It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Interstellar travel impossible, therefore...

page: 7
12
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:38 PM
link   

tanka418


Source please...




he says most of that in here:

www.youtube.com...

i dunno if that was the source in question but most of that. maybe all of it...is in there. though i think he starts out talking about the QVPT rather than the White-Juday warp detection spectrometer experiment.
edit on 12-3-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: typo patrol.




posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:41 PM
link   

stormbringer1701
or of course gravity drives or warps or wormholes. a gravity drive can render inertia gain null and void due to the equivalence principle.


Gravity Drive isn't really all that new. It exists and has operated in the Lab...

Warping of space occurs naturally when ANY mass is moving fast enough. There is also "Frame Dragging" and Doppler effect to consider. All that is needed is to "offset" time dilation, and a sort of "crude"/'mechanical" warp exists...good for near by stars (up say 50ly)...





edit on 12-3-2014 by tanka418 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:48 PM
link   

tanka418

stormbringer1701
or of course gravity drives or warps or wormholes. a gravity drive can render inertia gain null and void due to the equivalence principle.


Gravity Drive isn't really all that new. It exists and has operated in the Lab...

Warping of space occurs naturally when ANY mass is moving fast enough. There is also "Frame Dragging" and Doppler effect to consider. All that is needed is to "offset" time dilation, and a sort of "crude"/'mechanical" warp exists...good for near by stars (up say 50ly)...





edit on 12-3-2014 by tanka418 because: (no reason given)


yup to pretty much all of that. but you really don't want to be rid of time dilation. time dilation is a good thing all in all if you are stuck with merely relativistic speed.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:52 PM
link   

stormbringer1701

yup to pretty much all of that. but you really don't want to be rid of time dilation. time dilation is a good thing all in all if you are stuck with merely relativistic speed.


Won't disagree, however I would be all about controlling it. Since this drive allows me to take control of my gravity, then I should be able to affect "frame dragging" and therefore some of the time dilation effects.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by eezveeneetee
 


You statement is based on the presumption that our knowledge and understanding of physics is superior to any other civilization in the universe. What factual evidence can you present to support your statement?



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:58 PM
link   

stormbringer1701

tanka418


Source please...




he says most of that in here:

www.youtube.com...

i dunno if that was the source in question but most of that. maybe all of it...is in there. though i think he starts out talking about the QVPT rather than the White-Juday warp detection spectrometer experiment.
edit on 12-3-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: typo patrol.
Yes, that was the source I was using. I'd seen the video before, and reviewed the relevant parts again today-- from about 20 until 30 minutes into the video.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 08:10 PM
link   
Haven't you seen that one movie where this astronaut base screens its occupants on a genetic basis? The main character is a dude who could meet all of the requirements of the space program but fell slightly short thus was unable to reach his dream. So in this movie he uses a friend's DNA to become part of the space program, pretending to be him for the whole ten yards. He meets this beautiful girl and they decide to have a baby together. You can imagine the trouble that got him into because, well, she chose him based on his DNA not because he's a real cool guy. So, I can't remember much else of that movie but it was a really good movie. Do you know what it was called?



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 08:29 PM
link   

tanka418

stormbringer1701

yup to pretty much all of that. but you really don't want to be rid of time dilation. time dilation is a good thing all in all if you are stuck with merely relativistic speed.


Won't disagree, however I would be all about controlling it. Since this drive allows me to take control of my gravity, then I should be able to affect "frame dragging" and therefore some of the time dilation effects.

When you control gravity you control inertia. therefore unless there is some other show stopper you should be able to keep right on accelerating through the light barrier. i do not think dilation would apply either.



posted on Mar, 13 2014 @ 12:05 AM
link   

stormbringer1701

Krahzeef_Ukhar
reply to post by stormbringer1701
 


The odds of flying into something increase the further you go. This is only applicable for propulsion based travel but you would be going in a straight line and I wouldn't trust going in a straight line for 4 billion light years.


Shall i tell you what the odds are? the odds are 1 dust mote sized collision per day for each square meter of the front face of the vessel. these sorts of impact carry the energy of a high powered rifle bullet. fairly easy to shield against. and easily deflected out of the way by a electrical or magnetic field.

larger impacts are exponentially more rare still and there are techniques to avoid or destroy them as well.

furthermore the nearest stars would take years not billions of years. alpha centauri is 4.4 light years away. please explain how at .90 light speed it would take billions of years to get there? and even if they did thanks to time dilation the crew would experience just months for such a trip.



Bending space around you avoids this issue but still leaves you with a lot of effort for possibly little or no gain. Keep trying and eventually you'll find someone out there but how many trips do you do before you are disillusioned by the emptiness of space?

100? 1000? A Million?


contact with other sentient life is just one reason to go into interstellar space. colonization, resource exploitation and economics are others. however; chances are there are civilizations out there.


