Topic: EXTRAORDINARY "hyperspace" engine could make interstellar space travel a reality  (Read 10946 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
EXTRAORDINARY "hyperspace" engine could make interstellar space travel a reality

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Welcome to Mars express: only a three hour trip

IAN JOHNSTON
SCIENCE CORRESPONDENT


AN EXTRAORDINARY "hyperspace" engine that could make interstellar space travel a reality by flying into other dimensions is being investigated by the United States government.

The hypothetical device, which has been outlined in principle but is based on a controversial theory about the fabric of the universe, could potentially allow a spacecraft to travel to Mars in three hours and journey to a star 11 light years away in just 80 days, according to a report in today's New Scientist magazine.

The theoretical engine works by creating an intense magnetic field that, according to ideas first developed by the late scientist Burkhard Heim in the 1950s, would produce a gravitational field and result in thrust for a spacecraft.

Also, if a large enough magnetic field was created, the craft would slip into a different dimension, where the speed of light is faster, allowing incredible speeds to be reached. Switching off the magnetic field would result in the engine reappearing in our current dimension.

The US air force has expressed an interest in the idea and scientists working for the American Department of Energy - which has a device known as the Z Machine that could generate the kind of magnetic fields required to drive the engine - say they may carry out a test if the theory withstands further scrutiny.

Professor Jochem Hauser, one of the scientists who put forward the idea, told The Scotsman that if everything went well a working engine could be tested in about five years.

However, Prof Hauser, a physicist at the Applied Sciences University in Salzgitter, Germany, and a former chief of aerodynamics at the European Space Agency, cautioned it was based on a highly controversial theory that would require a significant change in the current understanding of the laws of physics.

"It would be amazing. I have been working on propulsion systems for quite a while and it would be the most amazing thing. The benefits would be almost unlimited," he said.

"But this thing is not around the corner; we first have to prove the basic science is correct and there are quite a few physicists who have a different opinion.

"It's our job to prove we are right and we are working on that."

He said the engine would enable spaceships to travel to different solar systems. "If the theory is correct then this is not science fiction, it is science fact," Prof Hauser said.

"NASA have contacted me and next week I'm going to see someone from the [US] air force to talk about it further, but it is at a very early stage. I think the best-case scenario would be within the next five years [to build a test device] if the technology works."

The US authorities' attention was attracted after Prof Hauser and an Austrian colleague, Walter Droscher, wrote a paper called "Guidelines for a space propulsion device based on Heim's quantum theory".

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Also an article in New Sceintist on it but it's subscription members only for the full article.

Offline Death_Merchant

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3639
  • Gender: Male
Translation: "Hey! Someone from NASA actually returned our call!!!!"

Sure, would be cool. But that's all this really is now....
Cheers,
Death "believes only experiments" Merchant

BTW: In an era where we worry about EM from cellphones, what would a mag field big enough to pop you into another dimension do to the passengers?
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and is widely regarded as a bad move." - Douglas Adams (1952-2001)

Offline J. Carney

  • Son of Dixie
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 10705
  • Gender: Male
  • Fortuna Favet Fortibus
BTW: In an era where we worry about EM from cellphones, what would a mag field big enough to pop you into another dimension do to the passengers?

I agree... I'll start whooping and hollering when we get the first call back "Earth to Mars in 3 hours and I feel fine." Till then, anyone can theorize anything.


And as far as health effects... well, Hell, I'll willingly give myself cancer and cut 20 years off my life if I can walk thesurface of another planet before I die.
Everything I did in my life that was worthwhile I caught hell for. - Earl Warron

The advantages of living in the Heart of Dixie- low cost of living, peace and quiet and a conservative majority. For some reason I think that the first two items have a lot to do with the presence of the last one.

"Flag of Alabama I salute thee. To thee I pledge my allegiance, my service, and my life."
   

Offline Darth Sidious

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 598
  • One Winged Angel
BTW: In an era where we worry about EM from cellphones, what would a mag field big enough to pop you into another dimension do to the passengers?

I agree... I'll start whooping and hollering when we get the first call back "Earth to Mars in 3 hours and I feel fine." Till then, anyone can theorize anything.


And as far as health effects... well, Hell, I'll willingly give myself cancer and cut 20 years off my life if I can walk thesurface of another planet before I die.

You arent the only one.  Heck, i'd probably volunteer for a one-way trip to another planet

Offline Dracho

  • Global Moderator
  • Rear Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 18289
  • Gender: Male
Even if it's completely fatal to humans, imagine what it could do for our unmanned space exploration. 

Or, on a more frightening note, combine this with genetic research and you could develop the explorer at the target system from store biological material, educate him via machine, then return his human perspective, via probe, upon his death.
The worst enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan.  - Karl von Clausewitz

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
Sounds like a lot of horsesh*t to me... How do we know what the effect of jumping into other dimensions with different physical laws will be on the matter we are built of and take for granted?


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Sounds like a lot of horsesh*t to me... How do we know what the effect of jumping into other dimensions with different physical laws will be on the matter we are built of and take for granted?

By experimentation.

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
Sounds like a lot of horsesh*t to me... How do we know what the effect of jumping into other dimensions with different physical laws will be on the matter we are built of and take for granted?

By experimentation.

I'll eagerly await the results... 


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Bonk

  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13298
  • You don't have to live like a refugee.
I have my doubts.

The highest accurately known feild strengths I am aware of in NMR and MRI instrumentation range from 8-20 Tesla. If accurate higher feild strengths were avaialable I'm pretty sure they'd be in use in such studies.

The other issue I have with such an idea is the effect of such immense feild strengths on electronic systems, not to mention living biological systems. In NMR and MRI studies the control systems are located remote from the experiment site in order that they continue to function normally. Field strengths in NMR studies are not limited by the living subject as in MRI but only by magnet technology and the physical limitiations of the facility and proximity of the human operator and control electronics. Recall that water has a dipole moment.

The part in the article:
Quote
Also, if a large enough magnetic field was created, the craft would slip into a different dimension,

... poses significant issues in my mind. How are the control electronics and/or passenger to be sheilded from the destructive influence of such immense feilds encompassing them? And if they are sheilded well enough to survive the experiment would they still be subject to the postulated effects of such a device? (i.e. would the engine take off and leave the controls and operator behind?)

