Jump to content

Recommended Posts

If you could make a "u" shape wormhole and mount it so both ends of the wormhole are side by side at one end of a tube,
and then accelerate a mass from  the other end of the tube through the wormhole so it comes right back to where it started...
Does conservation of momentum still hold?
When the projectile is launched, the tube gets accelerated opposite the projectile, and when the projectile lands the tube gets accelerated in the same direction as the projectile so all the forces act together to accelerate the tube without reaction mass.  

Or...

Edited by moth
needed more ellipses
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it possible to violate conservation laws with wormholes (i don't think so), or would a violation mean wormholes are purely sci-fi?
If you could put one end of a wormhole at the bottom of a lake and the other end on top of a nearby mountain you could generate electricity using the water flowing back down the mountain to power the wormhole  generator.
In the inertial drive setup, I'm assuming an object traversing a wormhole doesn't give up all it's momentum to the wormhole. If objects did lose all their momentum to the wormhole, that might restore conservation of momentum but then how can you move through a wormhole when you have zero momentum?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, moth said:

Is it possible to violate conservation laws with wormholes (i don't think so), or would a violation mean wormholes are purely sci-fi?

We have never seen or detected any wormhole, but it is a solution to GR equations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, beecee said:

We have never seen or detected any wormhole, but it is a solution to GR equations.

You never played Portal? In Portal 2 the machine gun turrets all serenade you at the end, it's great.

I know there's no way to test these ideas without a wormhole to experiment with, that's why i put this in speculations.
I don't think the lack of an observable worm hole should stop us from trying to build a model of how they could exist and be consistent with the rest of physics.
It was the same with Black holes at one time, they were consistent with GR theory so people made models of how black holes could be consistent with physical laws.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the wormhole allows for violation of spatial translation symmetry, that is, if the laws of physics distinguish between different points in space ( external and internal to the wormhole ), then conservation of momentum is not required.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, moth said:

I don't think the lack of an observable worm hole should stop us from trying to build a model of how they could exist and be consistent with the rest of physics.
It was the same with Black holes at one time, they were consistent with GR theory so people made models of how black holes could be consistent with physical laws.

I am not actually disagreeing with you just confirming that as yet, they are only a prediction of GR, which as we know, has a pretty good track record. With BH's of course, we had observational data of there existence in the early seventies with Cygnus X1.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MigL said:

... if the laws of physics distinguish between different points in space ( external and internal to the wormhole )...

Could it be something like a black hole's event horizon making the distinction? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the EH is not a 'separator' for all rames.
And there is no variance to the laws of physics on either side.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MigL said:

...if the laws of physics distinguish between different points in space ( external and internal to the wormhole ), then conservation of momentum is not required.

Does that mean a properly configured wormhole can be a free energy device?

Link to post
Share on other sites

depends on what you mean by 'free'.
A Black Hole can supply energy, which might seem free, but it is at the expense of the BH's mass-energy, or size of EH.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe some arrangement where an excited atom emits a photon then goes through a wormhole back in time to emit the same photon over and over, or dropping an electric charge through a field and wormholing it back out to be dropped again. Like a wormhole current source. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Closed timelike curves don't work that way, not even with stable ( ? ) wormholes.

Take a look at these lecture notes from K Thorne ( he gets to wormhole time travel near the end )

II-121.pdf (caltech.edu)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks MigL I'm reading the paper tonight. looks like it will give me some help with my questions. 
I read (in WIkipedia i think) that accelerating one end of a stable wormhole near c and then returning to the other end resulted in a wormhole version of the twin paradox. If you go through one way you age, if you go the other way you're younger. That is the type of wormhole I was using in my atom emits a photon example I don't think it's a CTC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, moth said:

If you go through one way you age, if you go the other way you're younger.

If you read the .pdf you should have realized that 'wormholes-as-time-machines' don't work that way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still struggling with the .pdf. Is it a multi-worlds thing like after the atom goes through the wormhole each copy of the emission event is in a different universe?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.