Even assuming that instant travel to anywhere in the universe is quick and easy. It could still be a billion years before you find something worthwhile.


wrong. virtually every red dwarf has a planet. most other stars do as well. even if these are lifeless they hold untold motivations to go to any of them. even boring ones like we think barnard's star or alpha proxima or wolf 359 are.


It's fine for the travellers in regard to time dilation however the people waiting on earth wait longer the quicker you go.
At 0.9C it's about double so going 4.4 light years away not including acceleration and deceleration time you would return 16yrs later.
Go 0.99C and it's over 100 yrs later. Plus you have the actual time spent while you are at your destination.

I'll give you the dust thing. I still think it would be greater than a bullet however the odds are small to actually hit it. Voyager is still going strong I guess and it's probably in a high traffic zone albeit at much lower speeds.



posted on Mar, 13 2014 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by eezveeneetee
 


They also claimed that going up in a hot air balloon would kill you due to there being "poisonous air" higher up. They claimed that going faster than the speed of sound was also impossible. They said going to the moon is impossible.

Yet, not only was all this possible, it was done. To sum it up: Be careful what you claim is impossible as one day it'll be possible and you'll look the fool.



posted on Mar, 13 2014 @ 12:21 AM
link   

Krahzeef_Ukhar

It's fine for the travellers in regard to time dilation however the people waiting on earth wait longer the quicker you go.
At 0.9C it's about double so going 4.4 light years away not including acceleration and deceleration time you would return 16yrs later.
Go 0.99C and it's over 100 yrs later. Plus you have the actual time spent while you are at your destination.




you need to study. this is wrong. nothing happens to the people left behind with regard to the flow of time. they experience the time of flight only. how long are the photons from earth taking to get to a hypothetical telescope on a planet orbiting alpha proxima? or how long does a photon take to carry light from proxima to here? both of those are travelling at the speed of light.

furthermore time dilation was tested here on earth. two clocks one with in orbit and one on the earth's surface. the one on the earth ran at normal time but the one moving faster experienced less time.

you can apply time dilation only to the moving reference frame.


edit on 13-3-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)


voyager may be going slow. but it's still faster than orbital speeds. and at orbital speeds a sand grain sized particle impacted the space station and burrowed a neat little hole 14 CMs into a steel structural member. voyager is going several thousand miles per hour faster then the ISS's orbital speed. voyager has been going fairly close to 40 years. new horizons is travelling at twice orbital speed and has 4 au to go to get to pluto. neither of the voyagers nor the pioneer probe nor New Horizons got damaged in any way that prevented operations. and none of them have particularly robust shielding or any counter measures.
edit on 13-3-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: added voyager reply



posted on Mar, 13 2014 @ 12:22 AM
link   
If the universe had a dictionary,
I do not think you would find the word "impossible" in it.



posted on Mar, 13 2014 @ 12:45 AM
link   
reply to post by stormbringer1701
 


Interesting, if that's the case I definitely do need to study more. Perhaps I've misunderstood it however I would refer you to the following link...
www.einstein-online.info...

"The result is in precise agreement with the predictions of special relativity - the "inner clock" of such a travelling particle runs much slower than that of a particle of the same species that remains at rest"



posted on Mar, 13 2014 @ 12:47 AM
link   
If humans dont wipe each other out in the next 100 years it is very possible we would find away to bend space and time. It will take longer to implement it though.



posted on Mar, 13 2014 @ 12:59 AM
link   
reply to post by eezveeneetee
 


Since interstellar space travel "is" possible…does that make your original post irrelevant?


I mean seriously…you are saying you put the last nail in a coffin here, but your "only nail" is wrong.

Back to the drawing board bro. Good luck!


MM



posted on Mar, 13 2014 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Krahzeef_Ukhar
reply to post by stormbringer1701
 


Interesting, if that's the case I definitely do need to study more. Perhaps I've misunderstood it however I would refer you to the following link...
www.einstein-online.info...

"The result is in precise agreement with the predictions of special relativity - the "inner clock" of such a travelling particle runs much slower than that of a particle of the same species that remains at rest"


i can see where the confusion arises. so it's not a big deal. maybe this description form the wiki can help you plus also show how it can be confusing about the time on the home world.

en.wikipedia.org...