The proposed experimental apparatus:
http://www.sandia.gov/media/z290.htm
I fail to see how the feild strenghts could be accurately known and reproducible in such an apparatus, knowing the intricacies of NMR experimental apparati.
Built and designed for another purpose altogether, though it looks pretty cool in action:

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
I have my doubts.

The highest accurately known feild strengths I am aware of in NMR and MRI instrumentation range from 8-20 Tesla. If accurate higher feild strengths were avaialable I'm pretty sure they'd be in use in such studies.

The other issue I have with such an idea is the effect of such immense feild strengths on electronic systems, not to mention living biological systems. In NMR and MRI studies the control systems are located remote from the experiment site in order that they continue to function normally. Field strengths in NMR studies are not limited by the living subject as in MRI but only by magnet technology and the physical limitiations of the facility and proximity of the human operator and control electronics. Recall that water has a dipole moment.

The part in the article:
Quote
Also, if a large enough magnetic field was created, the craft would slip into a different dimension,

... poses significant issues in my mind. How are the control electronics and/or passenger to be sheilded from the destructive influence of such immense feilds encompassing them? And if they are sheilded well enough to survive the experiment would they still be subject to the postulated effects of such a device? (i.e. would the engine take off and leave the controls and operator behind?)

The proposed experimental apparatus:
http://www.sandia.gov/media/z290.htm
I fail to see how the feild strenghts could be accurately known and reproducible in such an apparatus, knowing the intricacies of NMR experimental apparati.
Built and designed for another purpose altogether, though it looks pretty cool in action:



I would imagine that solutions for such problems are possible. for example optical fiber optic control lines and computers, faraday cage shielding, cold plasma field line shunts or otherwise shaping the field so it does not permeate the capsule. it strikes me that the thing works by modifying space and therefore the field intersecting the crew cabin is not necessary. once a local space is isolated the effect does not depend on universal permiation of the local space but acts at the boundary layer.

Offline Dracho

  • Global Moderator
  • Rear Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 18289
  • Gender: Male
Here is a great place to data mine on the subject..

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3217961/

 Jan. 6, 2006 | 7 p.m. ET
Hyperspace hyped: Could extradimensional physics provide a way to propel spacecraft to other stars without bulky chemical fuels, through shortcuts in spacetime that get around Einstein's cosmic speed limits?

The idea sounds like a "Star Trek" dream come true, and it's generated a Warp Factor 7 buzz this week, thanks to a report in New Scientist magazine that makes it sound as if some heavyweights in the physics world might be willing to look into the concept. But when you do a little checking around, there's little sign that the concept is actually gaining serious traction in the scientific community
The worst enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan.  - Karl von Clausewitz

Offline Death_Merchant

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3639
  • Gender: Male
I have first hand experience with a working hyperspace drive:

Experimental items needed:

1) a car
2) a designated driver (henceforth called "test pilot")
3) a bottle of JD (actual experiment originally conducted with 4 large martinis)

Other than an unknown period of unconsciousness and some strange ill effects the next day, it worked!
Made it from a New Year's  Eve party to home unperceptibly fast!

Only downside: such a spacecraft may require a roll-down or power window
« Last Edit: January 10, 2006, 09:44:55 am by Death_Merchant »
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and is widely regarded as a bad move." - Douglas Adams (1952-2001)

Offline Lepton

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1620
Another dimension?  I think if the idea is framed in that manner then it is clearly a bunch of silliness.  If such a dimension were to exist it would not be a dimension of space in the manner that we know it.  If matter in the manner that we know it even it exists in such a dimension, it is likely to be only one aspect of matter that we currently experience in the known dimensions.  Think of hacking a dimension off of the known dimensions and think of what matter or energy for that matter (a little pun there) would be without it.  A dimension is a dimension.  It is not a whole other type of space.  While string theory suggests the existence of other dimensions, it clearly is not this sci-fi junk that these fools are referring to.

Now if rather what they are referring to is another parallel set of spatial dimensions like a hyperspace, the same theoretical problem pertain.  Again, what is the state of matter in that parallel space from known space?  Is all known space matter and energy represented in that parallel space or merely aspects of it that pertain to that parallel space.  If the latter which I would suspect would be true, then I can hardly imagine that applying some sort of energy in known space could translate known space matter and energy into this parallel dimension as it would be impossible, nor do I believe that somehow applying energy in that parallel space could affect the movement of matter and energy in known space.

The only way in which I could think such a thing might happen, warp drive so to speak, is if matter and energy in known space is merely a subset of a real matter and energy in a larger superspace and that known space and known dimenson are a subset of the entirety of real space.  What I mean by that is that known space is intimately tied and bound with this superspace that I am calling real space rather than there being a hyperspace that is merely parallel or wrapped into known space.  Then one might be able to effect some change in real space aspects of matter and energy and have its effects felt in known space or the converse.


System Specs:

Dell Dimension E521
AMD64x2 5000+
2G DDR2 RAM
ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB GDDR3
250GB SATA HD

Offline Lieutenant_Q

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1669
  • Gender: Male
You know...this kinda sounds...Event Horizon-ish...
"Your mighty GDI forces have been emasculated, and you yourself are a killer of children.  Now of course it's not true.  But the world only believes what the media tells them to believe.  And I tell the media what to believe, its really quite simple." - Kane (Joe Kucan) Command & Conquer Tiberium Dawn (1995)

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
You know...this kinda sounds...Event Horizon-ish...

The new scientist article has become available:

Take a leap into hyperspace
05 January 2006
From New Scientist Print Edition
Haiko Lietz
Print this pageEmail to a friendRSS Feed
 EVERY year, the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics awards prizes for the best papers presented at its annual conference. Last year's winner in the nuclear and future flight category went to a paper calling for experimental tests of an astonishing new type of engine. According to the paper, this hyperdrive motor would propel a craft through another dimension at enormous speeds. It could leave Earth at lunchtime and get to the moon in time for dinner. There's just one catch: the idea relies on an obscure and largely unrecognised kind of physics. Can they possibly be serious?

The AIAA is certainly not embarrassed. What's more, the US military has begun to cast its eyes over the hyperdrive concept, and a space propulsion researcher at the US Department of Energy's Sandia National Laboratories has said he would be interested in putting the idea to the test. And despite the bafflement of most physicists at the theory that supposedly underpins it, Pavlos Mikellides, an aerospace engineer at the Arizona State University in Tempe who reviewed the winning paper, stands by the committee's choice. "Even though such features have been explored before, this particular approach is quite unique," he says.

