sonjouten05 Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 This is an "invention" that ive had in my head for a while.. it is an efficient means of storage, city building, farming, and even "accelerated evolution" (due to the effects of time dilation, fitting 40 sq miles or so into the space of a matchbox will obviously have an altered effect on time, making it pass faster in the bottle than on the outside) How will it be built? an implosion bomb, detonated in outerspace outside any planets immediate rotation path ( we dont want too many unintended consequences) as the implosion happens a rotating electromagnetic container(rotating) is placed of the imploded area to contain the "spacetime" that was squeezed out of empty space. Fill it up with air, put a little earth in it.. and than bam. you have a city, or a portable farm, or a civilization holding spaceship so small that no telescope will see it. The gravitational effect inside the jar will be inverted compared to a normal planet. for one thing because its rotating, everything inside of it will try to push out (but be prevented because of the walls of the bottle. Time will definitely flow differently, with one day on the outside being many more on the inside. An advanced alien species would surely have invented this, and surely use it as a more advanced urbanization method (along with the thousands of other uses it could be used for) And that is why the fermi paradox is perceived, any evolved advanced species will be utilizing it. And of course the drake equation, as it is being utilized now, is inaccurate because the value of the variable for the time from sentience to extinction is lower than it should be. The idea for the device came to me in a dream, while i was reading Einsteins General and special relativity (fifth edition). No i dont believe it was a prophesy dream, but i do believe the subconscious will answer things for you and even give you a starting point to a good idea. I know this is a speculative device, but i think it completely agrees with relativity and if it actually came to be human kind will possibly evolve exponentially more so than we ever could in our current space/time dimension. if i am wrong though, please tell me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ophiolite Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 Generally an implosion will destroy whatever is being imploded. How do you intend to prevent that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajb Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 (edited) What is an implosion bomb? Edited February 13, 2016 by ajb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonjouten05 Posted February 13, 2016 Author Share Posted February 13, 2016 (edited) What is an implosion bomb? a nuke with the pressure faced inward, compressing as much space as it gathers in one spot. some kind of electro-gravic(mass induced, some how) container. probably rotating as fast as humanly possible, idk exactly.. lol.. but i know it can be done. black holes do it all the time. Ophiolite you dont need to. the creation of the world needs to be "clean space", though its inners will be nuclear for some time (thousand years or so.. but remember time dilation...) so depending on condition you can send crews to clean it and set a "ground", and go from there. the container its going to be in needs to be just far enough away to almost fall into the space, but instead "catch it" Edited February 13, 2016 by sonjouten05 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajb Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 a nuke with the pressure faced inward, Okay so you want some spherical shell of nuclear bombs and you want to think about what happens in the centre of this arrangement when the bombs go of. The main 'push' of a nuclear bomb is due to the superheated air which causes a shockwave. In space the effect will be greatly reduced, but okay. compressing as much space as it gathers in one spot. I do not quite follow this. You then wonder about the gravitational effect of the detonation? Do you want to create black hole in this way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonjouten05 Posted February 13, 2016 Author Share Posted February 13, 2016 Okay so you want some spherical shell of nuclear bombs and you want to think about what happens in the centre of this arrangement when the bombs go of. The main 'push' of a nuclear bomb is due to the superheated air which causes a shockwave. In space the effect will be greatly reduced, but okay. I do not quite follow this. You then wonder about the gravitational effect of the detonation? Do you want to create black hole in this way? its like one, it has alot of the characteristics. but i its kept in place by its seal and rotation. you can use air in the explosion to create the initial environment for the bottle. the air will spread in it internally. it just needs a perfect seal, everytime you enter or leave a little time dissipates from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajb Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 You would have to show that the situation you suggest gives rise to a space-time with the properties you want. I am not convinced that this can be done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonjouten05 Posted February 13, 2016 Author Share Posted February 13, 2016 You would have to show that the situation you suggest gives rise to a space-time with the properties you want. I am not convinced that this can be done. Does a black hole not do that? to space-time i mean? close to the singularity it slows down things and squeezing it.. etc. i think its worth trying, dont you? gather data from that and go from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajb Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 Does a black hole not do that? to space-time i mean? close to the singularity it slows down things and squeezing it.. etc. There are strong tidal forces inside the horizon, these squeeze in one direction and pull in another. Time as far as the objects themselves are concerned does not change. In fact, just under free fall any massive particle will hit the classical singularity in finite time as they measure it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonjouten05 Posted February 13, 2016 Author Share Posted February 13, 2016 (edited) There are strong tidal forces inside the horizon, these squeeze in one direction and pull in another. Time as far as the objects themselves are concerned does not change. In fact, just under free fall any massive particle will hit the classical singularity in finite time as they measure it. those affects are due to its core being there, were not simulating the core of a black hole, just the effects in its immediate gravitational effect on its environment(time dilation, space compression, etc..) Edited February 13, 2016 by sonjouten05 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajb Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 ... just the effects in its immediate gravitational effect on its