle in QM (the only particle with energy E ~ frequency. Gravity (general relativity) includes gravitational redshift and gravitational time dilation. The common theme between QM and GR was that frequency shift, h(f_f - f_i) equals a change in gravitational potential energy.
Thus it makes sense to perform experiments by synthesizing shift photons to see if they give you back a gravitational potential.
The only reason I mentioned entanglement of light @ different wavelengths is because if 1 frame exists where all events happen @ the same time then entangling coherent (LASER) light @ different wavelengths so so that all frames are entangled could produce the warped effect you want to achieve.
I seriously think this is impossible. Moire likely that you just make a hot spot on a piece of paper.
I agree that shift photons should be made, as an experiment, by entangling several photons of different frequencies (in increasing or decreasing order) to see if that results in a gravity field.
Ed,
Don't let worthless trash like Alexg make you feel stupid. Your brain is doing its job of coming up with new ideas. Innovation is what drives the market place, it creates wealth and cool gadgets. Innovation is what makes the world a better place, not woo woo criticism.
QUOTE
The math is great it will tell me what I can do with the warp drive once it is built, how to modify materials, physical dimensions and electronics to make it work better.
Mazulu, I don't think an LED television or any other array of LED's will do the trick no matter how many pixels it has or the wavelengths the use.
Mazulu, I don't think an LED television or any other array of LED's will do the trick no matter how many pixels it has or the wavelengths the use.
This is exactly why I came up with the shift photon emitter idea as a way to curve space-time (and/or curve hyperspace). Redshift (photon frequency shift) and gravity are definitely related. We know that gravity causes light to frequency shift. If it works the other way then there is a lot to gain.
The shift photon originated as an ad hoc way to unify quantum mechanics and general relativity. After all, the photon is a common particle in QM (the only particle with energy E ~ frequency. Gravity (general relativity) includes gravitational redshift and gravitational time dilation. The common theme between QM and GR was that frequency shift, h(f_f - f_i) equals a change in gravitational potential energy.
Thus it makes sense to perform experiments by synthesizing shift photons to see if they give you back a gravitational potential.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| The math is great it will tell me what I can do with the warp drive once it is built, how to modify materials, physical dimensions and electronics to make it work better. Mazulu, I don't think an LED television or any other array of LED's will do the trick no matter how many pixels it has or the wavelengths the use. |
This is exactly why I came up with the shift photon emitter idea as a way to curve space-time (and/or curve hyperspace). Redshift (photon frequency shift) and gravity are definitely related. We know that gravity causes light to frequency shift. If it works the other way then there is a lot to gain.
The shift photon originated as an ad hoc way to unify quantum mechanics and general relativity. After all, the photon is a common particle in QM (the only particle with energy E ~ frequency. Gravity (general relativity) includes gravitational redshift and gravitational time dilation. The common theme between QM and GR was that frequency shift, h(f_f - f_i) equals a change in gravitational potential energy.
Thus it makes sense to perform experiments by synthesizing shift photons to see if they give you back a gravitational potential.
The only reason I mentioned entanglement of light @ different wavelengths is because if 1 frame exists where all events happen @ the same time then entangling coherent (LASER) light @ different wavelengths so so that all frames are entangled could produce the warped effect you want to achieve.
I seriously think this is impossible. Moire likely that you just make a hot spot on a piece of paper.
I agree that shift photons should be made, as an experiment, by entangling several photons of different frequencies (in increasing or decreasing order) to see if that results in a gravity field.
More flashing lights.
dumbass.
dumbass.
Worthless trash says what?
Vintage Mazulu.
Vintage Mazulu.
Thank you.
But if there really is no hope that shift photons could generate gravity fields, then why does black hole gravity result in gravitational time dilation? Why does time dilation happen at all?
Robittybob1,
Why are you being mean? I would expect that from Alexg, but not you?
Has that never happened to you, were you read a word with your peripheral vision and get it wrong. It was a joke. Laugh right!
Neither of which exist.
Neither of which exist.
The light bearing aether has both relativistic and quantum wave features.
You've been sniffing to much aether.
QUOTE (AlexG+Mar 19 2012, 12:46 AM)
More flashing lights. dumbass.
The world will be a better place when your woo woo life returns to dust.
The world will be a better place when your woo woo life returns to dust.
The world would have been a better place if you had gotten an education, but it's too late now.
QUOTE (AlexG+Mar 19 2012, 01:04 AM)
The world would have been a better place if you had gotten an education, but it's too late now.
Yawn!!! Woo woo comments from worthless trash are so boring.
What ever happened to attempts to unify GR with QM? Didn't that lead to string theory? If so, why didn't Doppler redshift ever fall out of string theory?
Yawn!!! Woo woo comments from worthless trash are so boring.
What ever happened to attempts to unify GR with QM? Didn't that lead to string theory? If so, why didn't Doppler redshift ever fall out of string theory?
Just keep playing with your flashing lights. It's really all your fit for. 
QUOTE (AlexG+Mar 19 2012, 02:15 AM)
Just keep playing with your flashing lights. It's really all your fit for.
Like I said, I'm bored with woo woo conversation.
Doesn't anyone have any new and practical ideas about how to warp space to produce propulsion?
Like I said, I'm bored with woo woo conversation.
Doesn't anyone have any new and practical ideas about how to warp space to produce propulsion?
QUOTE
Doesn't anyone have any new and practical ideas about how to warp space to produce propulsion?
Vintage Mazulu.
QUOTE (AlexG+Mar 19 2012, 04:14 AM)
Vintage Mazulu.
Thank you.
But if there really is no hope that shift photons could generate gravity fields, then why does black hole gravity result in gravitational time dilation? Why does time dilation happen at all?
Read up on Relativity, the Special and General Theories.
You have a lot of problems with the concepts of cause and effect. Why do you think that photons have anything to do with gravity?
You have a lot of problems with the concepts of cause and effect. Why do you think that photons have anything to do with gravity?
QUOTE (AlexG+Mar 19 2012, 06:34 AM)
Read up on Relativity, the Special and General Theories.
You have a lot of problems with the concepts of cause and effect. Why do you think that photons have anything to do with gravity?
I've known all along that gravity causes photons to frequency shift. I know that doing this in reverse must sound crazy. But how can you be so sure that nature has a good reason for restricting it? Shift photons that result in acceleration forces do not cause a paradox. At worst, they create a problem for conservation of energy.
A shift in frequency from f_i to f_f should have a corresponding shift in energy,
Delta E = h(f_f - f_i). This shift in frequency will be caused by a gravitational potential Delta Phi.
It just looks reasonable to me that if you synthesize a wide enough frequency shift with enough frequency steps, that you will start to probe a vulnerability within the laws of physics themselves.
You have a lot of problems with the concepts of cause and effect. Why do you think that photons have anything to do with gravity?
I've known all along that gravity causes photons to frequency shift. I know that doing this in reverse must sound crazy. But how can you be so sure that nature has a good reason for restricting it? Shift photons that result in acceleration forces do not cause a paradox. At worst, they create a problem for conservation of energy.
A shift in frequency from f_i to f_f should have a corresponding shift in energy,
Delta E = h(f_f - f_i). This shift in frequency will be caused by a gravitational potential Delta Phi.
It just looks reasonable to me that if you synthesize a wide enough frequency shift with enough frequency steps, that you will start to probe a vulnerability within the laws of physics themselves.
The unification between GR and QM remains illusive. But if you look at the constants involved, here is what you find.
Quantum mechanics constants: Planck constant h, speed of light c, coulombic charge q.
General Relativity constants: Gravitational constant G, speed of light c, Cosmological constant lambda...
QM and GR share the constant, c, the speed of light. Light is important in both quantum mechanics and relativity. There are many reasons to believe that light plays a central role in the laws of phyiscs.
The space-time continuum is obliged to obey the speed limit, the speed of light, even if that means producing time dilation and length contract effects.
The laws of physics and the space-time continuum are preoccupied with light. The rules and the infrastructure of nature are obedient to: light.
So what is the relationship between light and gravity? If we wanted to get gravity, we should do something with light; something that we haven't tried before.
Quantum mechanics constants: Planck constant h, speed of light c, coulombic charge q.
General Relativity constants: Gravitational constant G, speed of light c, Cosmological constant lambda...
QM and GR share the constant, c, the speed of light. Light is important in both quantum mechanics and relativity. There are many reasons to believe that light plays a central role in the laws of phyiscs.
The space-time continuum is obliged to obey the speed limit, the speed of light, even if that means producing time dilation and length contract effects.
The laws of physics and the space-time continuum are preoccupied with light. The rules and the infrastructure of nature are obedient to: light.
So what is the relationship between light and gravity? If we wanted to get gravity, we should do something with light; something that we haven't tried before.
Mazulu
Think virtual photons via coulomb coupling of hole (proton) paired electrons.
http://lanl.arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1202/1202.2480.pdf
Gravitomagnetic London Moment
http://esamultimedia.esa.int/docs/gsp/Expe...l_Detection.pdf
Now the only thing missing is amplification and control and I just wonder if it is a matter of scale and magnetic field manipulation.
I have seen no attempted experiments to control orientation of acceleration fields through electromagnetic manipulation.
Think virtual photons via coulomb coupling of hole (proton) paired electrons.
http://lanl.arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1202/1202.2480.pdf
Gravitomagnetic London Moment
http://esamultimedia.esa.int/docs/gsp/Expe...l_Detection.pdf
Now the only thing missing is amplification and control and I just wonder if it is a matter of scale and magnetic field manipulation.