Unique it certainly is. If the experiment gets the go-ahead and works, it could reveal new interactions between the fundamental forces of nature that would change the future of space travel. Forget spending six months or more holed up in a rocket on the way to Mars, a round trip on the hyperdrive could take as little as 5 hours. All our worries about astronauts' muscles wasting away or their DNA being irreparably damaged by cosmic radiation would disappear overnight. What's more the device would put travel to the stars within reach for the first time. But can the hyperdrive really get off the ground?

“A hyperdrive craft would put the stars within reach for the first time”The answer to that question hinges on the work of a little-known German physicist. Burkhard Heim began to explore the hyperdrive propulsion concept in the 1950s as a spin-off from his attempts to heal the biggest divide in physics: the rift between quantum mechanics and Einstein's general theory of relativity.

Quantum theory describes the realm of the very small - atoms, electrons and elementary particles - while general relativity deals with gravity. The two theories are immensely successful in their separate spheres. The clash arises when it comes to describing the basic structure of space. In general relativity, space-time is an active, malleable fabric. It has four dimensions - three of space and one of time - that deform when masses are placed in them. In Einstein's formulation, the force of gravity is a result of the deformation of these dimensions. Quantum theory, on the other hand, demands that space is a fixed and passive stage, something simply there for particles to exist on. It also suggests that space itself must somehow be made up of discrete, quantum elements.

In the early 1950s, Heim began to rewrite the equations of general relativity in a quantum framework. He drew on Einstein's idea that the gravitational force emerges from the dimensions of space and time, but suggested that all fundamental forces, including electromagnetism, might emerge from a new, different set of dimensions. Originally he had four extra dimensions, but he discarded two of them believing that they did not produce any forces, and settled for adding a new two-dimensional "sub-space" onto Einstein's four-dimensional space-time.

In Heim's six-dimensional world, the forces of gravity and electromagnetism are coupled together. Even in our familiar four-dimensional world, we can see a link between the two forces through the behaviour of fundamental particles such as the electron. An electron has both mass and charge. When an electron falls under the pull of gravity its moving electric charge creates a magnetic field. And if you use an electromagnetic field to accelerate an electron you move the gravitational field associated with its mass. But in the four dimensions we know, you cannot change the strength of gravity simply by cranking up the electromagnetic field.

In Heim's view of space and time, this limitation disappears. He claimed it is possible to convert electromagnetic energy into gravitational and back again, and speculated that a rotating magnetic field could reduce the influence of gravity on a spacecraft enough for it to take off.

When he presented his idea in public in 1957, he became an instant celebrity. Wernher von Braun, the German engineer who at the time was leading the Saturn rocket programme that later launched astronauts to the moon, approached Heim about his work and asked whether the expensive Saturn rockets were worthwhile. And in a letter in 1964, the German relativity theorist Pascual Jordan, who had worked with the distinguished physicists Max Born and Werner Heisenberg and was a member of the Nobel committee, told Heim that his plan was so important "that its successful experimental treatment would without doubt make the researcher a candidate for the Nobel prize".

But all this attention only led Heim to retreat from the public eye. This was partly because of his severe multiple disabilities, caused by a lab accident when he was still in his teens. But Heim was also reluctant to disclose his theory without an experiment to prove it. He never learned English because he did not want his work to leave the country. As a result, very few people knew about his work and no one came up with the necessary research funding. In 1958 the aerospace company Bölkow did offer some money, but not enough to do the proposed experiment.

While Heim waited for more money to come in, the company's director, Ludwig Bölkow, encouraged him to develop his theory further. Heim took his advice, and one of the results was a theorem that led to a series of formulae for calculating the masses of the fundamental particles - something conventional theories have conspicuously failed to achieve. He outlined this work in 1977 in the Max Planck Institute's journal Zeitschrift für Naturforschung, his only peer-reviewed paper. In an abstruse way that few physicists even claim to understand, the formulae work out a particle's mass starting from physical characteristics, such as its charge and angular momentum.

Yet the theorem has proved surprisingly powerful. The standard model of physics, which is generally accepted as the best available theory of elementary particles, is incapable of predicting a particle's mass. Even the accepted means of estimating mass theoretically, known as lattice quantum chromodynamics, only gets to between 1 and 10 per cent of the experimental values.

Gravity reduction
But in 1982, when researchers at the German Electron Synchrotron (DESY) in Hamburg implemented Heim's mass theorem in a computer program, it predicted masses of fundamental particles that matched the measured values to within the accuracy of experimental error. If they are let down by anything, it is the precision to which we know the values of the fundamental constants. Two years after Heim's death in 2001, his long-term collaborator Illobrand von Ludwiger calculated the mass formula using a more accurate gravitational constant. "The masses came out even more precise," he says.

After publishing the mass formulae, Heim never really looked at hyperspace propulsion again. Instead, in response to requests for more information about the theory behind the mass predictions, he spent all his time detailing his ideas in three books published in German. It was only in 1980, when the first of his books came to the attention of a retired Austrian patent officer called Walter Dröscher, that the hyperspace propulsion idea came back to life. Dröscher looked again at Heim's ideas and produced an "extended" version, resurrecting the dimensions that Heim originally discarded. The result is "Heim-Dröscher space", a mathematical description of an eight-dimensional universe.

From this, Dröscher claims, you can derive the four forces known in physics: the gravitational and electromagnetic forces, and the strong and weak nuclear forces. But there's more to it than that. "If Heim's picture is to make sense," Dröscher says, "we are forced to postulate two more fundamental forces." These are, Dröscher claims, related to the familiar gravitational force: one is a repulsive anti-gravity similar to the dark energy that appears to be causing the universe's expansion to accelerate. And the other might be used to accelerate a spacecraft without any rocket fuel.

This force is a result of the interaction of Heim's fifth and sixth dimensions and the extra dimensions that Dröscher introduced. It produces pairs of "gravitophotons", particles that mediate the interconversion of electromagnetic and gravitational energy. Dröscher teamed up with Jochem Häuser, a physicist and professor of computer science at the University of Applied Sciences in Salzgitter, Germany, to turn the theoretical framework into a proposal for an experimental test. The paper they produced, "Guidelines for a space propulsion device based on Heim's quantum theory", is what won the AIAA's award last year.