Time dilation
Main article: Time dilation
Assuming one can not travel faster than light, one might conclude that a human can never make a round-trip further from the Earth than 40 light years if the traveler is active between the ages of 20 and 60. So a traveler would never be able to reach more than the very few star systems which exist within the limit of 10–20 light years from the Earth.
But that would be a mistaken conclusion because it fails to take into account time dilation. Informally explained, clocks aboard ship run slower than Earth clocks, so if the ship engines are powerful enough the ship can reach mostly anywhere in the galaxy and go back to Earth within 40 years ship-time. The problem is that there is a difference between the time elapsed in the astronaut's ship and the time elapsed on Earth.
An example will make this clearer. Suppose a spaceship travels to a star 32 light years away. First it accelerates at a constant 1.03g (i.e., 10.1 m/s2) for 1.32 years (ship time). Then it stops the engines and coasts for the next 17.3 years (ship time) at a constant speed. Then it decelerates again for 1.32 ship-years so as to come at a stop at the destination. The astronaut takes a look around and comes back to Earth the same way.
After the full round-trip, the clocks on board the ship show that 40 years have passed, but according to Earth calendar the ship comes back 76 years after launch.
So, the overall average speed is 0.84 lightyears per earth year, or 1.6 lightyears per ship year. This is possible because at a speed of 0.87 c, time on board the ship seems to run slower. Every two Earth years, ship clocks advance 1 year.
From the viewpoint of the astronaut, onboard clocks seem to be running normally. The star ahead seems to be approaching at a speed of 0.87 lightyears per ship year. As all the universe looks contracted along the direction of travel to half the size it had when the ship was at rest, the distance between that star and the Sun seems to be 16 light years as measured by the astronaut, so it's no wonder that the trip at 0.87 ly per shipyear takes 20 ship years.
At higher speeds, the time onboard will run even slower, so the astronaut could travel to the center of the Milky Way (30 kly from Earth) and back in 40 years ship-time. But the speed according to Earth clocks will always be less than 1 lightyear per Earth year, so, when back home, the astronaut will find that 60 thousand years will have passed on Earth.


i think from that you can see that time passes normally on earth but the clock on the ship moves slower. which translates to a divergence in time experience *on the ship* from time experienced at home. but the home time does not change. it is the reference to how long a trip *SHOULD* take (which is the time experienced at home) that causes people to think time on earth changed. so for a trip like alpha centauri the time expected is 4.37 years. but the astronauts do not experience 4.7 years. they experience a shorter time.

had they went across the galaxy then the earth would experience 100s of thousands of years. but that is only because that is how long the trip should take without time dilation.


without exotic propulsion systems (that allow apparent global FTL) time dilation is our friend. at least for trips in the immediate neighborhood of Sol. it begins to really suck at about 16 light years or so though. unless it is a one way colonization trip. in that case it is our friend again.
edit on 13-3-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2014 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 



Yeah...uhmm..I meant that

Thank you



posted on Mar, 13 2014 @ 01:46 AM
link   

stormbringer1701

After the full round-trip, the clocks on board the ship show that 40 years have passed, but according to Earth calendar the ship comes back 76 years after launch.


Now I'm really confused. That agrees with what I said initially.



posted on Mar, 13 2014 @ 01:57 AM
link   
reply to post by stormbringer1701
 


I think I see the confusion. I said...

It's fine for the travellers in regard to time dilation however the people waiting on earth wait longer the quicker you go.
At 0.9C it's about double so going 4.4 light years away not including acceleration and deceleration time you would return 16yrs later.
Go 0.99C and it's over 100 yrs later. Plus you have the actual time spent while you are at your destination.

The 16yrs later was referring to the time on earth not the time on the ship. In the above scenario you leave earth in 2014 and return to earth in 2030 while your own watch says 2022.

I was getting worried I completely missed a fairly basic concept.



posted on Mar, 13 2014 @ 02:19 AM
link   

Krahzeef_Ukhar
reply to post by stormbringer1701
 


I think I see the confusion. I said...

It's fine for the travellers in regard to time dilation however the people waiting on earth wait longer the quicker you go.
At 0.9C it's about double so going 4.4 light years away not including acceleration and deceleration time you would return 16yrs later.
Go 0.99C and it's over 100 yrs later. Plus you have the actual time spent while you are at your destination.

The 16yrs later was referring to the time on earth not the time on the ship. In the above scenario you leave earth in 2014 and return to earth in 2030 while your own watch says 2022.

I was getting worried I completely missed a fairly basic concept.


yes you and another person made it seem like just by virtue of using a relativistic rocket the flow of time altered on earth. that isn't the case. time on earth takes as much time as the trip should take. i.e; 4.37 years elapse on earth when the ship is travelling at near light speed. but on the ship it takes less than 4.37 years. a lot less.

however consider if the ship was going to a star 1000 LY away. on earth they experience 1000 years. on the ship they experience much less time. in fact weeks. nothing really changes on earth except when related or compared to the experience on the ship.

"great scott keptin! the earth has traveled 1000 years into the future! we have only aged a few weeks! every one we knew is long dead! what will we do?"

but really life on earth went on as normal. it's the ship and crew that are odd.
edit on 13-3-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join