RICHARDBATTY Posted August 21, 2004 Share Posted August 21, 2004 I had a theory that if we could force space out of matter we may be able to travel at light speed without the constraints of inertia. I believe this has been proposed by physicists some where. Does any one have any information on research into this subject. I would also like to know of theorys on space controling position,time and movement of matter throught inertia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreamLord Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 Try this article: http://www.calphysics.org/haisch/science.html I think part of it may be what you are talking about. It has a bit on manipulating the quantam vacuum and controling inertia. Is that what you were talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thales Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 Its an intesting theory. One problem I can see with it is that the 'vacuum' itself assuming it is free of virtual particle/anti particle pairs would be quite unstable. see False Vacuum That and keeping a path open along the distance needed to accelerate to light speed would be a huge engineering effort. The idea has merit though, I will have a read and see if I can pull it apart anymore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RICHARDBATTY Posted August 22, 2004 Author Share Posted August 22, 2004 Try this article:http://www.calphysics.org/haisch/science.html I think part of it may be what you are talking about. It has a bit on manipulating the quantam vacuum and controling inertia. Is that what you were talking about? Thanks for that, maybe I'm not insane after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RICHARDBATTY Posted August 22, 2004 Author Share Posted August 22, 2004 Basicly the idea was that if you could fill matter with enough of the right kind of energy you may be able to force out spacetime. It would be a bit like injecting a wet sponge with treacle forcing out the water. As I believe spacetime is responsible for inertia and the control of the time and position of matter by saturation and flow, it should allow us to behave like energy and travel without inertia and at the speed of light. My only concern is that if you push matter outside of space then where would it be and what control could be exerted over matter that would not be following the rules. As regaurds propulsion the field could be manipulated. If you take the generated field to be sphere the energy could be made to flow from a point at one side to a point at the oposite side and maybe cause friction on space outside the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callipygous Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 interesting. but if your shoving tons of energy into whatever you want to move at the speed of light, wont it get destroyed in the process anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thales Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 Good point, its not exactly like you can 'inject' matter with the 'right type of energy' and have it dsiappear from space time. However your reasoning shows promise, but in terms of real world physics you would need a lot of mathematical reasoning to show; firstly that the property of inertia is reliant on space time, and secondly that the 'right kind of energy' will indeed 'push' space-time out of the matter, without, as Callipygous pointed out, destroying the matter itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RICHARDBATTY Posted August 22, 2004 Author Share Posted August 22, 2004 interesting. but if your shoving tons of energy into whatever you want to move at the speed of light, wont it get destroyed in the process anyway?It would only be to flush out the space between matter and then maintain a field to prevent it getting back in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RICHARDBATTY Posted August 22, 2004 Author Share Posted August 22, 2004 All points taken greatfully, I understand that massive amounts of energy would destroy matter but I am not a physacist and can only work from logic. I just want a way to get this crap out of my head. I think the time of exposure and the energy used would obviously have to be taken into account. Yes more reaserch is required and thats why I'm here. Its not something I could do in a garden shed with a screw driver and hammer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thales Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 Logic will only get you so far. I suggest you research some special relativity before you get too attached to the idea... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 Logic will only get you so far. I suggest you research some special relativity before you get too attached to the idea... And when researching special relativity and quantum mechanics, you can leave logic far, far behind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thales Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 Ohh too true, too true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RICHARDBATTY Posted August 22, 2004 Author Share Posted August 22, 2004 I find special relativity works logicaly with the space control theory and bubble theory. In fact it explains some of the unexplained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicMX Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 And when researching special relativity and quantum mechanics, you can leave logic far, far behind I disagree; everything (in science) has logic, the difference is the level of abstraction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreamLord Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 I don't know about that. Some parts of quantum sciences aren't exactly logical, depending on how you look at them. If scientists relied on pure logic all the time, they may not get very far. Sometimes discovery means pushing your mind beyond "logic". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicMX Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 how could you push your mind beyond logic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreamLord Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 I meant by thinking beyond what seems possible. Leonardo DaVinci made designs for a helicopter. Odds are, to most it did not seem "logical". Of course, it seems logical now, because we know how it works. I'm saying at first, many new ideas do not seem "logical" until they are actually proven to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicMX Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 well i call that imagination, imagination has logic. i wont arguee with this because i understand your point, but, the mind and discoverings are mostly logic, (or luck in biology, and those "sciences") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 well i call that imagination, imagination has logic. You mean imagination can have logic. i wont arguee with this because i understand your point, but, the mind and discoverings are mostly logic Logic is a tool, it is not the defining be-all-and-end-all of knowledge. As the Vulcans say, "logic is the beginning of wisdom, not its end", and nobody knows more about logic than the Vulcans. (or luck in biology, and those "sciences") Oh **** off with your unjustifiable opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thales Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 Logic is different from abstraction, and when we talk about leaving logic far behind, it is viewing logic as an outcome of common sense. The postulates of SR and many fundamentals in QM will leave you in a state, if you try to always deduce the 'logic' behind them. The universe has no need or will to be logical. Things that seem 'logical' to us, are based on our experiences, but lorentz contraction and time dilaition are results of mathematical logic not common sense logic, which appeared to be Mr Batty's line of attack. Swansot and I were merely trying to point out that one can 'theorise' till your blue in the face, but without a firm understanding of the concepts that have been previously nutted out, by generations before us, your arguements will be baseless. "If I have seen farther, It is by standing on the shoulders of Giants" -Isaac Newton Personally though, I encourage people to think freely topics, its both intellectually stimulating and the process of peer review of such idea's makes us all more well rounded individuals (in both communicating to others and understanding concepts better ourselves). That is not to say, however, that words alone are enough to convince anyone of a particular theorem's scientific validity... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RICHARDBATTY Posted August 23, 2004 Author Share Posted August 23, 2004 I meant by thinking beyond what seems possible. Leonardo DaVinci made designs for a helicopter. Odds are, to most it did not seem "logical". Of course, it seems logical now, because we know how it works. I'm saying at first, many new ideas do not seem "logical" until they are actually proven to work.Thats my life in a nut shell. I cannot stop until every thing makes sence. I cannot just accept this is the way things are. As to logic yes, if sit back and accept what is it is ilogical to go further but if you keep pushing and think on all levels of existence at the same time you can apply logic to all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thales Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 hmmm...for an Englishman/woman your English is terrible. Communication is the key my friend, you might be the smartest person in the world but, as someone else so eloquently put it in another thread, if you can't communicate your idea's, things will become much more difficult. Modesty doesn't go astray either, I've noticed a lot of the self professed 'geniuses'(mainly the youngens) on these forums often turn out to have little or no clue. I'm not saying this is the case with you, but just be weary that blowing your own trumpet just to make noise, can be irritable to say the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RICHARDBATTY Posted August 23, 2004 Author Share Posted August 23, 2004 hmmm...for an Englishman/woman your English is terrible. Communication is the key my friend' date=' you might be the smartest person in the world but, as someone else so eloquently put it in another thread, if you can't communicate your idea's, things will become much more difficult. Modesty doesn't go astray either, I've noticed a lot of the self professed 'geniuses'(mainly the youngens) on these forums often turn out to have little or no clue. I'm not saying this is the case with you, but just be weary that blowing your own trumpet just to make noise, can be irritable to say the least.[/quote'] I can't spell for toffee. I don't mean to make myself out to be a genius or compare myself in any way to great figures past or pesent. I am a male aged 31. I just want to understand and vent some ideas. I have always been this way since the age of about 9ish. I am here in the main as a release and for people like you to help me where possible. I am gratefull for your coments either positive or negative. I have had no formal education in any science and have only gleaned the information I have from my own research. My grammar is terrible also and you are right I should think a little more before I type. I would like to appologise for any irritation I may have caused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thales Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 No problems here brother, juts a heads up. Sometimes on forums people get a bit 'carried' away but I am not a moderator and I have no problem with you venting your ideas, infact as I said a post or two ago I applaude those among us who speak their mind. Keep up with the inquiring mind, and I also offer my apology if I sounded overly harsh, tone is next to impossible to express through type. No irritation here matey, if anything it was a subtle dig at the few people who have 'declared' their IQ etc, as though it is some justification to spurt s**t. I am always interested in new idea's, and just because people might not agree with yours, it is essential to the scientific process to reassess your own theories at every turn. I hope I can help you in anyway I can... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RICHARDBATTY Posted August 23, 2004 Author Share Posted August 23, 2004 How long on average does it take to aquire the level of math to describe this sort of thing. Say starting from the level of a domestic cat. :confused:Why am I a quark today when I was a lepton yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now