Claims of the possibility of "gravity reduction" or "anti-gravity" induced by magnetic fields have been investigated by NASA before (New Scientist, 12 January 2002, p 24). But this one, Dröscher insists, is different. "Our theory is not about anti-gravity. It's about completely new fields with new properties," he says. And he and Häuser have suggested an experiment to prove it.

This will require a huge rotating ring placed above a superconducting coil to create an intense magnetic field. With a large enough current in the coil, and a large enough magnetic field, Dröscher claims the electromagnetic force can reduce the gravitational pull on the ring to the point where it floats free. Dröscher and Häuser say that to completely counter Earth's pull on a 150-tonne spacecraft a magnetic field of around 25 tesla would be needed. While that's 500,000 times the strength of Earth's magnetic field, pulsed magnets briefly reach field strengths up to 80 tesla. And Dröscher and Häuser go further. With a faster-spinning ring and an even stronger magnetic field, gravitophotons would interact with conventional gravity to produce a repulsive anti-gravity force, they suggest.

“A spinning ring and a strong magnetic field could produce a repulsive anti-gravity force”Dröscher is hazy about the details, but he suggests that a spacecraft fitted with a coil and ring could be propelled into a multidimensional hyperspace. Here the constants of nature could be different, and even the speed of light could be several times faster than we experience. If this happens, it would be possible to reach Mars in less than 3 hours and a star 11 light years away in only 80 days, Dröscher and Häuser say.

So is this all fanciful nonsense, or a revolution in the making? The majority of physicists have never heard of Heim theory, and most of those contacted by New Scientist said they couldn't make sense of Dröscher and Häuser's description of the theory behind their proposed experiment. Following Heim theory is hard work even without Dröscher's extension, says Markus Pössel, a theoretical physicist at the Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics in Potsdam, Germany. Several years ago, while an undergraduate at the University of Hamburg, he took a careful look at Heim theory. He says he finds it "largely incomprehensible", and difficult to tie in with today's physics. "What is needed is a step-by-step introduction, beginning at modern physical concepts," he says.

The general consensus seems to be that Dröscher and Häuser's theory is incomplete at best, and certainly extremely difficult to follow. And it has not passed any normal form of peer review, a fact that surprised the AIAA prize reviewers when they made their decision. "It seemed to be quite developed and ready for such publication," Mikellides told New Scientist.

At the moment, the main reason for taking the proposal seriously must be Heim theory's uncannily successful prediction of particle masses. Maybe, just maybe, Heim theory really does have something to contribute to modern physics. "As far as I understand it, Heim theory is ingenious," says Hans Theodor Auerbach, a theoretical physicist at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich who worked with Heim. "I think that physics will take this direction in the future."

It may be a long while before we find out if he's right. In its present design, Dröscher and Häuser's experiment requires a magnetic coil several metres in diameter capable of sustaining an enormous current density. Most engineers say that this is not feasible with existing materials and technology, but Roger Lenard, a space propulsion researcher at Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico thinks it might just be possible. Sandia runs an X-ray generator known as the Z machine which "could probably generate the necessary field intensities and gradients".

For now, though, Lenard considers the theory too shaky to justify the use of the Z machine. "I would be very interested in getting Sandia interested if we could get a more perspicacious introduction to the mathematics behind the proposed experiment," he says. "Even if the results are negative, that, in my mind, is a successful experiment."

From issue 2533 of New Scientist magazine, 05 January 2006, page 24
Who was Burkhard Heim?
Burkhard Heim had a remarkable life. Born in 1925 in Potsdam, Germany, he decided at the age of 6 that he wanted to become a rocket scientist. He disguised his designs in code so that no one could discover his secret. And in the cellar of his parents' house, he experimented with high explosives. But this was to lead to disaster.

Towards the end of the second world war, he worked as an explosives developer, and an accident in 1944 in which a device exploded in his hands left him permanently disabled. He lost both his forearms, along with 90 per cent of his hearing and eyesight.

After the war, he attended university in Göttingen to study physics. The idea of propelling a spacecraft using quantum mechanics rather than rocket fuel led him to study general relativity and quantum mechanics. It took an enormous effort. From 1948, his father and wife replaced his senses, spending hours reading papers and transcribing his calculations onto paper. And he developed a photographic memory.

Supporters of Heim theory claim that it is a panacea for the troubles in modern physics. They say it unites quantum mechanics and general relativity, can predict the masses of the building blocks of matter from first principles, and can even explain the state of the universe 13.7 billion years ago.


Offline Bonk

  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13298
  • You don't have to live like a refugee.
It may be a long while before we find out if he's right. In its present design, Dröscher and Häuser's experiment requires a magnetic coil several metres in diameter capable of sustaining an enormous current density. Most engineers say that this is not feasible with existing materials and technology, but Roger Lenard, a space propulsion researcher at Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico thinks it might just be possible. Sandia runs an X-ray generator known as the Z machine which "could probably generate the necessary field intensities and gradients".

For now, though, Lenard considers the theory too shaky to justify the use of the Z machine. "I would be very interested in getting Sandia interested if we could get a more perspicacious introduction to the mathematics behind the proposed experiment," he says. "Even if the results are negative, that, in my mind, is a successful experiment."


Credibility dropping fast...

The Z-machine target:

... a fair bit short of a few meters.

Top feild strengths in MRI instruments with a ~1M magnet bore are around 8 Tesla currently. NMR instruments typically run about 20 Tesla in their cryogenically cooled superconducting magnets with a bore of about 5 cm. Quite a ways to go, though probably feasible. Cryogen maintenance in a spaceship engine application leaves a lot of questions.

This is where they lose me:
Quote
gravitophotons

Kook alert! Sorry, but gravity is still essentially magic as far as we are concerned. Until I see "gravitophotons" in an accepted and reproducible experiment... till then our knowledge of gravity is purely empirical and must remain so to be valid in my view.

Set your phasers to "stunned" folks!  :D

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
LOL. What do you think quantum gravity or the linking of the EM quanta to gravity would mean?

Offline Bonk

  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13298
  • You don't have to live like a refugee.
I am unaware of any such thing as "quantum gravity". All matter is quantised, thus energy. All of it is subject to the same phenomenon we know as gravity.

Linking EM quanta (photons) to gravity would have innumerable implications.

