on wormholes, quantum back pressure and artificial monopoles

when researching stuff related to woodward's mach drive and worm holes i came across references to quantum back pressure as evoked in quantum theories about wormholes.

quantum back pressure has severe consequences for wormhole creation and maintenance. it is often evoked as an argument against tranversible worm holes. but it does not actually forbid that either. but at any rate quantum back pressure is also the key to controlling them.

As a consequence of quantum back pressure you can charge a wormholes apertures with electric, magnetic, mass, inertial and other properties. and that means you can move the apertures where you want to accelerate them and do other desireable things as well.

well i was ruminating on other topics when i had some random thoughts interrupt my train of thought. i was thinking about other tube like physical topological phenomenon. the strong force exchange between nuclear particles as an example. then wormholes as tubes with charges on each end. then recent emergent monopole like tubes. these were not real monopoles but acted like them in that the magnetic charge on either end can be treated as an isolated magnetic charge. they are defacto monopoles.

so then back to wormholes that you can charge with various types of energy... mix the above ideas and you get a magnetic monopole.

that's my epiphany. a source of easy monopoles. And monopoles have all sorts of fringey science fictiony uses: unlimited energy production. incredibly dense strong thermally resistant pseudo-matter with the chemical bonding energy normally reserved for nuclear binding energy. artificial black holes. and probably other stuff i have forgotten.

reply to post by stormbringer1701


I thought quantum back pressure was all about the force of light reacting against something like a wall or mirror ? I also thought it only worked on an itsy bitsy quantum scale?

reply to post by 727Sky
when it comes to wormholes at least quantum back pressure gains new powers. it applies to not only things like light, electrical charge and even more weirdly magnetic charge but to properties such as inertia and mass. and wormholes are normally a quantum scale issue. it is theorized that you could make one macroscopic but only with an extreme effort and the quantum back pressure is evokes as a way to try to prevent or at least constrain that from happening even though it would be a quantum gravity process and we do not have a complete theory of quantum gravity.

mainstream science loathes things like wormholes because they allow what they view as violations of common sense thier understanding of the way the universe is and have profound implications for the standard model and physics and cosmology.

as an example if you created a wormhole and sent the other end of it towards a star 1200 light years away with a speed near light speed the timeline of the stationary mouth on earth and the time line of the traveling mouth would diverge. long before 1200 years had elapsed in fact in a matter of weeks you would be able to look into the worm hole and see the destination as if the 1200 year trip had already elapsed. long before the wormhole arrives at the destination. in fact you could travel through the worm hole even though it should be many many many light years and that many years away from completion. if you think of it the worm hole could meet with an accident or the wormhole machine could break down before the 1200 years is up.

in fact it is a time machine that allows travel from the inauguration point to future where the wormhole arrives at the target and back again. scientists hate that. so they come up with stuff like Causality ordering postulates or Chronology protection postulates and so forth even though that general relativity allows time travel and FTL as a family of relativity solutions and physicist allow that there is no mathematically supported reason that a process cannot be reversed such that the arrow of time reverses. they speak about nature not liking you to do that and other absurd things that they chastise the religious for when the religious do it.

on philosophical grounds and to satisfy their sense of order they propose that Nature (with a capital N) so abhors a wormhole like that despite it being allowed by the laws of physics Nature with a capital N conspires to thwart it to happen via quantum gravity even though scientists have not yet formulated quantum gravity. they proclaim that when quantum gravity is understood what ever it is it must stop this sort of offense from happening

727Sky
reply to post by stormbringer1701

 

I thought quantum back pressure was all about the force of light reacting against something like a wall or mirror ? I also thought it only worked on an itsy bitsy quantum scale?

here are a couple of videos on using wormholes for travel:

www.youtube.com...

quantum back reaction part begins at 16 minutes 30 seconds in to the kramer video.

the presenter is John Cramer Professor Emeritus of the physics department at washington university and Analog magazine contributor.

and a presentation on Woodward's work with Machs principle and wormholes. the presenter is Gary Hudson. the presentation was given at NIAC 2014 which is the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts Symposium

www.youtube.com...

any way if the ends of wormholes can be counted as monopoles then with a couple of other types of monopole you could make monopole atoms and monopole atom chemistry. and monopole atoms and chemistry are magic stuff.

imagine a monopole analogs of the atoms in steel (carbon iron etc) it would be steel but several thousands of times more massive per unit and because the particles in the nucleus and the electronic bonds between atoms would be much shorter it would be hyper strong. it would take a hard gamma ray to even have a chance to break the first level of ionization energy. it would not melt even if dipped into the sun. you can forget about denting it, puncturing it, breaking it or bending it. radiation would not penetrate it very easily either. if you could break the chemical bonds it would nearly as much energy as regular atomic fission. if you could fission a monopole atom it would make antimatter look like a ladyfinger firecracker.

if you put too much of it together within it's calculated swarzchild radius it would collapse into a black hole. you would not want to get more than 1.3 CMs thickness of this stuff. on the other hand if you did you could have a 1.3 CM diameter black hole you could then dump anything on and get fantastic energy out of it. energy to power a spaceship or a power plant.

stormbringer1701
when researching stuff related to woodward's mach drive and worm holes i came across references to quantum back pressure as evoked in quantum theories about wormholes.

quantum back pressure has severe consequences for wormhole creation and maintenance. it is often evoked as an argument against tranversible worm holes. but it does not actually forbid that either. but at any rate quantum back pressure is also the key to controlling them.

