Seasons
This is a forum or general chit-chat, small talk, a "hey, how ya doing?" and such. Or hell, get crazy deep on something. Whatever you like.
Posts 2,950 - 2,961 of 6,170
once you enter hyperspace, how do you maintain the field being produced by the coil?
As I understand it, the coil and superconducting ring need to be onboard, and travel with the ship.
I would have thought the real problem was: how do you maintain a 25 Tesla field in the first place - without tearing your equipment and crew apart under a magnetic field half a million times stronger than Earth's?
I would worry what effect that would have on even the iron atoms in the crew's haemoglobin, let alone the inevitable magnetic and magnetically sensitive materials used in craft and computer construction.
The particle mass predictions he came up with are impressively accurate, but they don't necessarily mean that everything predictable is practical.
It might be more feasible to use it for "beaming" objects through hyperspace using an external generator like a cannon, if it was focussable. At least you could avoid having to operate computer control systems inside the field.
why are we talking about this in the Seasons forums???
Well, like it says at the top of the page:
"get crazy deep on something"
But it would only look like an incredible speed in this space-time - in hyperspace it could be a comparatively gentle motion. But I say "could" - I don't understand what basis there actually is for assuming the speed of light would be much higher in hyperspace than in "our" space. But there's only so much they can fit into a potted explanation in a popular science mag I guess (hmm, sorry New Scientist - I expect they wouldn't think of themselves as primarily in that category, but you know what I mean
we already can "beam" electrons back and forth using a similar principle.
Indeed, but we still can't get them to break local light-speed (AFAIAA), which does make me wonder.
I can't help thinking that this view of "hyperspace" is only a dim glimpse of adjoining dimensions with fairly similar physical laws and constants. We see it through a glass darkly, and imagine all sorts of wonders - here be dragons - but when we get there, we'll find it's not so very different. I'm inclined to think they spread off across a continuum with only a single quantum state-change between each. Just think how many identical yous there could be out there!
It's not so much "when we get there" - we're already there. We just don't notice the difference! (crazy deep enough?
I don't understand what basis there actually is for assuming the speed of light would be much higher in hyperspace than in "our" space.
I don't know if this answers your question or not. But I will do the best I can. Light which tavels at 186,000mps (miles per second) Is the basis of what time exists on. Imagine you have an electron is a glass jar. Now this electron hits the top and bottom of the lid once a second. As you approach the speed of light, the electron would slow down, and would hit the lid less often. Once you are at the speed of lgiht. It wouldn't hit it at all. Thus the theory that You cannot go over the speed of light. It is impossible. (maybe)
It's not so much "when we get there" - we're already there.
Are you saying that the future already exisits? want to discuss the theories of time travel? 
Posts 2,950 - 2,961 of 6,170
For those of you intersted in quantum physics, here is a fascinating article on the prospect of a multi-dimensional reality in which a hyperdrive device is possible:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18925331.200
Thanks for the link. It is an intereting article. I was a little confused by the idea that hyperspace was reportedly ignored in the 1960s and 70s. I know sci fi is not the same as attention from physicists, but didn't most space ships in 1960s and 70s movies and TV shows use a hyperdrive?
Amazing. I dont know if the 60's and 70's had shows with hyperdrive. But nevertheless, I understand What Heim is suggesting with his theory, and I think it would work. I think the only problem with the ship however, Is once you enter hyperspace, how do you maintain the field being produced by the coil?
This is unrelated to quantum physics, but is anyone here familiar with skateboarding terminology and able to explain it in English?
As I understand it, the coil and superconducting ring need to be onboard, and travel with the ship.
I would have thought the real problem was: how do you maintain a 25 Tesla field in the first place - without tearing your equipment and crew apart under a magnetic field half a million times stronger than Earth's?
I would worry what effect that would have on even the iron atoms in the crew's haemoglobin, let alone the inevitable magnetic and magnetically sensitive materials used in craft and computer construction.
