Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Lekgolo555

Is space folding a good method of space travel (if it is for real)

Recommended Posts

Is folding space (or wormholes) a good method of space travel; that is if it actually exists or is a theory that people except?

 

I remember on a history channel show about space travel, that there was something called "rosen bridges" or wormholes that were everywhere in einstein's theories. Apparently they're tunnels of folded space making the distance very short.

 

Is this even possible? If so wouldnt it take a long time to actually fold the space anyways because in order to fold it, the two points would still have to travel the same long distance just to get to the position where they are now folded?

 

I know this question probably seems too general of a question to alot of you, and many of you would feel like this should not be posted because it would take to long to explain. I am sorry, but I do not know enough to ask a more specific question, so please just humor me :D :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea of folding space is real, and it works mathematically. The problem is that we have no mechanism to fold space itself... which is something I couldn't even begin to imagine how we would do.

 

I think that one idea is that space (and time) may already be folded, and we have to figure out a way to tunnel through it.

 

I don't know that much about this area, but it's all VERY theoretical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have a few ideas about how to do it but they are FAR beyond the technological powers of even most Sci-Fi races. usually has something to do with 2 rings of neutron star matter that are 2AU in radius being spun near the speed of light. not the easiest of tasks. then theres the negative energy, we don't have a clue about that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The film "Event Horizon" is about folding space, its a good film but it would put anybody off ever trying to travel that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The theory of folding space is quite real. To answer the original question about the distance being the same even when folded I have added a picture (art not my strong point) to help show the general idea.

The neutron star idea is the closest we have but there is also the idea using super black holes which do in effect bend space/time already. It is by far all theory of course but also some think very possible as space/time is being bent naturally everywhere.

Bend space.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

every object folds the space but nothing have enough power to make a worm hole


Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

to make a wormhole you have to make two holes and that means u have to go where u want to go before using hole

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
every object folds the space but nothing have enough power to make a worm hole


Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

to make a wormhole you have to make two holes and that means u have to go where u want to go before using hole

 

Not sure what your getting at there. It has already been theorised that wormholes could be abundant in the universe if there was exotic matter (matter with negative mass/energy). Being able to detect or travel through a wormhole is another matter as, when these form they most likely close immediately.

There is also the theory behind black/white holes being a form of wormhole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing I can say is that it could be possible, otherwise we wouldn't have came up with this theory. Any thing that the mind can dream up should always be treated with respect, For example 110 yrs ago we thought flight was impossible, Unless it is proven wrong .It might be possible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For example 110 yrs ago we thought flight was impossible,

 

no we didn't. we seen birds flying, we had gliders etc. the only novelty the wright brothers brought to the table was a powersource that could drive the plane forward enough to lift the plane AND the power source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for my lack of knowledge about flight ,but I think I made the point concerning the question that was asked.Anyway, insane_alien, thanks for the

reply

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no we didn't. we seen birds flying, we had gliders etc. the only novelty the wright brothers brought to the table was a powersource that could drive the plane forward enough to lift the plane AND the power source.

 

That's a little harsh and could of been better as it's not quite true.

Hot air balloons were the first sustained 'flight' in 1783. Gliders came a little later in 1804 which were only a model (not taking into account Da Vinci).

Then the first actual take off but not sustained flight happened in around 1874. And then in 1890 Clement Ader’s Eole was the first 'powered flight'.

The Wright brothers came later famed for 'sustained powered flight'.

Sorry to bring it up in such detail but if you put someone down then I always say do it with facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure what your getting at there. It has already been theorised that wormholes could be abundant in the universe if there was exotic matter (matter with negative mass/energy). Being able to detect or travel through a wormhole is another matter as, when these form they most likely close immediately.

There is also the theory behind black/white holes being a form of wormhole.

 

its simple to go anywhere you have to dig two holes enterance and exit so to make a wormhole we need 2 holes so two high gravity forces get it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
its simple to go anywhere you have to dig two holes enterance and exit so to make a wormhole we need 2 holes so two high gravity forces get it?

 

Do I get it? holes enterance and exit

I can spell entrance correctly for a start. Your argument has nothing to back it up apart from you blustering. Please don't go toe to toe with me. You will lose. Your argument has no substance and has the attitude of a 2 year old punching and screaming because they MUST be right as they shouted the loudest and longest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
its simple to go anywhere you have to dig two holes enterance and exit so to make a wormhole we need 2 holes so two high gravity forces get it?

 

the traditional representation of 3-d space and time and how it warps due to gravity is to envision a flat plane; gravity is symbolized by depressions in this plane; (for example, throw a ball onto a stretched sheet; the depression it makes will "attract" other items you place onto the sheet).

 

a Black hole is theorized to form a one way ticket to a bubble of space that the black hole has captured. perhaps it even breaks off completely; like a bubble.

 

a wormhole, on the other hand, is like a vortex; it could be formed by any number of disturbances. Consider water currents and eddies and how they intermingle and occasionally form small vortexes; this is similar to how a wormhole forms. One side forms semi-randomly due to gravitational anomolies, and the other side "snakes" from that point through space outside our universe; eventually rejoining our universe at some possibly far off point. The concept is simple; while perhaps the space in our universe from the entrance to the exit might be several million light-years, the stretch of the wormhole could distort the space within it to be a much shorter distance; perhaps less than 100 light years.