I have seen no attempted experiments to control orientation of acceleration fields through electromagnetic manipulation.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Mar 20 2012, 12:03 AM)
Mazulu
Think virtual photons via coulomb coupling of hole (proton) paired electrons.
http://lanl.arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1202/1202.2480.pdf
Gravitomagnetic London Moment
http://esamultimedia.esa.int/docs/gsp/Expe...l_Detection.pdf
Now the only thing missing is amplification and control and I just wonder if it is a matter of scale and magnetic field manipulation.
I have seen no attempted experiments to control orientation of acceleration fields through electromagnetic manipulation.
Ed,
Ok, let's say they have a gravity field generator of some kind. They got some experimental results,
"In the experiment with the highest precision to date, Tate et al5,6 reported a disagreement between the theoretically predicted Cooper-pair mass in Niobium of m*/2me = 0.999992 and her experimental value of 1.000084(21), where me is the electron mass."
I'm not sure I understand what it going here? First, the superconductor is spinning (like a helicopter propeller) but the change in weight of the apparatus is very small. How do we know that gravity is being affected at all? How do I know it's not just propeller lift?
Think virtual photons via coulomb coupling of hole (proton) paired electrons.
http://lanl.arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1202/1202.2480.pdf
Gravitomagnetic London Moment
http://esamultimedia.esa.int/docs/gsp/Expe...l_Detection.pdf
Now the only thing missing is amplification and control and I just wonder if it is a matter of scale and magnetic field manipulation.
I have seen no attempted experiments to control orientation of acceleration fields through electromagnetic manipulation.
Ed,
Ok, let's say they have a gravity field generator of some kind. They got some experimental results,
"In the experiment with the highest precision to date, Tate et al5,6 reported a disagreement between the theoretically predicted Cooper-pair mass in Niobium of m*/2me = 0.999992 and her experimental value of 1.000084(21), where me is the electron mass."
I'm not sure I understand what it going here? First, the superconductor is spinning (like a helicopter propeller) but the change in weight of the apparatus is very small. How do we know that gravity is being affected at all? How do I know it's not just propeller lift?
Warp Drive Technology, Blueshift technology and hardware
it caught my eye and I read it as " Warp Drive Technology, Bullshit technology and hardware
it caught my eye and I read it as " Warp Drive Technology, Bullshit technology and hardware
QUOTE (Robittybob1+Mar 19 2012, 09:10 PM)
Warp Drive Technology, Blueshift technology and hardware
it caught my eye and I read it as " Warp Drive Technology, Bullshit technology and hardware
You got it right.
it caught my eye and I read it as " Warp Drive Technology, Bullshit technology and hardware
You got it right.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 20 2012, 01:45 AM)
Ed,
Ok, let's say they have a gravity field generator of some kind. They got some experimental results,
"In the experiment with the highest precision to date, Tate et al5,6 reported a disagreement between the theoretically predicted Cooper-pair mass in Niobium of m*/2me = 0.999992 and her experimental value of 1.000084(21), where me is the electron mass."
I'm not sure I understand what it going here? First, the superconductor is spinning (like a helicopter propeller) but the change in weight of the apparatus is very small. How do we know that gravity is being affected at all? How do I know it's not just propeller lift?
I propose that the bonus mass is not the electron but the coupling virtual photon(s) (o since that seems to nicely and accurately predict Tc of a superconductor.
This is a positive result albeit tiny of mechanically induced acceleration outside an accelerating device in effect a very small warp field.
My idea was if the electrons could be in effect pooled by magnetic fields then the effect could be directionalized and amplified.
AlexG seriously try nothing because the world is flat like your head.
Come on man with that kind of don't try anything because it won't work attitude I'm surprised you can walk let alone eat.
Nothing ventured nothing gained.
Ok, let's say they have a gravity field generator of some kind. They got some experimental results,
"In the experiment with the highest precision to date, Tate et al5,6 reported a disagreement between the theoretically predicted Cooper-pair mass in Niobium of m*/2me = 0.999992 and her experimental value of 1.000084(21), where me is the electron mass."
I'm not sure I understand what it going here? First, the superconductor is spinning (like a helicopter propeller) but the change in weight of the apparatus is very small. How do we know that gravity is being affected at all? How do I know it's not just propeller lift?
I propose that the bonus mass is not the electron but the coupling virtual photon(s) (o since that seems to nicely and accurately predict Tc of a superconductor.
This is a positive result albeit tiny of mechanically induced acceleration outside an accelerating device in effect a very small warp field.
My idea was if the electrons could be in effect pooled by magnetic fields then the effect could be directionalized and amplified.
AlexG seriously try nothing because the world is flat like your head.
Come on man with that kind of don't try anything because it won't work attitude I'm surprised you can walk let alone eat.
Nothing ventured nothing gained.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Mar 20 2012, 03:00 AM)
I propose that the bonus mass is not the electron but the coupling virtual photon(s) (o since that seems to nicely and accurately predict Tc of a superconductor.
This is a positive result albeit tiny of mechanically induced acceleration outside an accelerating device in effect a very small warp field.
My idea was if the electrons could be in effect pooled by magnetic fields then the effect could be directionalized and amplified.
AlexG seriously try nothing because the world is flat like your head.
Come on man with that kind of don't try anything because it won't work attitude I'm surprised you can walk let alone eat.
Nothing ventured nothing gained.
Ed,
I'm still skeptical that spinning a superconductor will induce a gravity effect, although I don't blame the experimentalists for trying. I sincerely hope that something profound comes out of it. I would be more impressed if they could aim their apparatus at a jewelery scale witha 100g weight on it. If they could change the weight of the weight by turning on the scale. That was what I had planned to do with my gravity field generator idea, until I got bogged down in cost and complexity.
Robittybob1,
Why are you being mean? I would expect that from Alexg, but not you?
This is a positive result albeit tiny of mechanically induced acceleration outside an accelerating device in effect a very small warp field.
My idea was if the electrons could be in effect pooled by magnetic fields then the effect could be directionalized and amplified.
AlexG seriously try nothing because the world is flat like your head.
Come on man with that kind of don't try anything because it won't work attitude I'm surprised you can walk let alone eat.
Nothing ventured nothing gained.
Ed,
I'm still skeptical that spinning a superconductor will induce a gravity effect, although I don't blame the experimentalists for trying. I sincerely hope that something profound comes out of it. I would be more impressed if they could aim their apparatus at a jewelery scale witha 100g weight on it. If they could change the weight of the weight by turning on the scale. That was what I had planned to do with my gravity field generator idea, until I got bogged down in cost and complexity.
QUOTE
it caught my eye and I read it as " Warp Drive Technology, Bullshit technology and hardware
Robittybob1,
Why are you being mean? I would expect that from Alexg, but not you?
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 20 2012, 03:26 AM)
Robittybob1,
Why are you being mean? I would expect that from Alexg, but not you?
Has that never happened to you, were you read a word with your peripheral vision and get it wrong. It was a joke. Laugh right!
QUOTE (Robittybob1+Mar 20 2012, 03:39 AM)
Has that never happened to you, were you read a word with your peripheral vision and get it wrong. It was a joke. Laugh right!
Yeah, they've been brain washing you here.
Think of it as a multiple choice test. The question reads:
Gravity field acceleration exists; it's technology is based on:
A. spinning superconducting magnets;
B. transmitting redshift (multiple frequencies that duplicate gravitational redshift), shift photon generation induces curvature in space-time;
C. another technology;
D. nature does not permit gravity field acceleration technology.
So you make your best guess and hope you guessed right. What else is there to do?
Yeah, they've been brain washing you here.
Think of it as a multiple choice test. The question reads:
Gravity field acceleration exists; it's technology is based on:
A. spinning superconducting magnets;
B. transmitting redshift (multiple frequencies that duplicate gravitational redshift), shift photon generation induces curvature in space-time;
C. another technology;
D. nature does not permit gravity field acceleration technology.
So you make your best guess and hope you guessed right. What else is there to do?
One benefit to pursuing shift photon acceleration field generator technology (Blueshift technology) would be that it could be used for megalithic construction. Lifting, and positioning, 100 to 200 ton stones would become effortless.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 20 2012, 08:04 AM)
One benefit to pursuing shift photon acceleration field generator technology (Blueshift technology) would be that it could be used for megalithic construction. Lifting, and positioning, 100 to 200 ton stones would become effortless.
the problem is photons have no mass and therefore cannot work space.
photons are records of events in time thatis why i pointed out the possibility of communication through modulation of the universal frame or hyperspace or subspace the 1 frame that contains all frames. by entangling multiple not naturally occuring frequencies one could create messages that with the correct cypher transmit data across the universe without the nasty limitation of the speed of light. would probably still have the lag caused by expansion though. phone typing no fun
the problem is photons have no mass and therefore cannot work space.
photons are records of events in time thatis why i pointed out the possibility of communication through modulation of the universal frame or hyperspace or subspace the 1 frame that contains all frames. by entangling multiple not naturally occuring frequencies one could create messages that with the correct cypher transmit data across the universe without the nasty limitation of the speed of light. would probably still have the lag caused by expansion though. phone typing no fun
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Mar 20 2012, 12:00 PM)
the problem is photons have no mass and therefore cannot work space.
photons are records of events in time thatis why i pointed out the possibility of communication through modulation of the universal frame or hyperspace or subspace the 1 frame that contains all frames. by entangling multiple not naturally occuring frequencies one could create messages that with the correct cypher transmit data across the universe without the nasty limitation of the speed of light. would probably still have the lag caused by expansion though. phone typing no fun
Mass has nothing to do with inducing curvature in space-time. Energy is what causes curvature in space-time; mass is just a form of energy. This is accepted physics.