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
indeed. yet that is the current holy grail of physics to one way or another unify the rules of quantum mechanics with those of grvity in one profound equation.

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
indeed. yet that is the current holy grail of physics to one way or another unify the rules of quantum mechanics with those of grvity in one profound equation.

And it'll happen when pigs fly, or when we invoke quasi religious Kaluza Klein based theories that magically explain away all the harsh Universal realities that we don't like...

There are no gravitophotons, black holes have proven that, and much as we would all love to think that future generations will be jaunting around the galaxy a-la the Starship Enterprise, it's just not within the realms of possibilty...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2785
  • Gender: Male
FTL travel has yet to be proven true or false yet, so how could it be outside the realms of possibilty
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
FTL travel has yet to be proven true or false yet, so how could it be outside the realms of possibilty

Because at c mass is infinite and time comes to a standstill, unless you jump into hyperdimesnions with different physical laws, whcih would most definitely be fatal...   Frankly, I think it has been proven false.  Kaluza Klein based Theories (like String Theory) and Relatvity have sounded the death knell for FTL travel...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
I disagree. rather than a death knell they refined the field narrowed the possibilites; which is an aid in determining where to look for solutions.

Offline Sirgod

  • Whooot Master Cattle Baron
  • Global Moderator
  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 27814
  • Gender: Male
I always get abit excited when I read stories like this, and the mind stars to wonder. Can you Imagine the Aurora Borialus effect on the ship, when Solar Energy hits the the Shields?  It would be something to see indeed.

Stephen
"You cannot exaggerate about the Marines. They are convinced to the point of arrogance, that they are the most ferocious fighters on earth - and the amusing thing about it is that they are."- Father Kevin Keaney, Chaplain, Korean War

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
I disagree. rather than a death knell they refined the field narrowed the possibilites; which is an aid in determining where to look for solutions.

The trouble is they have been refined from "technically unachievable" to "Dream on puny human" a hundred years ago...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
I disagree. rather than a death knell they refined the field narrowed the possibilites; which is an aid in determining where to look for solutions.

The trouble is they have been refined from "technically unachievable" to "Dream on puny human" a hundred years ago...

I don't think so. Actually al scientific refinements to theory pointed the way to reasonable lines of inquiry. they did not rule out the possibilities. they just said any working approach needs to overcome in some way the following restrictions. because of this thousands of false approaches can be eliminated. narrowing the field to those paths that current theory leaves open. So now instead of searching through thousands of futile approaches we need only sort through a handful.

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2785
  • Gender: Male
FTL travel has yet to be proven true or false yet, so how could it be outside the realms of possibilty

Because at c mass is infinite and time comes to a standstill, unless you jump into hyperdimesnions with different physical laws, whcih would most definitely be fatal...   Frankly, I think it has been proven false.  Kaluza Klein based Theories (like String Theory) and Relatvity have sounded the death knell for FTL travel...

And i said as of yet it hasn't been proven decisivly true or false.  This means that all routes of possibility have not been ruled out.  Until that day happens it will always be within the realms of possibility.  What you said has only ruled out one possibility, it hasn't removed them all.
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
And i said as of yet it hasn't been proven decisivly true or false.  This means that all routes of possibility have not been ruled out.  Until that day happens it will always be within the realms of possibility.  What you said has only ruled out one possibility, it hasn't removed them all.


It's convinced me to my satisfaction, and I don't believe anything easily...  True science is the orbital math that you sent me and stuff like that...  I meant to tell you by the way, using your calculations on dlownrange orbital velocity I managed to take down the Falcon to within five hundred yards of the original Palus Putredinis landing site... That, under manual control, is amazing, so if I anyone ever needs a mission controller, you know where to find the best...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
I disagree. rather than a death knell they refined the field narrowed the possibilites; which is an aid in determining where to look for solutions.

The trouble is they have been refined from "technically unachievable" to "Dream on puny human" a hundred years ago...

I don't think so. Actually al scientific refinements to theory pointed the way to reasonable lines of inquiry. they did not rule out the possibilities. they just said any working approach needs to overcome in some way the following restrictions. because of this thousands of false approaches can be eliminated. narrowing the field to those paths that current theory leaves open. So now instead of searching through thousands of futile approaches we need only sort through a handful.

they've pointed ways to a line of enquiry that scientists may look at for fun in their spare time to take a break from serious research...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
If you say so. perhaps in the future we will be saying that is why no "serious scientist" invented warp drive; it was an uncredentialed  individual with big dreams.

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
If you say so. perhaps in the future we will be saying that is why no "serious scientist" invented warp drive; it was an uncredentialed  individual with big dreams.

it's a waste of time thinking about it... Humans are spacetime...  the fields, particles and quanta that we are composed of are part and parcel of space and time... Warp the spacetime around yourself to a massive degree and you collapse under your own mass and you die...  There's no point in sugar coating it... It makes great Sci Fi, but we have to accept that there are far more pressing considerations for mankind, like providiong everyone on the planet with Fresh Water...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
If you say so. perhaps in the future we will be saying that is why no "serious scientist" invented warp drive; it was an uncredentialed  individual with big dreams.

it's a waste of time thinking about it... Humans are spacetime...  the fields, particles and quanta that we are composed of are part and parcel of space and time... Warp the spacetime around yourself to a massive degree and you collapse under your own mass and you die...  There's no point in sugar coating it... It makes great Sci Fi, but we have to accept that there are far more pressing considerations for mankind, like providiong everyone on the planet with Fresh Water...

You know there are solutions for blackholes that exclude that possibility. and in fact the most likely blackhole model makes the sigularity avoidable. further not all routes require massive warpings of space time.

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2785
  • Gender: Male
And i said as of yet it hasn't been proven decisivly true or false.  This means that all routes of possibility have not been ruled out.  Until that day happens it will always be within the realms of possibility.  What you said has only ruled out one possibility, it hasn't removed them all.


It's convinced me to my satisfaction, and I don't believe anything easily...  True science is the orbital math that you sent me and stuff like that...  I meant to tell you by the way, using your calculations on dlownrange orbital velocity I managed to take down the Falcon to within five hundred yards of the original Palus Putredinis landing site... That, under manual control, is amazing, so if I anyone ever needs a mission controller, you know where to find the best...