environment(time dilation, space compression, etc..) You mean within the horizon or outside the horizon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonjouten05 Posted February 13, 2016 Author Share Posted February 13, 2016 You mean within the horizon or outside the horizon? slightly outside, just enough for the desired effects. according to relativity it is possible, and actually llikely when you consider the logical nature of the fermi paradox( the universe is simply to big for it to be *true) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajb Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 Outside the event horizon we describe the space-time by using the Schwarzschild solution when we assume the body is slowly rotating or the Kerr solution if we need to worry about the rotation. I am a bit confused about the effects you are discussing. Either we see them all the time, or I am missing something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonjouten05 Posted February 13, 2016 Author Share Posted February 13, 2016 Outside the event horizon we describe the space-time by using the Schwarzschild solution when we assume the body is slowly rotating or the Kerr solution if we need to worry about the rotation. I am a bit confused about the effects you are discussing. Either we see them all the time, or I am missing something. i dont see a non rotating mass holding together very long, even if its gravitational mass is substantial, theyre surely moving in some way undetected. if you ever watched dbz, it would be close to the effects of the hyperbolic time chamber, but a big ball fixed on the inside with gravity pushing out. the walls of the chamber will be the ground of the environment, if youve ever had a bucket full of water spinning it very fast youd see exactly what i mean. think of it as an inverse planet, with its sun its core. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajb Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 i dont see a non rotating mass holding together very long, even if its gravitational mass is substantial, theyre surely moving in some way undetected. Well, most if not all objects in the Universe seem to rotate, just sometimes this rotation is slow enough to be ignored as a first approximation. ...if youve ever had a bucket full of water spinning it very fast youd see exactly what i mean. think of it as an inverse planet, with its sun its core. You mean something like the centrifugal (pseudo)force in Newtonian mechanics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 i dont see a non rotating mass holding together very long, even if its gravitational mass is substantial, theyre surely moving in some way undetected. if you ever watched dbz, it would be close to the effects of the hyperbolic time chamber, but a big ball fixed on the inside with gravity pushing out. the walls of the chamber will be the ground of the environment, if youve ever had a bucket full of water spinning it very fast youd see exactly what i mean. think of it as an inverse planet, with its sun its core. That will only create pseudo gravity around the equatorial region. You seems to have ignored Ophiolite's practical point about destroying everything when you compress them to this extent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonjouten05 Posted February 13, 2016 Author Share Posted February 13, 2016 (edited) Newton was smart as heck, just so you know.. just a product of his environment.. but it uses a lot of concepts of relativity and in all honesty provides the most logical explanation for the fermi paradox (and oddly tells us we underestimated the amount of sapient sentient life) because their species lifetime is probably astronomical comparatively. Like seriously, what do you think neutron stars really are? Sun sized in about 5 sq miles? Sounds like alien to me. Edited February 13, 2016 by sonjouten05 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajb Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 If you are thinking of a thin spherical shell and people standing on the inside of the shell then you should consult i) Newton's shell theorem ii) The relativistic version which is Birkhoff's theorem Essentially there is no nontrivial gravitational field inside such a shell. How would you get gravity 'pushing out'? You get the same result for an infinite hollow cylinder using Gauss's law, by the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 ! Moderator Note We're here to discuss science, not science fiction. Hand-wavey explanations are insufficient. Do better, or this gets locked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonjouten05 Posted February 13, 2016 Author Share Posted February 13, 2016 Dude, the gravity produced pulling on the wall of the device is the universe 's at large. Time dilation will surely effect the relative gravitational pull wouldn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 Dude, the gravity produced pulling on the wall of the device is the universe 's at large. If that is what you think, then you definitely need to read up on the Shell Theorem as ajb suggests. It sounds like your intuition doesn't match reality here. Time dilation will surely effect the relative gravitational pull wouldn't it? Not sure why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajb Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 Dude, the gravity produced pulling on the wall of the device is the universe 's at large. I am not sure that works as we are discussing local effects. I mean, why are you not pulled off the Earth by all the rest if the mass in the Universe? This reminds me of Mach's principle, which is not really a very clear mathematical statement, and we know that general relativity breaks some forms of this principle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonjouten05 Posted February 13, 2016 Author Share Posted February 13, 2016 (edited) Because the velocity of the gravitational waves change relative to a stationary observer. Different speeds will be needed if around earths immediate gravity field because ones set for empty space will crush on earth, etc.. Edited February 13, 2016 by sonjouten05 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajb Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 Because the velocity of the gravitational waves change relative to a stationary observer. Gravitational waves travel at the speed of light, which all inertial observers agree on. And anyway, your statement is confusing. You mean at rest relative to the source or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonjouten05 Posted February 13, 2016 Author Share Posted February 13, 2016 Gravitational waves travel at the speed of light, which all inertial observers agree on. And anyway, your statement is confusing. You mean at rest relative to the source or something? Well yeah, except that.. the speed of light depends highly on the medium it goes through (completely stops on walls), id imagine gravity has a similar effect relative to the observer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts