New efforts!

[Noyjitat]

There is nothing in this universe bigger than me, therefore I am forced to only believe in myself! :p

well.. you are the floating fat man after all hah.

[Arcana]

Speed is the big problem, we have a long ways to go just to get to 1% the speed of light. I'm sure we will eventually get things light enough that 1% is possible.

Trying to go fast in interstellar terms is actually kind of an interesting topic, because there are a number of different barriers to going fast.

The first problem isn't "speed" per se, but rather acceleration.  It takes a lot of energy to accelerate - go faster - but to a first order approximation it doesn't take any energy to keep going faster.  So the problem isn't going 1% the speed of light, its figuring out how to accelerate to that speed in the first place.  And the problem is fuel.

Conventional rockets use fuel that they bring along with them.  That means the more fuel you have, the more fuel you have to expend energy to accelerate.  Eventually, you have a spaceship that is one big giant fuel tank and all of your rocket fuel is going towards trying to accelerate more rocket fuel.  There's actually an equation that operates here called the impulse function, but that's neither here nor there.  The problem is that its like trying to build a car that can drive a thousand laps around North America.  You can't bring enough gas to make the trip in your car, and if you make your car bigger you'll just need more gas.

The solution is to not have to bring the fuel with you.  If you could drive a bit, gas up the car, and continue on, you can drive an unlimited distance (at least until your car falls apart).  There are theoretical propulsion systems that work that way: the classic Bussard Ramjet and its brethren for example.  The idea is that interstellar space is not empty: there is a very tiny amount of gas floating in space.  You collect that gas as you travel, compress it, energize it with some energy source, and expel it as propulsion exhaust like a rocket, or rather like a ramjet.  Provided you can bring a suitable long-lasting energy source with you (or you can fuse the hydrogen atoms in space that make up a lot of that gas), you could use this to accelerate to very high speeds.  Much higher than 1% the speed of light.

The problem then becomes the fact that you are now traveling fast enough that "empty space" isn't so empty anymore.  Now, you're travelling fast enough for you're getting constantly pelted by dust grains and that same gas that you're using for fuel.  Eventually, you could sustain a high degree of friction in the form of cosmic radiation that is bombarding your ship.  You'd need to both protect yourself from it and also expend more energy to overcome the drag of interstellar space components.  Different designs yield different results but my guess is that interstellar friction becomes a serious problem before you get to 10% the speed of light.

At some point, assuming you're traveling in normal space and not using exotic technology, the cosmic microwave background becomes a problem.  The universe contains a radiation field that has an intrinsic temperature of about 3 degrees Kelvin - i.e. three degrees above absolute zero.  In other words, not really very noticeable.  But as you move faster, you will doppler shift that radiation to higher and higher energies.  At high enough speeds, that 3K radiation will become increasingly hot until eventually you are experiencing incredibly intense radiation coming from the direction you are heading towards.  Eventually that radiation will vaporize your spacecraft.

So, initially the problem is acceleration.  Then the problem becomes speed, and the friction associated with that speed.  And if you get past that, the problem will be the universe will eventually try to incinerate you.

Of course, you could always invent Alcubierre warp drives.  Those tend to protect you from all of that.  On the other hand, analysis seems to indicate they will likely sweep up and accelerate the interstellar medium in the direction of travel.  Meaning you won't be incinerated, but your destination could become extra-crispy two seconds after you arrive.

[JanessaVR]

Of course, you could always invent Alcubierre warp drives.  Those tend to protect you from all of that.  On the other hand, analysis seems to indicate they will likely sweep up and accelerate the interstellar medium in the direction of travel.  Meaning you won't be incinerated, but your destination could become extra-crispy two seconds after you arrive.

There are days physics is such an annoying killjoy.  :)

[Abraxus]

There are days physics is such an annoying killjoy.  :)

I second that!  How the heck are we supposed to achieve warp speed if physics keeps throwing insurmountable obstacles in our way!  Time for someone to invent the "Heisenberg Compensator".  A device that can pretty much negate any such obstacle, so that the writers of Star Trek could go on without having to worry about details like that.  I believe they most famously employed it when dealing with issues surrounding the Transporter.  We need one for Warp Drive, so let's get a move on already!

[Arcana]

I've stated what gravity is multiple times. it's a force interaction between magnetism and electricity both on a field level and an atomic level. Electrons are drawn towards a magnet while in motion and charged, electrons on an atom are constantly in motion and have a charge therefore pull, therefore NO GRAVITY. the electricity arcs when it nears the magnet causing an electromagnetic field to form this field emits from the magnetic poles and collides at the magnetic equator causing static discharges into the atmosphere these discharges become conducted by the chemicals in our atmosphere and become electrical charges. at the same time this whole process re-magnetizes the core due to electricity constantly passing by the molten nickle generating a magnetic current. That is Planetary gravity, which stops shortly after leaving the atmosphere in about the same place the electromagnetic field arcs to. Cosmic Gravity follows rules of Polar interactions as each body in space renders its own poles.

When protons decay into neutral pions and positrons, the positron will curl in the opposite direction from an electron towards the magnetic pole of the magnetic field induced by the electric charge separation which would imply an anti-gravity force interacting with the coupled plasma in the ionosphere demagnetizing the inducted field loops in the magma without penetrating the ferro-crystalline core.  This poses limits on meson generation in chondritic coupled paramagnetic lattices of sufficient gravitational potential embedded within a dipole environment.

[Aggelakis]

When protons decay into neutral pions and positrons, the positron will curl in the opposite direction from an electron towards the magnetic pole of the magnetic field induced by the electric charge separation which would imply an anti-gravity force interacting with the coupled plasma in the ionosphere demagnetizing the inducted field loops in the magma without penetrating the ferro-crystalline core.  This poses limits on meson generation in chondritic coupled paramagnetic lattices of sufficient gravitational potential embedded within a dipole environment.

:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o

8)

[Ohioknight]

NASA still uses plain old Newtonian calculations to plot the trajectories of our inertial spacecraft.  Because Newton is "settled enough" that it still works, and will likely always work for that specific purpose.

Unless you're planning a landing on Mercury -- bad things happen will if you use Newton with too much precision.

[Ohioknight]

Of course, you could always invent Alcubierre warp drives.  Those tend to protect you from all of that.  On the other hand, analysis seems to indicate they will likely sweep up and accelerate the interstellar medium in the direction of travel.  Meaning you won't be incinerated, but your destination could become extra-crispy two seconds after you arrive.

Engineering details... that just means you can't use the simplest solution without getting that problem.  The most direct proposed solution (which also reduces the amount of negative energy -- "dark energy"? -- that you need) is to collapse the exterior of the warp metric to a size nearer the Planck limit during transit which will not impact the interior of the Metric. 

Yes, it turns out the solution to going faster than light (arguably backwards in time) may be to make your spaceship bigger on the inside than the outside.

[Arcana]

Engineering details... that just means you can't use the simplest solution without getting that problem.  The most direct proposed solution (which also reduces the amount of negative energy -- "dark energy"? -- that you need) is to collapse the exterior of the warp metric to a size nearer the Planck limit during transit which will not impact the interior of the Metric. 

Yes, it turns out the solution to going faster than light (arguably backwards in time) may be to make your spaceship bigger on the inside than the outside.

That only solves the problems with the exterior manifold interacting with normal space.  Its unclear if there exists any mechanism that can get you out of the bubble without causing pretty serious problems at the interior interface.  You could end up creating a singularity surface which would cause quantum effects to do undesirable things to your ship, luggage, and the molecules of your face.

[darkgob]

Why is nobody talking about 4-corner simultaneous day???

[Ohioknight]

That only solves the problems with the exterior manifold interacting with normal space.  Its unclear if there exists any mechanism that can get you out of the bubble without causing pretty serious problems at the interior interface.  You could end up creating a singularity surface which would cause quantum effects to do undesirable things to your ship, luggage, and the molecules of your face.

Well as long as that's the only unclear thing about our spacetime distorting FTL solution using negative energy, I'm willing to go for it.

[Twisted Toon]

Why is nobody talking about 4-corner simultaneous day???