In contrast, theoretical gravity field generation physics acknowledges the existence of an aether field, a relativistic light bearing field that exists between all particles of matter called the space-time continuum. We already know that large quantities of mass-energy will cause a pseudo-symmetric image called gravity. But this relativistic aether field is not perfect, it is not absolute. This relativistic aether field can be made to act contrary to the Einstein equations; it can be made to induce strong gravity fields without black holes. The space-time continuum is not perfect, it is not absolute. Shift photons are its vulnerability.
photons are records of events in time thatis why i pointed out the possibility of communication through modulation of the universal frame or hyperspace or subspace the 1 frame that contains all frames. by entangling multiple not naturally occuring frequencies one could create messages that with the correct cypher transmit data across the universe without the nasty limitation of the speed of light. would probably still have the lag caused by expansion though. phone typing no fun
Mass has nothing to do with inducing curvature in space-time. Energy is what causes curvature in space-time; mass is just a form of energy. This is accepted physics.
In contrast, theoretical gravity field generation physics acknowledges the existence of an aether field, a relativistic light bearing field that exists between all particles of matter called the space-time continuum. We already know that large quantities of mass-energy will cause a pseudo-symmetric image called gravity. But this relativistic aether field is not perfect, it is not absolute. This relativistic aether field can be made to act contrary to the Einstein equations; it can be made to induce strong gravity fields without black holes. The space-time continuum is not perfect, it is not absolute. Shift photons are its vulnerability.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 20 2012, 07:09 PM)
Mass has nothing to do with inducing curvature in space-time. Energy is what causes curvature in space-time; mass is just a form of energy. This is accepted physics.
In contrast, theoretical gravity field generation physics acknowledges the existence of an aether field, a relativistic light bearing field that exists between all particles of matter called the space-time continuum. We already know that large quantities of mass-energy will cause a pseudo-symmetric image called gravity. But this relativistic aether field is not perfect, it is not absolute. This relativistic aether field can be made to act contrary to the Einstein equations; it can be made to induce strong gravity fields without black holes. The space-time continuum is not perfect, it is not absolute. Shift photons are its vulnerability.
name 1 natural phenomenon where there is no mass and there is gravity.
In contrast, theoretical gravity field generation physics acknowledges the existence of an aether field, a relativistic light bearing field that exists between all particles of matter called the space-time continuum. We already know that large quantities of mass-energy will cause a pseudo-symmetric image called gravity. But this relativistic aether field is not perfect, it is not absolute. This relativistic aether field can be made to act contrary to the Einstein equations; it can be made to induce strong gravity fields without black holes. The space-time continuum is not perfect, it is not absolute. Shift photons are its vulnerability.
name 1 natural phenomenon where there is no mass and there is gravity.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Mar 20 2012, 07:29 PM)
name 1 natural phenomenon where there is no mass and there is gravity.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 20 2012, 07:31 PM)
stress-energy tensor
Seriously.
Name 1 place in the observable universe where a naturally occurring stress energy tensor exists without mass.
Seriously.
Name 1 place in the observable universe where a naturally occurring stress energy tensor exists without mass.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Mar 20 2012, 11:02 PM)
Seriously.
Name 1 place in the observable universe where a naturally occurring stress energy tensor exists without mass.
At the instant of the big bang before mass started to form.
I'm sure you know that the energy content of mass is E = mc^2. Newtonian gravity refers to mass, F = GMm/r^2. But the energy content of mass will work too.
Another example? At the event horizon of a black hole where are atoms are ripped apart. What is left is a slush of quantum particles and light energy that can't escape.
Name 1 place in the observable universe where a naturally occurring stress energy tensor exists without mass.
At the instant of the big bang before mass started to form.
I'm sure you know that the energy content of mass is E = mc^2. Newtonian gravity refers to mass, F = GMm/r^2. But the energy content of mass will work too.
Another example? At the event horizon of a black hole where are atoms are ripped apart. What is left is a slush of quantum particles and light energy that can't escape.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 20 2012, 11:25 PM)
At the instant of the big bang before mass started to form.
I'm sure you know that the energy content of mass is E = mc^2. Newtonian gravity refers to mass, F = GMm/r^2. But the energy content of mass will work too.
Another example? At the event horizon of a black hole where are atoms are ripped apart. What is left is a slush of quantum particles and light energy that can't escape.
All your examples have as a component MASS.
Yes E=MC^2
Equal and equivalent are 2 different things. Energy is not Mass
Black holes have MASS
As far as the big bang is concerned I'm pretty sure there was a mass involved somehow. but then again there is NO observational record of that event all information is inferred.
I'm sure you know that the energy content of mass is E = mc^2. Newtonian gravity refers to mass, F = GMm/r^2. But the energy content of mass will work too.
Another example? At the event horizon of a black hole where are atoms are ripped apart. What is left is a slush of quantum particles and light energy that can't escape.
All your examples have as a component MASS.
Yes E=MC^2
Equal and equivalent are 2 different things. Energy is not Mass
Black holes have MASS
As far as the big bang is concerned I'm pretty sure there was a mass involved somehow. but then again there is NO observational record of that event all information is inferred.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Mar 21 2012, 12:06 AM)
All your examples have as a component MASS.
Yes E=MC^2
Equal and equivalent are 2 different things. Energy is not Mass
Black holes have MASS
As far as the big bang is concerned I'm pretty sure there was a mass involved somehow. but then again there is NO observational record of that event all information is inferred.
Ed,
For purposes of determining what causes gravity, from either the Einstein equations or Newton's laws of gravity, mass and energy are interchangeable because E=mc^2. Obviously, energy in the form of light isn't going to just sit there on your scale while you measure its "mass".
If you doubt me when I tell you that energy in the form of electromagnetic energy also causes gravity, then ask around. Maybe someone else can give you an explanation more to your liking.
Yes E=MC^2
Equal and equivalent are 2 different things. Energy is not Mass
Black holes have MASS
As far as the big bang is concerned I'm pretty sure there was a mass involved somehow. but then again there is NO observational record of that event all information is inferred.
Ed,
For purposes of determining what causes gravity, from either the Einstein equations or Newton's laws of gravity, mass and energy are interchangeable because E=mc^2. Obviously, energy in the form of light isn't going to just sit there on your scale while you measure its "mass".
If you doubt me when I tell you that energy in the form of electromagnetic energy also causes gravity, then ask around. Maybe someone else can give you an explanation more to your liking.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Mar 20 2012, 12:29 PM)
name 1 natural phenomenon where there is no mass and there is gravity.
An electromagnetic field and electromagnetic radiation has a nonzero stress-energy tensor, but the length of the stress-energy tensor or mass density of the field particles is zero. The spacetime is "Ricci-flat" but has nonzero spacetime curvature as the term normally refers to the Riemann tensor which will not be zero where the electromagnetic field and electromagnetic radiation are.
An electromagnetic field and electromagnetic radiation has a nonzero stress-energy tensor, but the length of the stress-energy tensor or mass density of the field particles is zero. The spacetime is "Ricci-flat" but has nonzero spacetime curvature as the term normally refers to the Riemann tensor which will not be zero where the electromagnetic field and electromagnetic radiation are.
QUOTE (waitedavid137+Mar 21 2012, 03:00 AM)
An electromagnetic field and electromagnetic radiation has a nonzero stress-energy tensor, but the length of the stress-energy tensor or mass density of the field particles is zero. The spacetime is "Ricci-flat" but has nonzero spacetime curvature as the term normally refers to the Riemann tensor which will not be zero where the electromagnetic field and electromagnetic radiation are.
Thank you waitedavid. I hope your explanation satisfies Ed.
Anyway, this thread is about warp drive physics and opto-electronic gravity field generators. The mathematics of Ricci curvature might tell you how space-time behaves, how it curves in the presence of mass-energy/stress energy tensor. But physicists have hampered their ability to make progress towards advanced physics by abandoning the light bearing aether.
The light bearing aether has both relativistic and quantum wave features. The mono-frequency photons is a familiar resident of the space-time continuum (relativistic aether); photons are carriers of electromagnetic energy. But what causes gravity? Gravitons are carriers of gravity, but have never been observed. Why? Because they look like neither particles nor waves. I think this is the mechanism.
Graviton + shift-photon ---> nothing...
Shift photons cancel gravitons. When gravitons are cancelled, it causes a gravitational imbalance. When properly engineered, a shift photon drive can cancel gravitons all around it to the effect of producing propulsion.
Gravitons may be the negative energy necessary to produce gravitational curvature.
I look forward to comments.
Thank you waitedavid. I hope your explanation satisfies Ed.
Anyway, this thread is about warp drive physics and opto-electronic gravity field generators. The mathematics of Ricci curvature might tell you how space-time behaves, how it curves in the presence of mass-energy/stress energy tensor. But physicists have hampered their ability to make progress towards advanced physics by abandoning the light bearing aether.
The light bearing aether has both relativistic and quantum wave features. The mono-frequency photons is a familiar resident of the space-time continuum (relativistic aether); photons are carriers of electromagnetic energy. But what causes gravity? Gravitons are carriers of gravity, but have never been observed. Why? Because they look like neither particles nor waves. I think this is the mechanism.
Graviton + shift-photon ---> nothing...
Shift photons cancel gravitons. When gravitons are cancelled, it causes a gravitational imbalance. When properly engineered, a shift photon drive can cancel gravitons all around it to the effect of producing propulsion.
Gravitons may be the negative energy necessary to produce gravitational curvature.
I look forward to comments.
QUOTE
Anyway, this thread is about warp drive physics and opto-electronic gravity field generators.
Neither of which exist.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Anyway, this thread is about warp drive physics and opto-electronic gravity field generators. |
Neither of which exist.
The light bearing aether has both relativistic and quantum wave features.
You've been sniffing to much aether.
QUOTE (AlexG+Mar 21 2012, 03:35 AM)
Neither of which exist.
You've been sniffing to much aether.
Shift photons annihilate gravitons in a reaction that should probably look like:
graviton + shift photon --->
n photons each with increasing frequency + acceleration field.
If I wanted to make a shift photon out of 4 frequencies: 450THz, 550THz, 650THz and 750THz, I would need a train of each frequency with an integer number of cycles. The next frequency, 550THz, has to begin at the same phase that the previous frequency, 450THz finishes at. The more the phases line up, the higher quality shift photon it will be.
When a shift photon annihilates a graviton, you get back all of the individual photons, but their phases are randomized. You also get a brief acceleration field. Loss of phase information is the price you pay for annihilating a graviton.
Anyway, this is the foundation of warp drive theory. You need high quality shift photons to annihilate gravitons. Averaged out, you get a curvature in space-time that you can use for propulsion.
You've been sniffing to much aether.
Shift photons annihilate gravitons in a reaction that should probably look like:
graviton + shift photon --->
n photons each with increasing frequency + acceleration field.
If I wanted to make a shift photon out of 4 frequencies: 450THz, 550THz, 650THz and 750THz, I would need a train of each frequency with an integer number of cycles. The next frequency, 550THz, has to begin at the same phase that the previous frequency, 450THz finishes at. The more the phases line up, the higher quality shift photon it will be.
When a shift photon annihilates a graviton, you get back all of the individual photons, but their phases are randomized. You also get a brief acceleration field. Loss of phase information is the price you pay for annihilating a graviton.
Anyway, this is the foundation of warp drive theory. You need high quality shift photons to annihilate gravitons. Averaged out, you get a curvature in space-time that you can use for propulsion.
This is such utter nonsense.
If you really believe this crap, you're badly in need of professional help.
If you really believe this crap, you're badly in need of professional help.
QUOTE (AlexG+Mar 21 2012, 05:39 AM)
This is such utter nonsense.
If you really believe this crap, you're badly in need of professional help.
Just let them use their imaginations Alex relax or join in!
If you really believe this crap, you're badly in need of professional help.
Just let them use their imaginations Alex relax or join in!
QUOTE (Robittybob1+Mar 21 2012, 06:18 AM)
Just let them use their imaginations Alex relax or join in!
Imagination without basis is called nonsense, which has no place on a physics dedicated forum.
Go post here instead
Imagination without basis is called nonsense, which has no place on a physics dedicated forum.
Go post here instead
So shift photons annihilate gravitons. Generating higher yield shift photons is an engineering challenge. It involves controlling a wide range of electromagnetic frequencies, down to the cycle and the phase. Spitting out 2 or 3 cycles of 400THz, followed by 405THz for 2 or 3 cycles AND getting their phases to overlap is a very tough engineering challenge. But what did you expect the unification of GR and quantum mechanics to be about? 10 dimensional super-string engineering? Fantasize all you like, but unification of GR and QM is about manipulating gravity with quantum particles; the most likely contender is light.
The question then becomes: what kind of shift photon characteristics do you need to annihilate a graviton?
-How wide of a frequency shift?
-What is the minimum number of frequencies that you need to construct a shift photon?
-Do their phases have to line up?
-How short do they have to be to be effective? A shift photon that is one light second long, about 300,000km is going to be too dispersed to be effective.
You folks should be delighted that you get a sneak preview of what physics and engineering are going to look like in coming centuries. Anti-gravity, artificial gravity, megalithic construction, tractor beams and the superluminal drive are all coming in the next several centuries.
It all begins with having a vision.
The question then becomes: what kind of shift photon characteristics do you need to annihilate a graviton?
-How wide of a frequency shift?
-What is the minimum number of frequencies that you need to construct a shift photon?
-Do their phases have to line up?
-How short do they have to be to be effective? A shift photon that is one light second long, about 300,000km is going to be too dispersed to be effective.
You folks should be delighted that you get a sneak preview of what physics and engineering are going to look like in coming centuries. Anti-gravity, artificial gravity, megalithic construction, tractor beams and the superluminal drive are all coming in the next several centuries.
It all begins with having a vision.
Build it dude and prove it hell I'll give you an array of 2,073,600 LED's.
or if you wish you can pick one up at the junk yard or local computer recycler You will can modify the electronics any way wish to get the scan to work the way you want. You may even be able to purchase programmable chips so that you can program the scan rate.
I think you'll find it won't work. Light does not produce acceleration in a vacuum by any other means than ablation.
Good luck with that
I on the other hand I will be pursuing the super conductor avenue. I bet you won't give me any super conductors.
or if you wish you can pick one up at the junk yard or local computer recycler You will can modify the electronics any way wish to get the scan to work the way you want. You may even be able to purchase programmable chips so that you can program the scan rate.
I think you'll find it won't work. Light does not produce acceleration in a vacuum by any other means than ablation.
Good luck with that
I on the other hand I will be pursuing the super conductor avenue. I bet you won't give me any super conductors.
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Mar 21 2012, 11:11 AM)
Build it dude and prove it hell I'll give you an array of 2,073,600 LED's.
or if you wish you can pick one up at the junk yard or local computer recycler You will can modify the electronics any way wish to get the scan to work the way you want. You may even be able to purchase programmable chips so that you can program the scan rate.
I think you'll find it won't work. Light does not produce acceleration in a vacuum by any other means than ablation.
Good luck with that
I on the other hand I will be pursuing the super conductor avenue. I bet you won't give me any super conductors.
I think I have some liquid nitrogen sitting around the house.
As for shift photon generators, I'm trying to imagine how expensive and complicated it's gonna be.
or if you wish you can pick one up at the junk yard or local computer recycler You will can modify the electronics any way wish to get the scan to work the way you want. You may even be able to purchase programmable chips so that you can program the scan rate.
I think you'll find it won't work. Light does not produce acceleration in a vacuum by any other means than ablation.
Good luck with that
I on the other hand I will be pursuing the super conductor avenue. I bet you won't give me any super conductors.
I think I have some liquid nitrogen sitting around the house.
As for shift photon generators, I'm trying to imagine how expensive and complicated it's gonna be.
While looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive , I came across a sentence:
At least wiki has defined the problem for you. One of the problems is that you don't have a method to create a warp bubble. You all need to spend some time thinking about that.
You need a "method" to curve space-time. Can anyone in the physics community come up with a method?
QUOTE
The Alcubierre drive, however, remains a hypothetical concept with seemingly insuperable problems: The amount of energy required is unobtainably large, there is no method to create a warp bubble in a region that does not already contain one, and there is no method to move from the warp-bubble once having arrived at a supposed destination.
At least wiki has defined the problem for you. One of the problems is that you don't have a method to create a warp bubble. You all need to spend some time thinking about that.
You need a "method" to curve space-time. Can anyone in the physics community come up with a method?
This is now the unofficial silly bullshit thread.
(Actually, it's been that all along)
(Actually, it's been that all along)
QUOTE (AlexG+Mar 22 2012, 01:19 AM)
This is now the unofficial silly bullshit thread.
(Actually, it's been that all along)
It was getting lonely here. I guess a cranky troll is better than nothing.
I was looking at the Disclosure website, http://www.disclosureproject.org/docgallery.shtml
I was thinking how much I wish there were evidence of UFO's that actually looked like physics. Maybe a majority of people are not familiar enough with physics to be able to appreciate the physics behind warp drive theory. I did the best I could to come up with a theory without having access to a real warp drive engine. Gravitational redshift frequency shifts light. The best I could come up with is that transmitting shift photons, with careful attention to the phase of each constinuent frequency, might give you back a gravitational acceleration. The idea that shift photons cancel gravitons at least sounds plausible. If I can't actually build the experiment, at least I can give you a method.
I doubt you will find any better ideas out there to explain warp drives and gravity drives.
(Actually, it's been that all along)
It was getting lonely here. I guess a cranky troll is better than nothing.
I was looking at the Disclosure website, http://www.disclosureproject.org/docgallery.shtml
I was thinking how much I wish there were evidence of UFO's that actually looked like physics. Maybe a majority of people are not familiar enough with physics to be able to appreciate the physics behind warp drive theory. I did the best I could to come up with a theory without having access to a real warp drive engine. Gravitational redshift frequency shifts light. The best I could come up with is that transmitting shift photons, with careful attention to the phase of each constinuent frequency, might give you back a gravitational acceleration. The idea that shift photons cancel gravitons at least sounds plausible. If I can't actually build the experiment, at least I can give you a method.
I doubt you will find any better ideas out there to explain warp drives and gravity drives.
I thought of a possible solution to the energy crisis using shift photon technology. Take a cylinder and emit shift photons through one end, they are absorbed at the other end. Establish a very strong gravity field in the cylinder. Next, inject low energy electrons in one end. They will begin to fall in the artificial gravity well inside the cylinder. When they reach the bottom, they will constitute a very high dc current.
There is your clean new energy supply.
There is your clean new energy supply.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 22 2012, 01:45 AM)
I thought of a possible solution to the energy crisis using shift photon technology. Take a cylinder and emit shift photons through one end, they are absorbed at the other end. Establish a very strong gravity field in the cylinder. Next, inject low energy electrons in one end. They will begin to fall in the artificial gravity well inside the cylinder. When they reach the bottom, they will constitute a very high dc current.
There is your clean new energy supply.
build it. no one else will
mostly because it wont work but that is beside the point.
how to create shift photons
1 get a light bulb
2 mount light bulb on space craft
3 mount tetector on stationary object
4 turn on light
5 measure spectrum of light
6 fly ship with light bulb toward detector
7 measure spectrum of light source and you will find that you have sucessfully blue shifted your spectrum
There is your clean new energy supply.
build it. no one else will
mostly because it wont work but that is beside the point.
how to create shift photons
1 get a light bulb
2 mount light bulb on space craft
3 mount tetector on stationary object
4 turn on light
5 measure spectrum of light
6 fly ship with light bulb toward detector
7 measure spectrum of light source and you will find that you have sucessfully blue shifted your spectrum
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Mar 22 2012, 04:25 PM)
build it. no one else will
mostly because it wont work but that is beside the point.
how to create shift photons
1 get a light bulb
2 mount light bulb on space craft
3 mount tetector on stationary object
4 turn on light
5 measure spectrum of light
6 fly ship with light bulb toward detector
7 measure spectrum of light source and you will find that you have sucessfully blue shifted your spectrum
Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!
It's all about high performance electromagnetic frequency and phase control. When a photon falls into a gravity well (of a black hole), its frequency will change, it will blueshift along the radii with an unbroken changing frequency and changing phase. In other words, if the photon falls along the axis r (radii), then you can write the phase and frequency as a function of r:
phase theta ( r) = ...
frequency f( r) = d/dt[theta( r)].
IN REVERSE...
If you want to get back a gravity field, you have to synthesize and emit a continuous, unbroken waveform with a changing frequency. You can't do this with light bulbs. You probably have to use lasers, light emitting diodes, and very high performance electronics.
It's not about, as the woo woo people would say: twinkling lights. It's about high performance frequency and phase control.
mostly because it wont work but that is beside the point.
how to create shift photons
1 get a light bulb
2 mount light bulb on space craft
3 mount tetector on stationary object
4 turn on light
5 measure spectrum of light
6 fly ship with light bulb toward detector
7 measure spectrum of light source and you will find that you have sucessfully blue shifted your spectrum
Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!
It's all about high performance electromagnetic frequency and phase control. When a photon falls into a gravity well (of a black hole), its frequency will change, it will blueshift along the radii with an unbroken changing frequency and changing phase. In other words, if the photon falls along the axis r (radii), then you can write the phase and frequency as a function of r:
phase theta ( r) = ...
frequency f( r) = d/dt[theta( r)].
IN REVERSE...
If you want to get back a gravity field, you have to synthesize and emit a continuous, unbroken waveform with a changing frequency. You can't do this with light bulbs. You probably have to use lasers, light emitting diodes, and very high performance electronics.
It's not about, as the woo woo people would say: twinkling lights. It's about high performance frequency and phase control.
The photon is the energy solution to the Schrodinger equation, which is a wave-function. Photons have wave functions.
Gravitational redshift changes the photon's frequency. That means that gravity changes the photon's wave-function.
Wave functions are defined as continuous functions. Since gravity interacts with the photon's wave-function as a shift in frequency, ...
...and the wave-function is continuous...
...then the emission of a continuous wave-function of a frequency shifted photon will result in a gravity field...
Translation: A graviton frequency shifts the photon's wave-function. Reproduce the frequency shift photon and you get back a graviton. This is how a gravity drive works.
Just to see if you're paying attention; this is why flying saucers are real.
Gravitational redshift changes the photon's frequency. That means that gravity changes the photon's wave-function.
Wave functions are defined as continuous functions. Since gravity interacts with the photon's wave-function as a shift in frequency, ...
...and the wave-function is continuous...
...then the emission of a continuous wave-function of a frequency shifted photon will result in a gravity field...
Translation: A graviton frequency shifts the photon's wave-function. Reproduce the frequency shift photon and you get back a graviton. This is how a gravity drive works.
Just to see if you're paying attention; this is why flying saucers are real.
Hi, I'd like to order the word salad with a side of UFO paranoia please. And please hold the healthy skepticism, I'm allergic.
We call him flyboy
Don't wory he's harmless he's just out for recess !
Sorry I ment to say out to lunch.
Don't wory he's harmless he's just out for recess !
Sorry I ment to say out to lunch.
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+Mar 22 2012, 08:23 PM)
We call him flyboy
Don't wory he's harmless he's just out for recess !
Sorry I ment to say out to lunch.
I like recess.
The wave-function, I strongly believe, is a real phenomena; the Schrodinger differential equation is the math that describes it.
The wave function of the photon is frequency shifted by gravity (a graviton).
What happens if you synthesize a frequency shifted photon (with attention to phase)?
You should get back a graviton.
Gotta go!!!
Don't wory he's harmless he's just out for recess !
Sorry I ment to say out to lunch.
I like recess.
QUOTE
Hi, I'd like to order the word salad with a side of UFO paranoia please. And please hold the healthy skepticism, I'm allergic.
The wave-function, I strongly believe, is a real phenomena; the Schrodinger differential equation is the math that describes it.
The wave function of the photon is frequency shifted by gravity (a graviton).
What happens if you synthesize a frequency shifted photon (with attention to phase)?
You should get back a graviton.
Gotta go!!!
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 22 2012, 04:33 PM)
The wave function of the photon is frequency shifted by gravity (a graviton).
What happens if you synthesize a frequency shifted photon (with attention to phase)?
You should get back a graviton.
That doesn't even begin to make sense. Gravitons aren't even known to exist, yet you're making up all kinds of properties for them.
The rule of FTL travel is:
Relativity, Causality, FTL: Pick two
What happens if you synthesize a frequency shifted photon (with attention to phase)?
You should get back a graviton.
That doesn't even begin to make sense. Gravitons aren't even known to exist, yet you're making up all kinds of properties for them.
The rule of FTL travel is:
Relativity, Causality, FTL: Pick two
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 22 2012, 08:33 PM)
I like recess.
The wave-function, I strongly believe, is a real phenomena; the Schrodinger differential equation is the math that describes it.
The wave function of the photon is frequency shifted by gravity (a graviton).
What happens if you synthesize a frequency shifted photon (with attention to phase)?
You should get back a graviton.
Gotta go!!!
You're just making up bullshit in a public forum. Just like every other crank.
The wave-function, I strongly believe, is a real phenomena; the Schrodinger differential equation is the math that describes it.
The wave function of the photon is frequency shifted by gravity (a graviton).
What happens if you synthesize a frequency shifted photon (with attention to phase)?
You should get back a graviton.
Gotta go!!!
You're just making up bullshit in a public forum. Just like every other crank.
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+Mar 22 2012, 08:23 PM)
We call him flyboy
Don't wory he's harmless he's just out for recess !
Sorry I ment to say out to lunch.
You may think he's harmless. He's a purveyor of nonsense.
Don't wory he's harmless he's just out for recess !
Sorry I ment to say out to lunch.
You may think he's harmless. He's a purveyor of nonsense.
QUOTE (brucep+Mar 22 2012, 05:35 PM)
You may think he's harmless. He's a purveyor of nonsense.
I think he's referring to me.
I think he's referring to me.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 22 2012, 01:34 AM)
It was getting lonely here. I guess a cranky troll is better than nothing.
I was looking at the Disclosure website, http://www.disclosureproject.org/docgallery.shtml
I was thinking how much I wish there were evidence of UFO's that actually looked like physics. Maybe a majority of people are not familiar enough with physics to be able to appreciate the physics behind warp drive theory. I did the best I could to come up with a theory without having access to a real warp drive engine. Gravitational redshift frequency shifts light. The best I could come up with is that transmitting shift photons, with careful attention to the phase of each constinuent frequency, might give you back a gravitational acceleration. The idea that shift photons cancel gravitons at least sounds plausible. If I can't actually build the experiment, at least I can give you a method.
I doubt you will find any better ideas out there to explain warp drives and gravity drives.
You should know being the Nonsense Troll.
I was looking at the Disclosure website, http://www.disclosureproject.org/docgallery.shtml
I was thinking how much I wish there were evidence of UFO's that actually looked like physics. Maybe a majority of people are not familiar enough with physics to be able to appreciate the physics behind warp drive theory. I did the best I could to come up with a theory without having access to a real warp drive engine. Gravitational redshift frequency shifts light. The best I could come up with is that transmitting shift photons, with careful attention to the phase of each constinuent frequency, might give you back a gravitational acceleration. The idea that shift photons cancel gravitons at least sounds plausible. If I can't actually build the experiment, at least I can give you a method.
I doubt you will find any better ideas out there to explain warp drives and gravity drives.
You should know being the Nonsense Troll.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Mar 22 2012, 09:42 PM)
I think he's referring to me.
I thought he was a co-worker of the Nonsense Troll. You know the 'photon shift' LED 'warp drive factory'. I'm so sorry for my egregious error [s]. I thought they were on break together. Apparently I need a refresher in reading comprehension.
I thought he was a co-worker of the Nonsense Troll. You know the 'photon shift' LED 'warp drive factory'. I'm so sorry for my egregious error [s]. I thought they were on break together. Apparently I need a refresher in reading comprehension.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Mar 22 2012, 09:14 PM)
That doesn't even begin to make sense. Gravitons aren't even known to exist, yet you're making up all kinds of properties for them.
The rule of FTL travel is:
Relativity, Causality, FTL: Pick two
You are right that gravitons are not known to exist. Space-time curvature is used to explain gravity. Physicists argue that the space-time continuum has laid down absolute laws for us to obey (Einstein equations), yet itself doesn't exists and is nothingness. As brucep would say, that's bullshit. The space-time continuum does exist, it does have properties, and it is something that we can eventually learn to manipulate. I referred to graviton-shift photon annihilation just to emphasize to you that the space-time continuum can be manipulated.
You said: pick two. I pick:
1. Causality is absolute.
2. FTL is possible.
Yes relativity is correct. However, in order for a hyperdrive to exist, your starship has to divorce itself from the space-time continuum that includes the universe.
Your spaceship exists in space-time A.
The universe exists in space-time B.
Space-time A and B are always cojoined, attached, interconnected. A hyperdrive has to rip A away from B. When this occurs, the spaceship becomes an object in hyperspace. Hyperspace is a lot like the space-time continuum, except that it's own speed of light is c' >> c. A hyperdrive rips the spaceship out of the space-time continuum. The spaceship becomes an object in hyperspace where the speed of hyperspace light is c' >> c.
When space-time A is separated from space-time B, you can beat relativity without violating causality.
The rule of FTL travel is:
Relativity, Causality, FTL: Pick two
You are right that gravitons are not known to exist. Space-time curvature is used to explain gravity. Physicists argue that the space-time continuum has laid down absolute laws for us to obey (Einstein equations), yet itself doesn't exists and is nothingness. As brucep would say, that's bullshit. The space-time continuum does exist, it does have properties, and it is something that we can eventually learn to manipulate. I referred to graviton-shift photon annihilation just to emphasize to you that the space-time continuum can be manipulated.
You said: pick two. I pick:
1. Causality is absolute.
2. FTL is possible.
Yes relativity is correct. However, in order for a hyperdrive to exist, your starship has to divorce itself from the space-time continuum that includes the universe.
Your spaceship exists in space-time A.
The universe exists in space-time B.
Space-time A and B are always cojoined, attached, interconnected. A hyperdrive has to rip A away from B. When this occurs, the spaceship becomes an object in hyperspace. Hyperspace is a lot like the space-time continuum, except that it's own speed of light is c' >> c. A hyperdrive rips the spaceship out of the space-time continuum. The spaceship becomes an object in hyperspace where the speed of hyperspace light is c' >> c.
When space-time A is separated from space-time B, you can beat relativity without violating causality.
I think it would be useful to define what space is before we try to bend it as far as i know its nothing so it would be hard to bend nothing the same thing when physicists say space is expanding. You cant expand nothing the same as it has no mass no time and doesn't react with matter in any way expect for the negative force it exerts.
There is a similar affect in nature that is well known called osmoses and works by equalization. It is used by plants to absorb water and nutrients from the earth.
Im not sure warp drive is possible because the standard model is based on speed of light witch hasn't been proven to be a constant yet.
Just because the math says speed of light isn't possible doesn't make it so either.
The proof for that is the fact that nobody has written the perfect computer program that simulates reality.
I may seem to be contradicting my self but physics at this stage is a contradiction.
There is a similar affect in nature that is well known called osmoses and works by equalization. It is used by plants to absorb water and nutrients from the earth.
Im not sure warp drive is possible because the standard model is based on speed of light witch hasn't been proven to be a constant yet.
Just because the math says speed of light isn't possible doesn't make it so either.
The proof for that is the fact that nobody has written the perfect computer program that simulates reality.
I may seem to be contradicting my self but physics at this stage is a contradiction.
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+Mar 23 2012, 01:11 AM)
I think it would be useful to define what space is before we try to bend it as far as i know its nothing so it would be hard to bend nothing the same thing when physicists say space is expanding. You cant expand nothing the same as it has no mass no time and doesn't react with matter in any way expect for the negative force it exerts.
There is a similar affect in nature that is well known called osmoses and works by equalization. It is used by plants to absorb water and nutrients from the earth.
Im not sure warp drive is possible because the standard model is based on speed of light witch hasn't been proven to be a constant yet.
Just because the math says speed of light isn't possible doesn't make it so either.
The proof for that is the fact that nobody has written the perfect computer program that simulates reality.
I may seem to be contradicting my self but physics at this stage is a contradiction.
You're right, physics is a contradiction.
I have a general idea of what space-time really is, but I would be at a loss as to how to define it formally, mathematically. The best I can do is to tell you that it's made out of wave functions. Since wave-functions, as a physical phenomena, have never been proved to exist, then we're kinda stuck.
Warp drive can exist if a piece of space-time (the part that contains your ship) can be removed from the space-time that contains the universe. Then, that piece of space-time can behave like a hyperspace object, and move faster than c.
I wish I could prove to you, to everyone, that hyperspace and gravity drives exist. I have given you all a general idea of what kind of experiments you have to run. You have to generate shift photons to see if they really do manipulate space-time. But it's expensive research and it is technically very difficult. If it were easy, I would do the test myself.
Attitudes have to change in the physics community before warp drive research can happen. There is a strong unwillingness to think beyond what has been experimentally verified. We can't go faster than the speed of light because of the mantra, Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
There is a similar affect in nature that is well known called osmoses and works by equalization. It is used by plants to absorb water and nutrients from the earth.
Im not sure warp drive is possible because the standard model is based on speed of light witch hasn't been proven to be a constant yet.
Just because the math says speed of light isn't possible doesn't make it so either.
The proof for that is the fact that nobody has written the perfect computer program that simulates reality.
I may seem to be contradicting my self but physics at this stage is a contradiction.
You're right, physics is a contradiction.
I have a general idea of what space-time really is, but I would be at a loss as to how to define it formally, mathematically. The best I can do is to tell you that it's made out of wave functions. Since wave-functions, as a physical phenomena, have never been proved to exist, then we're kinda stuck.
Warp drive can exist if a piece of space-time (the part that contains your ship) can be removed from the space-time that contains the universe. Then, that piece of space-time can behave like a hyperspace object, and move faster than c.
I wish I could prove to you, to everyone, that hyperspace and gravity drives exist. I have given you all a general idea of what kind of experiments you have to run. You have to generate shift photons to see if they really do manipulate space-time. But it's expensive research and it is technically very difficult. If it were easy, I would do the test myself.
Attitudes have to change in the physics community before warp drive research can happen. There is a strong unwillingness to think beyond what has been experimentally verified. We can't go faster than the speed of light because of the mantra, Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
Nothing can go faster than the speed of light!
How come nobody here can keep up with me? Is warp drive theory too challenging conceptually?
Just remember: mathematical physics was invented by humans as a means to quantify what was being measured. But its ability to predict what is ultimately possible is limited. After all, the mathematical laws of physics can't even predict the exists of the human mind.
Just remember: mathematical physics was invented by humans as a means to quantify what was being measured. But its ability to predict what is ultimately possible is limited. After all, the mathematical laws of physics can't even predict the exists of the human mind.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 22 2012, 07:32 PM)
You said: pick two. I pick:
1. Causality is absolute.
2. FTL is possible.
Yes relativity is correct. However, in order for a hyperdrive to exist, your starship has to divorce itself from the space-time continuum that includes the universe.
Your spaceship exists in space-time A.
The universe exists in space-time B.
Space-time A and B are always cojoined, attached, interconnected. A hyperdrive has to rip A away from B. When this occurs, the spaceship becomes an object in hyperspace. Hyperspace is a lot like the space-time continuum, except that it's own speed of light is c' >> c. A hyperdrive rips the spaceship out of the space-time continuum. The spaceship becomes an object in hyperspace where the speed of hyperspace light is c' >> c.
When space-time A is separated from space-time B, you can beat relativity without violating causality.
Causality is violated when your space-ship re-enters regular space. From an observer's point of view, it would appear that the ship arrived before it departed, violating causality.
1. Causality is absolute.
2. FTL is possible.
Yes relativity is correct. However, in order for a hyperdrive to exist, your starship has to divorce itself from the space-time continuum that includes the universe.
Your spaceship exists in space-time A.
The universe exists in space-time B.
Space-time A and B are always cojoined, attached, interconnected. A hyperdrive has to rip A away from B. When this occurs, the spaceship becomes an object in hyperspace. Hyperspace is a lot like the space-time continuum, except that it's own speed of light is c' >> c. A hyperdrive rips the spaceship out of the space-time continuum. The spaceship becomes an object in hyperspace where the speed of hyperspace light is c' >> c.
When space-time A is separated from space-time B, you can beat relativity without violating causality.
Causality is violated when your space-ship re-enters regular space. From an observer's point of view, it would appear that the ship arrived before it departed, violating causality.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Mar 23 2012, 03:37 AM)
Causality is violated when your space-ship re-enters regular space. From an observer's point of view, it would appear that the ship arrived before it departed, violating causality.
Why would you worry about an observer? With any new thing the first observers were baffled by what they saw.
Why would you worry about an observer? With any new thing the first observers were baffled by what they saw.
QUOTE (Robittybob1+Mar 22 2012, 11:51 PM)
Why would you worry about an observer? With any new thing the first observers were baffled by what they saw.
Physics depends on the "observer." There is no absolute reference.
Physics depends on the "observer." There is no absolute reference.
Mazulu, I think you really believe what you say. Unfortunately your understanding is incorrect.
Light does not warp space.
Light does not have mass if it did it could not travel at the speed of light.
This may confound you but Light does not move in time it is at rest.
Light exists in the time frame it was created.
The only reason you are able to detect it at all is be cause your mass happens to intersect with the event horizon of the time frame that emitted the light and the wave function of the particles in your measurement device happen to be tuned to the RELATIVE frequency or frequencies (resonant energy) that happen to be present when the horizon of the time frame of the event that emitted the light crosses your path.
By relative I mean weather you and your detection device are traveling toward or away from the event, the local mass density of the emitter and the local mass density where you happen to be when the event horizon of the event cross your path.
by local mass density I mean gravitational influence.
Light Does NOT cause gravity.
Light cannot cause gravity not with current technology anyway.
In certain special cases Light Gamma rays created in certain matter antimatter collisions can decay into electrons and Positrons (anti electrons) which have mass.
How many electrons/Positrons @ what density do you need to create a 1G warp field? I bet it is a hell of a lot more dense and numerous than you could ever hope to muster in your wildest dreams to achieve without copious amounts of antimatter.
So you need an attowatt^18 gamma ray laser powered by copious amounts of antimatter. And yes that is a PROMA number so don't give me crap about it more figurative than literal. You want to figure it out go ahead.
mass of earth 5.9742 × 1024 kilograms
Volume of earth 1.08321×10 12 km 3
electron mass = 9.10938188 × 10-31 kilograms
just remember you have to the a number of electrons with the same mass as the earth into a volume the size of the earth or less.