As a consequence of quantum back pressure you can charge a wormholes apertures with electric, magnetic, mass, inertial and other properties. and that means you can move the apertures where you want to accelerate them and do other desireable things as well.

Hey stormbringer, would you be interested in joining me in a search through astronomical data for possible wormhole signatures?

I have been thinking that it should be possible to comb through existing lightcurve databases of significant resolution to look for the "double brightening" signature that was predicted by F. Abe as well as Cramer and Forward in this paper:

"Gravitational Microlensing by the Ellis Wormhole" - F. Abe - (2010) -Astrophysical Journal - 725 pp.787-793 ArXiv

A method to calculate light curves of the gravitational microlensing of the Ellis wormhole is derived in the weak-field limit. In this limit, lensing by the wormhole produces one image outside the Einstein ring and one other image inside. The weak-field hypothesis is a good approximation in Galactic lensing if the throat radius is less than 1011km. The light curves calculated have gutters of approximately 4% immediately outside the Einstein ring crossing times. The magnification of the Ellis wormhole lensing is generally less than that of Schwarzschild lensing. The optical depths and event rates are calculated for the Galactic bulge and Large Magellanic Cloud fields according to bound and unbound hypotheses. If the wormholes have throat radii between 100 and 107km, are bound to the galaxy, and have a number density that is approximately that of ordinary stars, detection can be achieved by reanalyzing past data. If the wormholes are unbound, detection using past data is impossible.

So I was thinking the publically available gravitational microlensing surveys and perhaps even Kepler light curves might be excellent in this regard.

If you haven't already see these papers....might want to have a look-see.

Alien megaprojects: The hunt has begun" - Stephen Battersby - (April 9, 2013) - New Scientist 2911

"On a macroscopic traversable spacewarp in practice" - Mohammad Mansouryar - (Jan 2, 2006) - ArXiv, arXiv:gr-qc/0511086v2

"Natural Wormholes as Gravitational Lenses" - John G. Cramer, Robert L. Forward, Michael S. Morris, Matt Visser, Gregory Benford, Geoffrey A. Landis - (Sep 1994) - Physical Review D (March 15, 1995): pp. 3124–27 - ArXiv

“Detecting Interstellar Migrations,” - Matloff and Pazmino - (1997) Astronomical and Biochemical Origins and the Search for Life in the Universe, ed. C. B. Cosmovici, S. Bowyer and D. Werthimer, Editrici Compositori, Bologna, Italy pp. 757-759.

"Observed Effects of Gravitational Microlensing of Stars by a Spatial–Temporal Tunnel" -
Bogdanov, M. B., Cherepashchuk, A. M. - (Dec 2002) - Astronomy Reports, Vol. 46 Issue 12, p1002, 8

i seem to recall vaguely some article where there was a hunt for micro-lensing events that were out of place. meaning that they occurred where there was no obvious massive gravitational source nearby or in line with it. i wish i could find it. but it was an overt attempt at a systematic survey of available astronomical data with the obvious aim of finding ET propulsion signatures. oddly it was in an academic rather than fringe online periodical. perhaps... no actually the article i remember is newer than 2006. sometime within the last three years.

of course there are other types of advanced propulsion signatures that could conceivably be looked for as well. mostly out of place gamma bursts or x ray bursts patterns of a semi-regular patterns of timing and position and smaller than stellar or cosmic sources.

depending on the details and demands i might help.

Here is Dr Woodward's book on absurdly benign wormholes and space transportation:

www.amazon.com...=ntt_athr_dp_pel_pop_1

here is something else to look at. quantum scale worm holes are implicated in gravity transmission and entanglement. it seems to me that the entanglement wormholes would perhaps lend themselves to in lab poking and prodding. Well at least there may be a way to set up an experiment such that the invisible wormhole can be directly or indirectly detected. and if you could locate the mouths you could apply a charge to them and fix them in place with magnetic or electrical fields. or at least if you used back pressure to impart a charge on them maybe you could then detect the charge.

This is way over my head, and would probably be better placed in Science & Technology forum.

wildespace
This is way over my head, and would probably be better placed in Science & Technology forum.

well this about several things actually, wormholes and their possible use as a FTL travel conduit is one of them. but it is also about monopoles as a building unit for peculiar types of matter but then that matter can be used for reactor parts spaceship armor and hull plating. furthermore the peculiar matter lends itself (in several ways depending upon the species of monopoles involved) to being a powerful power plant which is germane to advanced space ship propulsion. so it could be applicable both here and in the forum you suggest.

here is another monopole goodie ( I think.)

if i recall correctly matter antimatter annihilation actually takes place at the quark level. it's not just opposite baryonic matter particles bumping that triggers annihilation but when the appropriate quark pairs within the compound particles touch each other. if that is correct then at least some species of monopole matter are immune to the annihilation reaction because they have no quarks.

that would mean you could hold antimatter in a monopole-matter container so long as the container has been evacuated of atmospheric gases.