Though if you think about it you realize up until that point of time when the orbital maths i use were made it wasn't consider real science.  Sure there were alot of relgious things going on then to, but thats not the point, we know it today to be real science because someone dared to break the norms of what science was supposed to be and in the process opened up whole new feilds that at that point in time could not be imagined (like traveling to the moon, sending probes to mars, all thanks to kepler and other brave thinkers).  So in my pov when i see people saying its impossible, can't be done, this ain't real science i think back a few hundred years, and go o yes... this happened before and guess what, they were all wrong about what was being proposed.

O btw, glad i could help :)
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
If you say so. perhaps in the future we will be saying that is why no "serious scientist" invented warp drive; it was an uncredentialed  individual with big dreams.

it's a waste of time thinking about it... Humans are spacetime...  the fields, particles and quanta that we are composed of are part and parcel of space and time... Warp the spacetime around yourself to a massive degree and you collapse under your own mass and you die...  There's no point in sugar coating it... It makes great Sci Fi, but we have to accept that there are far more pressing considerations for mankind, like providiong everyone on the planet with Fresh Water...

You know there are solutions for blackholes that exclude that possibility. and in fact the most likely blackhole model makes the sigularity avoidable. further not all routes require massive warpings of space time.

Those black hole models may apply to a light beam or subatomic particle with zero mass, but I hardly a think a bulky spacecraft capable of supporting several men for many years would fit the bill...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
And i said as of yet it hasn't been proven decisivly true or false.  This means that all routes of possibility have not been ruled out.  Until that day happens it will always be within the realms of possibility.  What you said has only ruled out one possibility, it hasn't removed them all.


It's convinced me to my satisfaction, and I don't believe anything easily...  True science is the orbital math that you sent me and stuff like that...  I meant to tell you by the way, using your calculations on dlownrange orbital velocity I managed to take down the Falcon to within five hundred yards of the original Palus Putredinis landing site... That, under manual control, is amazing, so if I anyone ever needs a mission controller, you know where to find the best...

Though if you think about it you realize up until that point of time when the orbital maths i use were made it wasn't consider real science.  Sure there were alot of relgious things going on then to, but thats not the point, we know it today to be real science because someone dared to break the norms of what science was supposed to be and in the process opened up whole new feilds that at that point in time could not be imagined (like traveling to the moon, sending probes to mars, all thanks to kepler and other brave thinkers).  So in my pov when i see people saying its impossible, can't be done, this ain't real science i think back a few hundred years, and go o yes... this happened before and guess what, they were all wrong about what was being proposed.

O btw, glad i could help :)

The orbital maths you used had been proven on Earth by experiment.  It didn't require the evokation of hyperdimensions to prove it...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
If you say so. perhaps in the future we will be saying that is why no "serious scientist" invented warp drive; it was an uncredentialed  individual with big dreams.

It takes a clever man years to learn the basic mathematical principles of Kaluza Klein based theories.  Hell, I've been studying Field Theories for years as a hobby, and admittedly while I am no great mathematician, I don't even recognise half the symbols used in the Maths of these theories...  A guy tinkering in a workshop in his back yard is never going to invent a dimension hopper that allows FTL travel... 


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2785
  • Gender: Male
The orbital maths you used had been proven on Earth by experiment.  It didn't require the evokation of hyperdimensions to prove it...
And yet the concept that these orbital maths put forth was far different from what the science of the day had decided.  Much of it was scoffed against until people finally started seeing that these were indeed facts.  So as i view it, when i see theories and such being put down because they seem wild and new, i just remember thats how these maths were views until they were proven to be right (you relize they were only published in a paper shortly after kepler died, so that no one could argue with him about them.  They were made by careful measurements done by brahe, a feat in itself that took years to do, and then it even more years for kepler to make his laws and publish them.  When they were made they were revolutionary thought, outside of the     realm of thought that had driven most of europe during this time period.)
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline Bonk

  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13298
  • You don't have to live like a refugee.
The orbital maths you used had been proven on Earth by experiment.  It didn't require the evokation of hyperdimensions to prove it...
And yet the concept that these orbital maths put forth was far different from what the science of the day had decided.  Much of it was scoffed against until people finally started seeing that these were indeed facts.  So as i view it, when i see theories and such being put down because they seem wild and new, i just remember thats how these maths were views until they were proven to be right (you relize they were only published in a paper shortly after kepler died, so that no one could argue with him about them.  They were made by careful measurements done by brahe, a feat in itself that took years to do, and then it even more years for kepler to make his laws and publish them.  When they were made they were revolutionary thought, outside of the     realm of thought that had driven most of europe during this time period.)

That analogy is not valid. You cannot keep using it. The planets his theories apply to actually exist, they were observable in his time. You also recently made a comparison between modern cosmologies and philospohy (not science) and the flat earth concept. Again, invalid as testing the earth for flatness is a simple experiment that even prehistoric migrations could disprove.

Show me a superstring or some dark matter that we can perform experiments on. Purely hypothetical contructs will remain such. These comparisons you draw are not valid.

Real scientific theory rolls on, dealing with subjects that can be involved in real world experiments. (e.g CERN's international collider project).

I do not rule out anything as impossible, however new scientific theories must apply to reality, not fictional constructs.

Take quatum theory as an example. As improbable (pun intended) as it seems; it actually applies to real matter, stuff that can be validated by experiment. (the d orbital is a beautiful thing, the stuff of life...)

A theory that relates to hypothetical material cannot ever be validated, its a pretty safe way to guarantee continued funding for otherwise lackluster feilds of study. (Math, Philosophy, Psychology, Cosmology).

In my view there are two pure sciences. Physics and chemistry, with chemistry just being a very large subset of physics. These sciences deal with that which is real. These sciences provide results that we can actually use.

Offline Dracho

  • Global Moderator
  • Rear Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 18289
  • Gender: Male
It sounds like, deep down in your heart, you're not as much a scientist as an engineer.   :D
The worst enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan.  - Karl von Clausewitz

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Actually engineers make things work. they don't give "reasons" why something cannot be done.

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
That analogy is not valid. You cannot keep using it. The planets his theories apply to actually exist, they were observable in his time. You also recently made a comparison between modern cosmologies and philospohy (not science) and the flat earth concept. Again, invalid as testing the earth for flatness is a simple experiment that even prehistoric migrations could disprove.

Show me a superstring or some dark matter that we can perform experiments on. Purely hypothetical contructs will remain such. These comparisons you draw are not valid.