 

It is at this point I must contest the common visual depiction of worm-holes in TV and movies. Now, obviously, nobody really knows what it looks like. But theoretically, you are moving outside the known universe; there are no stars there; I would supposition that you would only see a bright light in two directions: the entrance, and the exit. the entrance light is formed by light being sucked into the wormhole; the exit light is the same. (this is under the assumption that such spacial anomalies would be insensitive to "direction of travel" which makes sense.

 

Now, going by this, it would be unnecessary to have "two" worm hole entry points. Although it is feasible that a second wormhole might intercept the first outside the universe, but that's just head-ache-inducing to fathom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the traditional representation of 3-d space and time and how it warps due to gravity is to envision a flat plane; gravity is symbolized by depressions in this plane; (for example, throw a ball onto a stretched sheet; the depression it makes will "attract" other items you place onto the sheet).

 

a Black hole is theorized to form a one way ticket to a bubble of space that the black hole has captured. perhaps it even breaks off completely; like a bubble.

 

a wormhole, on the other hand, is like a vortex; it could be formed by any number of disturbances. Consider water currents and eddies and how they intermingle and occasionally form small vortexes; this is similar to how a wormhole forms. One side forms semi-randomly due to gravitational anomolies, and the other side "snakes" from that point through space outside our universe; eventually rejoining our universe at some possibly far off point. The concept is simple; while perhaps the space in our universe from the entrance to the exit might be several million light-years, the stretch of the wormhole could distort the space within it to be a much shorter distance; perhaps less than 100 light years.

 

It is at this point I must contest the common visual depiction of worm-holes in TV and movies. Now, obviously, nobody really knows what it looks like. But theoretically, you are moving outside the known universe; there are no stars there; I would supposition that you would only see a bright light in two directions: the entrance, and the exit. the entrance light is formed by light being sucked into the wormhole; the exit light is the same. (this is under the assumption that such spacial anomalies would be insensitive to "direction of travel" which makes sense.

 

Now, going by this, it would be unnecessary to have "two" worm hole entry points. Although it is feasible that a second wormhole might intercept the first outside the universe, but that's just head-ache-inducing to fathom.

 

now imagine a copper stick and you want to fold it so 1 st you add 1 magnet to up side and to create a conflict you add another magnet at left site but imagine that these magnets have 1 polar they are like planets. so if they are so strong they can attract each other and folds the stick.

 

so the worm holes works this way but at that stick there may be lot of magnets so there maybe lot of holes.

 

on the other hand in theory if u want to go exact place with your hole at space you have to put 2 high gravity stars. to attarct and fold the space. but it is ipmposible cuz there are tons of hşgh gravity areas like black holes if so strong they attract each and we have a labirent.


Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

i hope i can explain what i think cuz my english is not that good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the traditional representation of 3-d space and time and how it warps due to gravity is to envision a flat plane; gravity is symbolized by depressions in this plane; (for example, throw a ball onto a stretched sheet; the depression it makes will "attract" other items you place onto the sheet).

 

 

I have always been somewhat confused by this representation of gravity folding/bending space. I can see why it is commonly represented as such because it is simpler to visualise but the problem I have with it is that Space-Time has length, width and depth.

 

If this is the case it would not be as simple as a depression appearing in sheet, rather the sheet of space-time would be wrapped around gravity and I have a hard time visualising a volume bending rather than an area.

 

Does anyone have any links with pictures or can explain how this works so I may understand it in a 3d sense rather than the more common 2 dimensional plane?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an image here for you. Hope it's what you were looking for. Borrowed off the web.

350px-Worm3.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have an image here for you. Hope it's what you were looking for. Borrowed off the web.

 

your image from google images supports me isnt it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not quite what I was looking for, but thanks. That is just a 2 dimensional plane that has been folded as with the below picture. How I understand space-time is that it works in 4 dimensions so am struggling to see how it bends around an object in 3 dimensions. rather than creating just an impression under a gravitational object

 

I suppose what I am asking is if there are any representations of the below that show spacetime in 3D instead of on one plane.

 

spacetime.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not quite what I was looking for, but thanks. That is just a 2 dimensional plane that has been folded as with the below picture. How I understand space-time is that it works in 4 dimensions so am struggling to see how it bends around an object in 3 dimensions. rather than creating just an impression under a gravitational object

 

I suppose what I am asking is if there are any representations of the below that show spacetime in 3D instead of on one plane.

 

spacetime.jpg

 

that pic is absolutaley wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To answer the original question about the image. I have never seen a true representation of how space/time is effected in 4 dimensions or even 3 for that matter. If something is effected in all three dimensions then the image would just be a sphere within a sphere as every dimension is effected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To answer the original question about the image. I have never seen a true representation of how space/time is effected in 4 dimensions or even 3 for that matter. If something is effected in all three dimensions then the image would just be a sphere within a sphere as every dimension is effected.

 

cuz u think so touchable .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cuz u think so touchable .

 

Again finding myself wondering what you are saying and/or meaning?? :confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
my english limited sorry :)

 

Ok that explains it. No problem

Share this post


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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • 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.