Because

When protons decay into neutral pions and positrons, the positron will curl in the opposite direction from an electron towards the magnetic pole of the magnetic field induced by the electric charge separation which would imply an anti-gravity force interacting with the coupled plasma in the ionosphere demagnetizing the inducted field loops in the magma without penetrating the ferro-crystalline core.  This poses limits on meson generation in chondritic coupled paramagnetic lattices of sufficient gravitational potential embedded within a dipole environment.

Followed by

:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o

8)

Is so much more awesome?

I would mention something about "Atheists", but I don't want to irritate the person with the keys to the thread. ;)

[Aggelakis]

I'm still not sure if Arcana didn't just trot out a shitton of semi-related two-dollar words and threw them at Joshex like a fighter throws sand in their opponent's eyes.

[Coulomb]

I would agree but there are some sites out there that continue - one of which is in Turkey and has been known to be a source of methane gas for literally thousands of years. Your reference is from 2005 and some of our present period still show it as possible.

A few other sites have been found as deep as 40,000 feet into granite.

I guess like all science - nothing is ever completely settled! Eggs used to be bad for you, salt was bad for you - now they are saying high cholesteral foods - don't give you high cholesteral.

It has also been found in astronomy cases where jets of hot gas appear to be traveling at 6 times or more faster than the speed of light! They are still seeking causes for that one!

Oh dear God ... Oh no ... no.  No we're not.  That effect has been well understood for something close to 20 years now.  I can explain it if I need to, but I'd rather not.  I mean it's in the standard textbooks at this point. 

I love what you're doing.  And I almost always lurk... But no.  Just no.  Like I said, I can explain the effect.  But you're a very smart guy.  I shouldn't need to.

[Ohioknight]

I'm still not sure if Arcana didn't just trot out a shitton of semi-related two-dollar words and threw them at Joshex like a fighter throws sand in their opponent's eyes.

Which is the proper response. 

Back when I was working at OSU Radio Observatory we had a crackpot file that Bob Dixon kept of the various people who sent us "sciencey" letters that were remarkably like Arcana's post -- they SOUND like they should mean something.

[darkgob]

I guess like all science - nothing is ever completely settled! Eggs used to be bad for you, salt was bad for you - now they are saying high cholesteral foods - don't give you high cholesteral.

I started trying to write several different things here but I'm just having a really hard time believing you're not being this obtuse on purpose.

It has also been found in astronomy cases where jets of hot gas appear to be traveling at 6 times or more faster than the speed of light! They are still seeking causes for that one!

https://i.imgur.com/KXek7SL.jpg

I'm almost starting to wonder if everybody is trolling this thread at this point.  Time to shut down one or both threads?

[Ohioknight]

It has also been found in astronomy cases where jets of hot gas appear to be traveling at 6 times or more faster than the speed of light! They are still seeking causes for that one!

No, what Ironwolf' saying here is true... of course there's no particular PROBLEM with finding causes for jets of hot gas that appear to be traveling at 6 times the speed of light.  It's fairly easy to explain things that APPEAR to move 6 times the speed of light -- just as if you swept a flashlight beam from one side of the sky to the other. It would create a bright spot that APPEARED to be traveling faster than light if it lit something far enough away. 

Jets of gas moving at very high speeds partially along our line of sight produce light that has less far to travel to reach us from the nearer/later parts than from the further/earlier parts.  The result, we see the nearer jet parts sooner than we "should" have and the net result is the jet seems to be moving "left to right" across our field of view faster than it should be able to.

[MM3squints]

https://i.imgur.com/KXek7SL.jpg

I'm almost starting to wonder if everybody is trolling this thread at this point.  Time to shut down one or both threads?

Can something move faster than light? Theoretically:

http://physics.about.com/od/relativisticmechanics/f/SpeedofLight.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyon

It's all in theory because like the article state

"To date, we have no experimental evidence to indicate that tachyons do exist."

[Super Firebug]

https://i.imgur.com/KXek7SL.jpg

Why does this guy specifically need a Chevy Citation? Or is it a Cessna Citation?

[MM3squints]

Why does this guy specifically need a Chevy Citation? Or is it a Cessna Citation?

Because he currently owns a Chevy Nova and it "won't go"