The particle mass predictions he came up with are impressively accurate, but they don't necessarily mean that everything predictable is practical.
It might be more feasible to use it for "beaming" objects through hyperspace using an external generator like a cannon, if it was focussable. At least you could avoid having to operate computer control systems inside the field.
True. In fact i beleive we already can "beam" electrons back and forth using a similar principle.
True about the 25 tesla. It would make a real mess of everything. But we don't how the physics of being faster then the speed of light would effect the enviroment.
Perhaps if you could use the force of the coil to send you to your destination. So to speak, pushing you along or towing you. therefore, the 25 tesla feild would be away from you. and you would not be effected. So then you just have to worry about space/time effects of traveling at an incredilbe speed.
the resl question is, why are we talking about this in the Seasons forums??? lol
True about the 25 tesla. It would make a real mess of everything. But we don't how the physics of being faster then the speed of light would effect the enviroment.
Perhaps if you could use the force of the coil to send you to your destination. So to speak, pushing you along or towing you. therefore, the 25 tesla feild would be away from you. and you would not be effected. So then you just have to worry about space/time effects of traveling at an incredilbe speed.
the resl question is,
Well, like it says at the top of the page:
"get crazy deep on something"
But it would only look like an incredible speed in this space-time - in hyperspace it could be a comparatively gentle motion. But I say "could" - I don't understand what basis there actually is for assuming the speed of light would be much higher in hyperspace than in "our" space. But there's only so much they can fit into a potted explanation in a popular science mag I guess (hmm, sorry New Scientist - I expect they wouldn't think of themselves as primarily in that category, but you know what I mean
Indeed, but we still can't get them to break local light-speed (AFAIAA), which does make me wonder.
I can't help thinking that this view of "hyperspace" is only a dim glimpse of adjoining dimensions with fairly similar physical laws and constants. We see it through a glass darkly, and imagine all sorts of wonders - here be dragons - but when we get there, we'll find it's not so very different. I'm inclined to think they spread off across a continuum with only a single quantum state-change between each. Just think how many identical yous there could be out there!
It's not so much "when we get there" - we're already there. We just don't notice the difference! (crazy deep enough?
Are you saying that the future already exisits?
want to discuss the theories of time travel? 
So deep I get a head ache..Wouldn't it possible that a adjoining dimension could be 'out side' of time and able to view all time at once, therefore able to travel in time the same way we travel in three dimentions?
Yeah, I know that's why we can't exceed the speed of light in this universe, but I don't understand where Dröscher drags in the idea that the speed of light would be any higher in hyperspace.
(from the article)
Dröscher is hazy about the details, but he suggests that a spacecraft fitted with a coil and ring could be propelled into a multidimensional hyperspace. Here the constants of nature could be different, and even the speed of light could be several times faster than we experience. If this happens, it would be possible to reach Mars in less than 3 hours and a star 11 light years away in only 80 days, Dröscher and Häuser say. (my italics)
"could be several times faster than we experience"? Could just as likely be be several times slower, surely?
I'm afraid it all comes down to the thorny problem of the non-existence of time in this universe (most things do, one way or another.) You see there are two types of time in Relativity - there's little "t" - that's the time in space-time, and that exists alright. No problem there - it's part of the matrix that macro-scale physics works in (we'll ignore the quantum-scale problems for now I think.)
And then there's big "T" - that's time that causality subsists in. You know, the stuff that ticks along at 60 seconds to the minute. And Gödel not only demonstrates that it does not exist in this universe, but that it cannot exist in any possible universe. That's an oversimplification of course. I can recommend a couple of good books:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0465092934/
reasonably simple introduction
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0812694082/ meatier, but pretty heavy-going in places
Are you saying that the future already exisits
Since whatever it is that we try to describe when we label it "time" is of fixed quantity within this Universe, and ultimately illusory anyway, yes. Except that "already" is a redundant descriptor. There is only Now
Something exists, we don't exactly know what. It interacts with our consciousness, we don't exactly know how. We call it "time", but it's a slippery beast that's at least as different from, as it is similar to, what we think it's like. That's about as definite as I'd care to be.
Sadly we can only perceive Reality with limited minds, and so we go groping around the universe like the blind men inspecting an elephant. It's really not to be wondered at that it doesn't make a lot of sense most of the time. But that's why it's so much fun
(from the article)
"could be several times faster than we experience"? Could just as likely be be several times slower, surely?
I'm afraid it all comes down to the thorny problem of the non-existence of time in this universe (most things do, one way or another.) You see there are two types of time in Relativity - there's little "t" - that's the time in space-time, and that exists alright. No problem there - it's part of the matrix that macro-scale physics works in (we'll ignore the quantum-scale problems for now I think.)
And then there's big "T" - that's time that causality subsists in. You know, the stuff that ticks along at 60 seconds to the minute. And Gödel not only demonstrates that it does not exist in this universe, but that it cannot exist in any possible universe. That's an oversimplification of course. I can recommend a couple of good books:
reasonably simple introduction
Since whatever it is that we try to describe when we label it "time" is of fixed quantity within this Universe, and ultimately illusory anyway, yes. Except that "already" is a redundant descriptor. There is only Now
Something exists, we don't exactly know what. It interacts with our consciousness, we don't exactly know how. We call it "time", but it's a slippery beast that's at least as different from, as it is similar to, what we think it's like. That's about as definite as I'd care to be.
Sadly we can only perceive Reality with limited minds, and so we go groping around the universe like the blind men inspecting an elephant. It's really not to be wondered at that it doesn't make a lot of sense most of the time. But that's why it's so much fun
That makes sense to me, Prob123, but I have only a superficial understanding of physics. I once read a book called "Flatland" that had 2 dimensional characters arguing about the possibility of a 3rd dimension. Something in this discussion reminds me of that.
The speed of light discussion also reminds me of an earlier thread we had here when people posted links to sites explaining how the speed of light may vary in our dimesion, and isn't really as constant as all that.
If Jasake, Einstein and Hawkins are correct and time is based on the speed of light, that variation would mean time "varies" in our dimesions as well, right? Please correct me if I am wrong. We never covered this in law school.
Another little thing I've come accross (and may have been discussed here too) is the "Spooky" effect (where far-distant particles appear to influence one another instantaneously, see e.g. http://focus.aps.org/story/v10/st29) which may indicate somethings must travel faster than light (or the nature of space is completely different than we imagine it). It's all very weird. It kind of leads me to the "space and time are an illusion" way of thinking.
Prob123, this shouldn't make your head hurt, even if there are many here who know a lot about the topic. You are a Terry Pratchett fan. Who needs Hawkins to tell you about the other trouser leg of time when you can read Lords and Ladies or The Theif of Time? To know is good, to imagine is better :-)
The speed of light discussion also reminds me of an earlier thread we had here when people posted links to sites explaining how the speed of light may vary in our dimesion, and isn't really as constant as all that.
If Jasake, Einstein and Hawkins are correct and time is based on the speed of light, that variation would mean time "varies" in our dimesions as well, right? Please correct me if I am wrong. We never covered this in law school.
Another little thing I've come accross (and may have been discussed here too) is the "Spooky" effect (where far-distant particles appear to influence one another instantaneously, see e.g. http://focus.aps.org/story/v10/st29) which may indicate somethings must travel faster than light (or the nature of space is completely different than we imagine it). It's all very weird. It kind of leads me to the "space and time are an illusion" way of thinking.
Prob123, this shouldn't make your head hurt, even if there are many here who know a lot about the topic. You are a Terry Pratchett fan. Who needs Hawkins to tell you about the other trouser leg of time when you can read Lords and Ladies or The Theif of Time? To know is good, to imagine is better :-)
» More new posts: Doghead's Cosmic Bar