Not only that, but even mathematically and hypothetically the construct that Superstring's coat is hanging on is a very shaky nail...

Quote
Real scientific theory rolls on, dealing with subjects that can be involved in real world experiments. (e.g CERN's international collider project).   

Couldn't agree more...

Quote
A theory that relates to hypothetical material cannot ever be validated, its a pretty safe way to guarantee continued funding for otherwise lackluster feilds of study. (Math, Philosophy, Psychology, Cosmology).

Ten years ago, as a somewhat less jaded man than I am now, I used to spend days on end pouring over books and articles on Cosmology and Philosophy and GUT's, but now I've realised that it's the here and now that matters, not absurdly grandiose dreams about what man might be able to do in ten thousand years time given the existance of quasi religious constructs like unseen Hyperspatial Dimensions...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
The orbital maths you used had been proven on Earth by experiment.  It didn't require the evokation of hyperdimensions to prove it...
And yet the concept that these orbital maths put forth was far different from what the science of the day had decided.  Much of it was scoffed against until people finally started seeing that these were indeed facts. 

Show me the six curled up dimensions, or a similar demonstration of them to Galileo's of the gravity field, and I will change my stance on String theory at once...  Until then, I regard it the same way as the old "Here Be Dragons" on the edge of maps...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Dracho

  • Global Moderator
  • Rear Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 18289
  • Gender: Male
Actually engineers make things work. they don't give "reasons" why something cannot be done.

They work within existing laws, they do not challenge those laws.

Actually, (And I know he'll hate this, but I am going to do it anyway), there are some passages in the Bible that support Prom's point.

The 148th Psalm is, by some accounts, the source of the Scientific Method.  Back when most people in science were also clergy, a certain teacher of one Francis Bacon taught hat based on the 138th Psalm that God put unchanging laws into effect in the universe and if one could learn those laws one would understand more about the world around them.

for instance: 

 3Praise ye him, sun and moon: praise him, all ye stars of light.

 4Praise him, ye heavens of heavens, and ye waters that be above the heavens.

 5Let them praise the name of the LORD: for he commanded, and they were created.

 6He hath also stablished them for ever and ever: he hath made a decree which shall not pass.


The Bible also speaks of a chasm that cannot be crossed.  When one thinks of the physical world, does this refer to time, and space, and relativity?

In Context read Luke 7, where it is referring to the distance between a dead man talking to God and his living relatives back on Earth.

26And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.
The worst enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan.  - Karl von Clausewitz

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2785
  • Gender: Male
The orbital maths you used had been proven on Earth by experiment.  It didn't require the evokation of hyperdimensions to prove it...
And yet the concept that these orbital maths put forth was far different from what the science of the day had decided.  Much of it was scoffed against until people finally started seeing that these were indeed facts.  So as i view it, when i see theories and such being put down because they seem wild and new, i just remember thats how these maths were views until they were proven to be right (you relize they were only published in a paper shortly after kepler died, so that no one could argue with him about them.  They were made by careful measurements done by brahe, a feat in itself that took years to do, and then it even more years for kepler to make his laws and publish them.  When they were made they were revolutionary thought, outside of the     realm of thought that had driven most of europe during this time period.)

That analogy is not valid. You cannot keep using it. The planets his theories apply to actually exist, they were observable in his time. You also recently made a comparison between modern cosmologies and philospohy (not science) and the flat earth concept. Again, invalid as testing the earth for flatness is a simple experiment that even prehistoric migrations could disprove.

Show me a superstring or some dark matter that we can perform experiments on. Purely hypothetical contructs will remain such. These comparisons you draw are not valid.

Real scientific theory rolls on, dealing with subjects that can be involved in real world experiments. (e.g CERN's international collider project).

I do not rule out anything as impossible, however new scientific theories must apply to reality, not fictional constructs.

Take quatum theory as an example. As improbable (pun intended) as it seems; it actually applies to real matter, stuff that can be validated by experiment. (the d orbital is a beautiful thing, the stuff of life...)

A theory that relates to hypothetical material cannot ever be validated, its a pretty safe way to guarantee continued funding for otherwise lackluster feilds of study. (Math, Philosophy, Psychology, Cosmology).

In my view there are two pure sciences. Physics and chemistry, with chemistry just being a very large subset of physics. These sciences deal with that which is real. These sciences provide results that we can actually use.

Actually my analogy applies perfectly if you remember the realm of thought at that period of time. I'm not saying that what they knew couldn't be proved wrong easily, what i'm saying is that for the majority of people the idea of earth not being the center, and earth being spherical were as much outside their realm of thought as many of the newer theories today.  I say to you take a medeval man and show him our technology he will call it magic, becuase he does not know how to conceptualize it, much in the same way we are trying to conceptualize something that is still just outside of our grasps, but the attempt to conceptualize is what is important as it will lead to the understanding neccessary to bring it into our realm of thought.
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline Bonk

  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13298
  • You don't have to live like a refugee.
Actually my analogy applies perfectly if you remember the realm of thought at that period of time.

No dice. Kepler had theories about planetary motion. Planets were known to exist when he postulated these theories/laws, allowing for observations to confirm these theories. When the earth was thought to be flat, the earth was right there to test that theory by actual observation. That does not compare at all to superstrings or dark matter (neither of which actually exist). Had Kepler proposed theories on something that was not known to exist in his time then there might be a comparison. His work on integral calculus also had real applications that could confirm its usefulness.

Proposing theories on fictional subjects is just not science no matter how you cut it.

There are theories in modern science that deal with real subjects however that do represent advancement. Don't get me wrong, I'm all in favour of new science, I just insist that it deal with the realm of that which is real as all successful science in the past has.

Things like Eienstien's relativity, Schrodinger's wavefunction, Newton's intuitive and empirical description of gravity.

About the only purely theoretical science I see any real use for is proofs for differential equations that we still rely on computers to solve, though there are many theorems there are no actual proofs, they are all intuitive relationships that happen to bear up under empirical scrutiny. Actual derivations of differential theorems could prove a revolution in mathematics with applications in all areas of science.


Offline Dracho

  • Global Moderator
  • Rear Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 18289
  • Gender: Male
You know Bonk, your point makes me realize that Quantum Computing will probably be the first field to prove extra-dimensional realities, if they exist.  If someone builds a quantum computer that can "go outside this universe" to do millions of years of computations outside of space and time and bring them back in what seems like no time, that'll be proof positive that:

#1 - Other dimensions exist

#2 - We can control entry and exit into those dimensions

#3 - Energy, at least, if not matter, can survive the transition.


Quantum computing is the most likely candidate to do it in our lifetimes.


I personally think interstellar space travel will be unmanned... unless we assemble the man on each end of the trip.. or we go the cryogenic route.  I suspect .9c and a deep slumper (or generational ships) are in our future.
The worst enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan.  - Karl von Clausewitz

Offline Bonk

  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13298
  • You don't have to live like a refugee.
1) Quantum computers have been produced. (IBM calcuated the factors of a number using nuclear spin states in a perfluoroethane molecule I think it was...)

2) Multidimensional mathematics is common practice. The use of factor analysis (principal component analysis) is common in the interpretation of complex multidimensional data to reduce its dimensionality to a level comprehensible by the human mind. I once revealed correlations in metals concentrations in mussels that would otherwise have been invisible to the human mind in the dataset. Unfortunately factor analysis is often misused on datasets with insufficient samples and dimensionality to reveal genuine relationships however. I originally achieved this running the common statisical sofware package SYSTAT on an old Pentium 133MHz machine, no quantum computer necessary. In fact it can be done with pencil and paper, but that is quantum if you get right down to the graphite and cellulose of it... ;)

Edit: Quantum computers, by definition must operate in our universe. Outside our universe (if there is such a thing, as the universe, is all, so anything outside it, once discovered, becomes part of it... ;) ...see the anthropic cosmological principle...) quantum theory will not likely hold.

Hmmm my head hurts... too much thinking. Time for a dose of Red Green I think...  ;D
« Last Edit: January 12, 2006, 02:25:17 pm by Bonk »

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2785
  • Gender: Male
Actually my analogy applies perfectly if you remember the realm of thought at that period of time.

No dice. Kepler had theories about planetary motion. Planets were known to exist when he postulated these theories/laws, allowing for observations to confirm these theories. When the earth was thought to be flat, the earth was right there to test that theory by actual observation. That does not compare at all to superstrings or dark matter (neither of which actually exist). Had Kepler proposed theories on something that was not known to exist in his time then there might be a comparison. His work on integral calculus also had real applications that could confirm its usefulness.

Proposing theories on fictional subjects is just not science no matter how you cut it.

There are theories in modern science that deal with real subjects however that do represent advancement. Don't get me wrong, I'm all in favour of new science, I just insist that it deal with the realm of that which is real as all successful science in the past has.

Things like Eienstien's relativity, Schrodinger's wavefunction, Newton's intuitive and empirical description of gravity.

About the only purely theoretical science I see any real use for is proofs for differential equations that we still rely on computers to solve, though there are many theorems there are no actual proofs, they are all intuitive relationships that happen to bear up under empirical scrutiny. Actual derivations of differential theorems could prove a revolution in mathematics with applications in all areas of science.



I don't know really how to put it so you know how i'm applying what i'm saying, so i'm pretty much done here cept for one thing...

kepler didn' t make theories... he put forth natural laws ;)
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
kepler didn' t make theories... he put forth natural laws ;)

And that is the crux of the matter...  Good scientists put forth natural laws...  Mad scientists chase after quasi religious fictional constructs...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Dracho

  • Global Moderator
  • Rear Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 18289
  • Gender: Male
kepler didn' t make theories... he put forth natural laws ;)

Mad scientists chase after quasi religious fictional constructs...

But they have marvelous pyrotechnics.
The worst enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan.  - Karl von Clausewitz

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
kepler didn' t make theories... he put forth natural laws ;)

Mad scientists chase after quasi religious fictional constructs...

But they have marvelous pyrotechnics.

I think I'm gonna leave this debate for now, strap on my Tachyon Warp field propelled Rocket Pants, and go for a jaunt round the galaxy...  Or I could just run Celestia I suppose...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Bonk

  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13298
  • You don't have to live like a refugee.
I don't know really how to put it so you know how i'm applying what i'm saying, so i'm pretty much done here cept for one thing...

kepler didn' t make theories... he put forth natural laws ;)

Just to be a bugger:

What about Darwin's Theory of Evolution? It is still technically a theory but deals with real world phenomena... ;)

Anyway, we're getting down to semantics here. Usually a sure sign I've won the arguement.  :P  ;D

Red Green made an awsome james bond style jet pack from two old gas barbeques on yesterday's epidose prometheus...  ;D

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2785
  • Gender: Male
well as i said i don't know how to explain it to ya so you can see it how i am, which is right now more annoying than what its worth in terms of my exceedingly limited time ;)

and no it wasn't semantics, i was correcting you because kepler never proposed a theory in his paper, he proposed natural laws ;) 3 of them to be exact

edit: not annoyed w/ you just annoyed w/ my inability to explain what appears to be a simple concept to me.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2006, 10:48:45 am by Tus »
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline Bonk

  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13298
  • You don't have to live like a refugee.
Quote
edit: not annoyed w/ you just annoyed w/ my inability to explain what appears to be a simple concept to me.

I think I understand what you are trying to say. I'm just being picky about what I see as science and what I see as philosopy. (similarly, not to annoy, just to express myself).

Quote
and no it wasn't semantics, i was correcting you because kepler never proposed a theory in his paper, he proposed natural laws Wink 3 of them to be exact

Yes, I believe it was semantincs. Regardless, I was aware Kepler's Laws of planetary motion were Laws... but they weren't really until proven as such were they...? Which does not invalidate my reference to evolutionary theory as a real scientific theory. If it dealt with the evolution of smurfs instead of primates, then it would better compare to theories involving superstrings and dark matter. Science must deal with the realm of reality. Philosophy deals with the realm of the imaginary.

I understand that exploring new ideas is a worthwhile endeavor, I just feel that they should not be presented as science unless they deal with reality, as historically all science has. (even while still unproven....) A good example might be global warming, it is unaccepted by many and even thought to be silly, but it deals with real phenomena (temperatures, concentrations, electromagnetic radiation).

Quote
well as i said i don't know how to explain it to ya so you can see it how i am, which is right now more annoying than what its worth in terms of my exceedingly limited time

I agree, we're not really understanding each other very well, perhaps some kind soul will come along and translate for us!  ;D