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.

 

What needs to be done for faster than light travel?

page: 12
14
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Im thinking more not as parallel universes as much as dendritic one that can interconnect and disconnect at any point of time(time-as current measurement)deja vue. Either yesterday, today or tomorrow because we are traveling with a speed of light, constantly, which my freind just proved it.
Therefore, based on the information we can overcome that, either moving faster(into the future) or slower into the past(which requires energy), while we are still in today by maintaining our mass.
Not too crazy?
edit on 3-2-2016 by boomstick88 because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 09:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: Bedlam

Yeah but what about or RF Broadcasts. They gotta be seeing those and can deduce where they are originating from, hence show up at our door at any time if they have bad intentions.


That bubble's only about 100 LY radius. Maybe a bit less.



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 05:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam

Is that a good or a bad discovery, though, is what you have to ask. Considering nothing's like Star Trek. And given the possibly legitimate propensity of the military to judge threat by capability and not intent, if you realized you weren't alone on an exploratory run, a chunky part of the rest of your life is likely to be spent on the beach at Planet Beta, where you will be staying so you don't lead your new acquaintances home. If, that is, they don't kill you on the spot themselves.


I still reckon that screenplay ought to focus on developing your strategically realistic perspective on secret space exploration.



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 01:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Nochzwei

-Does a machine with the ability to cancel out gravity by its very nature cease to be a part of the universe? And if so, why?

-Surely if it's not a part of this universe anymore it won't just go to another dimension? All dimensions are part of the universe are they not?
*Note: I understand "the universe" to mean "everything that exists". Do you have a different definition for it? And if so, what is it and which dimensions (if applicable) are part of the universe and which are not? It might also be worthwhile to elaborate what a 'dimension' means to you since I suspect we might have different defintions of that as well.

-Speed without time does not exist, the very nature of speed is the time it takes to travel a certain distance, so without time speed cannot exist.

Please understand that the first two questions are not criticisms. I simply want to understand what you mean by your statements.
The last point is a criticism however, I think you made a mistake of definition or reasoning there. That being said, I am willing to change my mind if it turns out I am wrong about that.
edit on 4-2-2016 by Nimyn because: grammar

edit on 4-2-2016 by Nimyn because: grammar



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 05:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jukiodone

I still reckon that screenplay ought to focus on developing your strategically realistic perspective on secret space exploration.




It's going to be hard enough explaining why it's not just push a button and then kick back while you hear the theme music and stars cruise past the viewscreen, and everyone is calm and it's relatively quiet. Hell, in Star Trek, you can't even tell if you're IN warp drive if you're not looking out the window.



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 06:55 PM
link   
the only way you achieve anti gravity is by negating time.
by universe I specifically mean our universe alone, that we exist in as flesh and blood
speed you are technically right. without time all travel is rather instantaneous
a reply to: Nimyn



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 07:08 PM
link   
"What needs to be done for faster than light travel?"

Dissolve your consciousness into the light. Research "solve et coagula". direct message me if you want more info.



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 08:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: Bedlam

Yeah but what about or RF Broadcasts. They gotta be seeing those and can deduce where they are originating from, hence show up at our door at any time if they have bad intentions.


That bubble's only about 100 LY radius. Maybe a bit less.


i think that presumes that anyone out there has the same electronic state of the art we do and thus cannot retrieve a signal below the background noise level or below "X" threshold signal strength. the problem with this is as our tech matured we have driven that threshold lower and lower. for instance pioneer and voyagers were eventually sending signals that would have been too weak for reception when they were created. but technology allowed us to keep on receiving them anyway; and we are imagined to be a tech backwater compared to the aliens (if they exist.)

So our assumptions about how far our radio and TV signals can travel before being undetectable may well be wrong. maybe. maybe not. if it were us on the other end of the signal it'd be true. for a few years.
edit on 4-2-2016 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 11:43 PM
link   
Currently, the most probable method for "anti-gravity" (even though it's gravity flipped 180 degrees) to my knowledge after doing some more research is probably gravitomagnetism. Einstein said inertial forces are indistinguishable from gravitational forces. So a rotating body can and will pull spacetime with it, this is commonly referred to as frame-dragging. This has been proven with Gravity probe B. Now, let's dig into some ufo lore. Whether you believe Edgar Fouche is a con or not, it doesn't matter. His concept of the Magnetic field disruptor; the rotating mercury plasma is very interesting. He claimed it can reduce the weight of the craft by 89%, that's amazing! The rotating plasma can easily be tied to gravitomagnetism which at the time was still a theory. To be more specific about his claims, mercury is a metal. It has 80 protons in the nucleus, making it a heavy material in comparison to common household objects. We know that the more mass an object has, the more it will affect spacetime. So maybe under his description it is possible.

Is it weird that a magnetic field in motion creates an electromagnetic field? Is it more weird that a gravitational field creates it's own similair affect?
edit on 4-2-2016 by IAmTheRumble because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 01:00 AM
link   
As afar as I am aware gravity probe b did not conclusively prove anything
a reply to: IAmTheRumble



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 01:08 AM
link   
All this talk about the speed of light or faster then speed of light travel the glorification it recieves and all the wonder at it...

Well there is no real mystery to me what is faster then the speed of light...

The answer is the speed of thought which is instantaneous...

Don't believe me?

Try this little experiment... turn off all your lights then choose a light to turn on... now try to turn it on without thinking about doing it first...

Lol
edit on 5-2-2016 by 5StarOracle because: word



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 04:03 AM
link   
On a more serious note though I feel the only ways to really accomplish light speed or beyond is to curve space by generating so much energy and mass that you become a black hole...

Or to repel space and thus create an anti gravity bubble and escape the essence of even time itself...



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 12:59 PM
link   
a reply to: 5StarOracle

According to modern theory, changing space in one way or another is our only option.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 01:01 PM
link   
a reply to: 5StarOracle

You cannot travel with thought. Sure you can see things you've previously experienced. But you can't travel with it.



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 05:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
screen inertia out. (mach drive variants.)

convert to massless particles.

create disjunction drive.

create a drive using balanced negative mass and positive mass. so that the reversed reaction of negative mass means both accelerate in the same direction forever. if you can't find natural sources of negative mass/energy -fake it with artificial substitutes.

alter several constants such as space permitivity a la Dr White.

consider time reversed particles.

create extensions of physics that involve holographic cosmological models and coordinate manipulation.
damn near spot on except the negative mass doesn't need to balance with the positive so much as it just needs to move along with, even it's slower just not creating reaction. Once you reach that point there is no acceleration you are immediately loosed from the bond of light and move into darkness, as in going where light has never been.



posted on Mar, 4 2016 @ 05:16 AM
link   
I don't think there are parallel universes, by my own definition, more like srprate planes that interconnect. Maybe since time-space are locked into a continuum in order to split the two you would have to interconnect that plane to two others. One where time is continuous with something else and visa versa. Now imagine if we each had possession of our own set of realatives but shared a common plane where we were still able to interact. I think that when we have what's needed for time travel we won't care about timer travel.



posted on Mar, 4 2016 @ 10:47 AM
link   



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 10:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nimyn
a reply to: Nochzwei

-Does a machine with the ability to cancel out gravity by its very nature cease to be a part of the universe? And if so, why?

-Surely if it's not a part of this universe anymore it won't just go to another dimension? All dimensions are part of the universe are they not?
*Note: I understand "the universe" to mean "everything that exists". Do you have a different definition for it? And if so, what is it and which dimensions (if applicable) are part of the universe and which are not? It might also be worthwhile to elaborate what a 'dimension' means to you since I suspect we might have different defintions of that as well.

-Speed without time does not exist, the very nature of speed is the time it takes to travel a certain distance, so without time speed cannot exist.

Please understand that the first two questions are not criticisms. I simply want to understand what you mean by your statements.
The last point is a criticism however, I think you made a mistake of definition or reasoning there. That being said, I am willing to change my mind if it turns out I am wrong about that.
I really like what you said in your last point. Agree with your second. And my theory on the first is that if anyone were to be placed outside the universe they Would then by default become God there as there became a separate dimension of the universe.



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 10:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Godthief

originally posted by: Nimyn
a reply to: Nochzwei

-Does a machine with the ability to cancel out gravity by its very nature cease to be a part of the universe? And if so, why?

-Surely if it's not a part of this universe anymore it won't just go to another dimension? All dimensions are part of the universe are they not?
*Note: I understand "the universe" to mean "everything that exists". Do you have a different definition for it? And if so, what is it and which dimensions (if applicable) are part of the universe and which are not? It might also be worthwhile to elaborate what a 'dimension' means to you since I suspect we might have different defintions of that as well.

-Speed without time does not exist, the very nature of speed is the time it takes to travel a certain distance, so without time speed cannot exist.

Please understand that the first two questions are not criticisms. I simply want to understand what you mean by your statements.
The last point is a criticism however, I think you made a mistake of definition or reasoning there. That being said, I am willing to change my mind if it turns out I am wrong about that.
I really like what you said in your last point. Agree with your second. And my theory on the first is that if anyone were to be placed outside the universe they Would then by default become God there as there became a separate dimension of the universe.
criticize all you want but being wrong is mine and I'm very proud of it.



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 10:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
nextbigfuture.com...
Thanks for showing me that link, it feels good to be taken seriously every once in a while but don't tell anyone, it robs me of my entitlement. I don't want credit it esteem or power our wealth or fame. I really just want to do the #. If you can tolerate me you could probably make a name for yourself.




top topics



 
14
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join