Good luck with that.
lol
Light does not warp space.
Light does not have mass if it did it could not travel at the speed of light.
This may confound you but Light does not move in time it is at rest.
Light exists in the time frame it was created.
The only reason you are able to detect it at all is be cause your mass happens to intersect with the event horizon of the time frame that emitted the light and the wave function of the particles in your measurement device happen to be tuned to the RELATIVE frequency or frequencies (resonant energy) that happen to be present when the horizon of the time frame of the event that emitted the light crosses your path.
By relative I mean weather you and your detection device are traveling toward or away from the event, the local mass density of the emitter and the local mass density where you happen to be when the event horizon of the event cross your path.
by local mass density I mean gravitational influence.
Light Does NOT cause gravity.
Light cannot cause gravity not with current technology anyway.
In certain special cases Light Gamma rays created in certain matter antimatter collisions can decay into electrons and Positrons (anti electrons) which have mass.
How many electrons/Positrons @ what density do you need to create a 1G warp field? I bet it is a hell of a lot more dense and numerous than you could ever hope to muster in your wildest dreams to achieve without copious amounts of antimatter.
So you need an attowatt^18 gamma ray laser powered by copious amounts of antimatter. And yes that is a PROMA number so don't give me crap about it more figurative than literal. You want to figure it out go ahead.
mass of earth 5.9742 × 1024 kilograms
Volume of earth 1.08321×10 12 km 3
electron mass = 9.10938188 × 10-31 kilograms
just remember you have to the a number of electrons with the same mass as the earth into a volume the size of the earth or less.
Good luck with that.
lol
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Mar 23 2012, 04:06 AM)
Physics depends on the "observer." There is no absolute reference.
Not absolutely. If you time warped to some other period and there were no observers would you care? Or is your observer yourself in that case? I thought you mean like other creatures not involved with the experiment,
How about Time warp back to the time of the dinosaurs. Dinosaurs observe you - would they count as an "observer".
What is your definition of "observer"?
Not absolutely. If you time warped to some other period and there were no observers would you care? Or is your observer yourself in that case? I thought you mean like other creatures not involved with the experiment,
How about Time warp back to the time of the dinosaurs. Dinosaurs observe you - would they count as an "observer".
What is your definition of "observer"?
The only object I know of that can manipulate time is a black hole/ worm hole which is due to having nearly infinite amount of gravitational force. Finding technology to mimic this behavior sounds to be a nearly impossible feat... Especially with current technology.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Mar 23 2012, 03:37 AM)
Causality is violated when your space-ship re-enters regular space. From an observer's point of view, it would appear that the ship arrived before it departed, violating causality.
All that means is that you could reenter space-time, look through a telescope and watch your image jump to hyperspace. There is nothing wrong with this, causally speaking.
Hyperspace objects also travel relative to one another. But there are differences. For one, hyperspace objects are chunks of space-time that can travel superluminally wrt each other (as long as they don't recombine). Second, all your relativistic equations have their c replaced with c' (speed of hyperspace light).
Hyperspace objects also travel relative to one another. But there are differences. For one, hyperspace objects are chunks of space-time that can travel superluminally wrt each other (as long as they don't recombine). Second, all your relativistic equations have their c replaced with c' (speed of hyperspace light).
The only object I know of that can manipulate time is a black hole/ worm hole which is due to having nearly infinite amount of gravitational force. Finding technology to mimic this behavior sounds to be a nearly impossible feat... Especially with current technology.
You're just gonna have to run the experiments to find out if shift photons will generate gravity. Remember that the benefit exceeds the cost (if it works).
Think of the Poynting vector. Think about the frequency of electromagnetic light. You have to generate light that changes frequency, Delta f, inside of a very short time period (<100ms) Delta t. However you generate it, try not to break phase. Make Delta f as large as possible, Delta t as small as possible.
Warped space time frequency shifts light. It is reasonable to perform experiments with shift photons to see if it could work in reverse. That is, if you're seeking warp drive/gravity drive physics.
From an experimental point of view, light "at rest" doesn't help you. It doesn't move you forward technologically.
Warped space time frequency shifts light. It is reasonable to perform experiments with shift photons to see if it could work in reverse. That is, if you're seeking warp drive/gravity drive physics.
From an experimental point of view, light "at rest" doesn't help you. It doesn't move you forward technologically.
EXACTLY Light @ rest in time is why your idea will not work.
Feel free to experiment all you want I am telling you it is a wasted effort.
I have attempted to offer you an alternative that at least in a laboratory has at least has proven to at least cause external accelerations. Yes they are small but their there.
I have just suggested that starting with something that seems to effect what you want to effect is a good place to start rather than wasting your time.
http://esamultimedia.esa.int/docs/gsp/Expe...l_Detection.pdf
http://www.superconductors.org/28c_rtsc.htm
http://lanl.arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1202/1202.2480.pdf
Good day
All that means is that you could reenter space-time, look through a telescope and watch your image jump to hyperspace. There is nothing wrong with this, causally speaking.
QUOTE
Physics depends on the "observer." There is no absolute reference.
Hyperspace objects also travel relative to one another. But there are differences. For one, hyperspace objects are chunks of space-time that can travel superluminally wrt each other (as long as they don't recombine). Second, all your relativistic equations have their c replaced with c' (speed of hyperspace light).
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Physics depends on the "observer." There is no absolute reference. |
Hyperspace objects also travel relative to one another. But there are differences. For one, hyperspace objects are chunks of space-time that can travel superluminally wrt each other (as long as they don't recombine). Second, all your relativistic equations have their c replaced with c' (speed of hyperspace light).
The only object I know of that can manipulate time is a black hole/ worm hole which is due to having nearly infinite amount of gravitational force. Finding technology to mimic this behavior sounds to be a nearly impossible feat... Especially with current technology.
You're just gonna have to run the experiments to find out if shift photons will generate gravity. Remember that the benefit exceeds the cost (if it works).
Think of the Poynting vector. Think about the frequency of electromagnetic light. You have to generate light that changes frequency, Delta f, inside of a very short time period (<100ms) Delta t. However you generate it, try not to break phase. Make Delta f as large as possible, Delta t as small as possible.
QUOTE
Mazulu, I think you really believe what you say. Unfortunately your understanding is incorrect. Light does not warp space. Light does not have mass if it did it could not travel at the speed of light. This may confound you but Light does not move in time it is at rest. Light exists in the time frame it was created.
Warped space time frequency shifts light. It is reasonable to perform experiments with shift photons to see if it could work in reverse. That is, if you're seeking warp drive/gravity drive physics.
From an experimental point of view, light "at rest" doesn't help you. It doesn't move you forward technologically.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 23 2012, 01:32 AM)
All that means is that you could reenter space-time, look through a telescope and watch your image jump to hyperspace. There is nothing wrong with this, causally speaking.
Hyperspace objects also travel relative to one another. But there are differences. For one, hyperspace objects are chunks of space-time that can travel superluminally wrt each other (as long as they don't recombine). Second, all your relativistic equations have their c replaced with c' (speed of hyperspace light).
Here are a couple resources you should look into:
http://www.physicsguy.com/ftl/html/FTL_part4.html
http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/fasterlight.php
Hyperspace objects also travel relative to one another. But there are differences. For one, hyperspace objects are chunks of space-time that can travel superluminally wrt each other (as long as they don't recombine). Second, all your relativistic equations have their c replaced with c' (speed of hyperspace light).
Here are a couple resources you should look into:
http://www.physicsguy.com/ftl/html/FTL_part4.html
http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/fasterlight.php
QUOTE (Ed Wood+Mar 18 2012, 04:38 AM)
Good luck with the LED thing. My TV has not yet warped space close enough to my couch to allow me to change the channel without the remote yet.
Is it possible to entangle photons with different wavelengths?
When you say hyperspace I think the 1 frame of reference that contains all reference frames if there is such a thing. Is that what you mean?
Hey Ed
The tv is how I discovered that all matter warps light regardless of it's mass and it wasn't a program that I was watching it was the light that was comming from the television
Is it possible to entangle photons with different wavelengths?
When you say hyperspace I think the 1 frame of reference that contains all reference frames if there is such a thing. Is that what you mean?
Hey Ed
The tv is how I discovered that all matter warps light regardless of it's mass and it wasn't a program that I was watching it was the light that was comming from the television
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Mar 23 2012, 02:03 PM)
Here are a couple resources you should look into:
http://www.physicsguy.com/ftl/html/FTL_part4.html
http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/fasterlight.php
I keep hearing physicists fret that if you could travel faster than light speed, you could go somewhere and come back before you ever left. Physicists believe that you jump to hyperspace traveling 1000c, visit the Jupiter cafe at Jupiter, come back to where you started, and then play a game of checkers with yourself until your other self has to depart; of course, failure of your other self to depart would result in a paradox.
Does everyone know what I'm talking about?
Can you guess where the physics community made a mistake in their reasoning?
When you jumped into hyperspace to go to Jupiter, you left space-time. Thus, relativity no longer applies. As long as your velocity in hyperspace is much smaller than the velocity of hyper-light, c', in hyperspace (i.e. v<<c'), time runs normally.
Any questions or disagreements?
http://www.physicsguy.com/ftl/html/FTL_part4.html
http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/fasterlight.php
I keep hearing physicists fret that if you could travel faster than light speed, you could go somewhere and come back before you ever left. Physicists believe that you jump to hyperspace traveling 1000c, visit the Jupiter cafe at Jupiter, come back to where you started, and then play a game of checkers with yourself until your other self has to depart; of course, failure of your other self to depart would result in a paradox.
Does everyone know what I'm talking about?
Can you guess where the physics community made a mistake in their reasoning?
When you jumped into hyperspace to go to Jupiter, you left space-time. Thus, relativity no longer applies. As long as your velocity in hyperspace is much smaller than the velocity of hyper-light, c', in hyperspace (i.e. v<<c'), time runs normally.
Any questions or disagreements?
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 23 2012, 04:08 PM)
When you jumped into hyperspace to go to Jupiter, you left space-time. Thus, relativity no longer applies. As long as your velocity in hyperspace is much smaller than the velocity of hyper-light, c', in hyperspace (i.e. v<<c'), time runs normally.
Any questions or disagreements?
Hyperspace is something made up by science fiction writers as a way of getting around the relativity problem. If anything like hyperspace exists in reality, there is no guarantee that its properties would even allow FTL travel, it could be live diving into pudding.
Any questions or disagreements?
Hyperspace is something made up by science fiction writers as a way of getting around the relativity problem. If anything like hyperspace exists in reality, there is no guarantee that its properties would even allow FTL travel, it could be live diving into pudding.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 23 2012, 05:32 AM)
Warped space time frequency shifts light. It is reasonable to perform experiments with shift photons to see if it could work in reverse. That is, if you're seeking warp drive/gravity drive physics.
From an experimental point of view, light "at rest" doesn't help you. It doesn't move you forward technologically.
EXACTLY Light @ rest in time is why your idea will not work.
Feel free to experiment all you want I am telling you it is a wasted effort.
I have attempted to offer you an alternative that at least in a laboratory has at least has proven to at least cause external accelerations. Yes they are small but their there.
I have just suggested that starting with something that seems to effect what you want to effect is a good place to start rather than wasting your time.
http://esamultimedia.esa.int/docs/gsp/Expe...l_Detection.pdf
http://www.superconductors.org/28c_rtsc.htm
http://lanl.arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1202/1202.2480.pdf
Good day
QUOTE (Investigator+Mar 23 2012, 09:14 PM)
Howdy.
"it would appear". There is the flaw in your argument that it would violate causality. The image is not the actual ship. Example, the image of you falling into a black hole would be frozen at the event horizon and eventually fade away. Your body would have been long gone past its "apparently" frozen or fading image at the event horizon. If the ship moves, it's image is it's "apparent" history, not its actual present position. It doesn't matter what an observer sees based on light, it's only the actual interaction with the ship that will effectively determine causality. The ship can come and go and even pass through the light image of it's past positions without "violating causality" in any way. Think of it as your light image going to a mirror far away and you then moving towards the mirror while the light goes to the mirror and is reflected back towards your new position. Just because your mirror image reflection is out there somewhere and you move through it again as it intersects with your body's new position, it doesn't constrain or violate your actual body's causal history at all. Only its image history is intersected, and that is dependent only on light image information about your body, and not your body itself. No causal violation involved there.
'bye.
Absolutely correct!!!
So what. So we shouldn't look for hyperspace because it might not be there?
"it would appear". There is the flaw in your argument that it would violate causality. The image is not the actual ship. Example, the image of you falling into a black hole would be frozen at the event horizon and eventually fade away. Your body would have been long gone past its "apparently" frozen or fading image at the event horizon. If the ship moves, it's image is it's "apparent" history, not its actual present position. It doesn't matter what an observer sees based on light, it's only the actual interaction with the ship that will effectively determine causality. The ship can come and go and even pass through the light image of it's past positions without "violating causality" in any way. Think of it as your light image going to a mirror far away and you then moving towards the mirror while the light goes to the mirror and is reflected back towards your new position. Just because your mirror image reflection is out there somewhere and you move through it again as it intersects with your body's new position, it doesn't constrain or violate your actual body's causal history at all. Only its image history is intersected, and that is dependent only on light image information about your body, and not your body itself. No causal violation involved there.
'bye.
Absolutely correct!!!
QUOTE
Hyperspace is something made up by science fiction writers as a way of getting around the relativity problem. If anything like hyperspace exists in reality, there is no guarantee that its properties would even allow FTL travel, it could be live diving into pudding.
So what. So we shouldn't look for hyperspace because it might not be there?
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 23 2012, 06:45 PM)
So what. So we shouldn't look for hyperspace because it might not be there?
Where do you think we should look for hyperspace? Under your pillow?
Where do you think we should look for hyperspace? Under your pillow?
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Mar 23 2012, 11:03 PM)
Where do you think we should look for hyperspace? Under your pillow?
Perform shift photon experiments. The experimental data will tell you how to find hyperspace.
Perform shift photon experiments. The experimental data will tell you how to find hyperspace.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 23 2012, 07:09 PM)
Perform shift photon experiments. The experimental data will tell you how to find hyperspace.
Right, your experiment that requires manipulation of gravitons? Good luck with that.
You're stacking assumption upon assumption, and not one of them is based on reality.
There's a very good chance that FTL is just not possible. The biggest clue is the fact that we have had no contact or evidence of extraterrestrial life. If FTL was possible, we should see evidence.
Right, your experiment that requires manipulation of gravitons? Good luck with that.
You're stacking assumption upon assumption, and not one of them is based on reality.
There's a very good chance that FTL is just not possible. The biggest clue is the fact that we have had no contact or evidence of extraterrestrial life. If FTL was possible, we should see evidence.
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Mar 23 2012, 11:21 PM)
Right, your experiment that requires manipulation of gravitons? Good luck with that.
You're stacking assumption upon assumption, and not one of them is based on reality.
There's a very good chance that FTL is just not possible. The biggest clue is the fact that we have had no contact or evidence of extraterrestrial life. If FTL was possible, we should see evidence.
If light is completely irrelevant to space-time curvature, then why does the speed of light show up in the Einstein equations?
You're stacking assumption upon assumption, and not one of them is based on reality.
There's a very good chance that FTL is just not possible. The biggest clue is the fact that we have had no contact or evidence of extraterrestrial life. If FTL was possible, we should see evidence.
If light is completely irrelevant to space-time curvature, then why does the speed of light show up in the Einstein equations?
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+Mar 23 2012, 09:01 PM)
Hyperspace is something made up by science fiction writers as a way of getting around the relativity problem. If anything like hyperspace exists in reality, there is no guarantee that its properties would even allow FTL travel, it could be live diving into pudding.
Howdy FBM
The ships frame, inside the warp geometry, is an inertial rest frame. For instance: our warp ship is in free fall orbiting the Earth at the same r_orbit as the International Space Station. The warp ship and ISST clocks are synced. Our ship goes into warp. During warp the ship and ISST clocks tick at the same rate and remain synced. The relative speed between the frames is 0 while both were orbiting and remain 0 during the warp. What changes is the local geometry of spacetime, around the ship, creating the warp. In my opinion: we have the most knowledgeable person on GR warp physics and the problems associated with it posting in this forum. That would be David [waitedavid137]. On the 'associated problems' David determined the warp CAN be turned off from the ship, how the warp shields the ship, and a possible way to reduce the 'exotic', negative energy, requirement.
Howdy FBM
The ships frame, inside the warp geometry, is an inertial rest frame. For instance: our warp ship is in free fall orbiting the Earth at the same r_orbit as the International Space Station. The warp ship and ISST clocks are synced. Our ship goes into warp. During warp the ship and ISST clocks tick at the same rate and remain synced. The relative speed between the frames is 0 while both were orbiting and remain 0 during the warp. What changes is the local geometry of spacetime, around the ship, creating the warp. In my opinion: we have the most knowledgeable person on GR warp physics and the problems associated with it posting in this forum. That would be David [waitedavid137]. On the 'associated problems' David determined the warp CAN be turned off from the ship, how the warp shields the ship, and a possible way to reduce the 'exotic', negative energy, requirement.
QUOTE (brucep+Mar 23 2012, 07:40 PM)
The ships frame, inside the warp geometry, is an inertial rest frame. For instance: our warp ship is in free fall orbiting the Earth at the same r_orbit as the International Space Station. The warp ship and ISST clocks are synced. Our ship goes into warp. During warp the ship and ISST clocks tick at the same rate and remain synced. The relative speed between the frames is 0 while both were orbiting and remain 0 during the warp. What changes is the local geometry of spacetime, around the ship, creating the warp. In my opinion: we have the most knowledgeable person on GR warp physics and the problems associated with it posting in this forum. That would be David [waitedavid137]. On the 'associated problems' David determined the warp CAN be turned off from the ship, how the warp shields the ship, and a possible way to reduce the 'exotic', negative energy, requirement.
The problem is that we still have no feasible way to manipulate the local geometry of spacetime without huge quantities of mass. The only method that seems open to me is if we could figure out how to manipulate the relationship between mass, gravitation and inertia.
The problem is that we still have no feasible way to manipulate the local geometry of spacetime without huge quantities of mass. The only method that seems open to me is if we could figure out how to manipulate the relationship between mass, gravitation and inertia.
QUOTE (Mazulu+Mar 23 2012, 11:33 PM)
If light is completely irrelevant to space-time curvature, then why does the speed of light show up in the Einstein equations?
Read your link. When you convert to geometric units it should become clear that c^4 and G are a function of the units used when writing down the EFE. Specifically conventional units. Since light is a form of energy then it does contribute to the right side of the EFE. The fact that you don't know 'what's up' with units means you should shut the fuk up and quit trolling Mazulu nonsense.
Read your link. When you convert to geometric units it should become clear that c^4 and G are a function of the units used when writing down the EFE. Specifically conventional units. Since light is a form of energy then it does contribute to the right side of the EFE. The fact that you don't know 'what's up' with units means you should shut the fuk up and quit trolling Mazulu nonsense.
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.