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.

 

Hey Scientists, why is space travel impossible?

page: 3
3
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 09:32 PM
link   
It is very similar to some individuals claiming we must find certain elements in order to find life elsewhere. Water is the most often mentioned element, which of course is total garbage. Who's to say that life elsewhere won't find H2O to be poisonous? Even here on Earth we have life thriving around deep ocean vents that find Oxygen poisonous. When the chemical process first began for the creation of multi-celled organisms here on Earth, O2 was actually a lethal gas, and did not resemble the so called life sustaining element we know it as today.

Now as far as space travel, we already have the type of technology you can only dream of. It has been said that the U.S. has actually been in posession of Nuclear Propulsion since the 60's. If true, imagine where we are currently at, and you get the picture.

Light Travel is by all means possible, and there are multiple ways of achieving such a feat.

One of the ways in which light travel can be achieved without needing enormous amounts of power is through harmonics. By vibrating an object at a certain frequency, you can in a sense change its properties to the point where its mass is a fraction of what it is during its normal state. In doing so, you can propel the object at amazing speeds, and allow it to maneuver with incredbile agility.

Of course another way of travelling at the speed of light, or even faster, is through a wormhole. A wormhole is quite simply a shortcut through space-time, and allows for an individual to appear nearly instantaneously at the other end. We already know the physics behind wormholes, and thus we have the knowledge to possibly create one, but I am unsure as to the state of our technological capabilites in currently allowing us to do so. Again, we might have already created wormholes, we might even currently be using them, but that is all pure speculation. What is NOT speculation is the actual proven physics behind the idea.

We also have the idea of inter-dimensional travel which coincides with harmonics. The theory is that you can achieve the ability to stride through different levels/dimensions by raising the vibrational frequency of an object. The idea being that different dimensions have different "Laws Of Physics" where in fact Mass is completely cancelled, and light waves exist and actually emanate from. Think about it, you can't normally see a light wave, so that would lead to the belief that it exists in another dimension. We can see the result of the light waves, the result of the other dimension interacting with our own, but on this plane you lack the ability to completely interact with the waves.

There are so many theories it's not even funny. If you want, I can even provide you with the title of a book you should look into if you're serious about such ideas.

Also don't forget, for the most part it seems that Space and Time are intertwined with eachother. Thus, if you play with one, you effect the other. Space Travel is simple if you think of it in One Dimension, simply increase the speed, and the quicker we arrive at our desination. However, in all reality, it would seem that once you exceed light speed, you will travel back in time. Gravity even effects the Space Time Dimensions, and is itself effected by electro-magnetism. There are so many variables that effect space travel, that it really takes the mind power, the funds, and the guts to truly test the feasibility of any one theory.



There is no question that we are currently being visited by someone or something. The extent of it however is the real question. There are so many goofballs and nutjobs out there who wish to play their own fantasies into the entire equation that the truth will remain clouded for quite some time.

I could probably type a huge paper on all the different theories and plausibilities of each, but I just wanted to lay out some ideas for you. If you want any clarification or further theories just let me know.




posted on Feb, 3 2008 @ 01:44 AM
link   
[Sarcasm] We humans, although infants in cosmic terms, sit on the summit of knowledge. Ergo, we have nothing left to learn since we know everything there is to know about everything. The fact that we're only 130 years removed from the invention of the light bulb has no bearing on anything, disregard it. Focus, rather, that 130 years from a simple invention to knowing how everything in the universe works only proves the unrivaled level of our genius.

I'm sure when the ancients discovered that the Earth not flat but actually a sphere, they probably thought they knew it all too. Hardly. All I would have to see would be the circular shadow the Earth cast on the moon to know this place wasn't flat. I don't know how someone didn't put 2+2 together back then. Oh, the mental implosions that must have occurred trying to figure out why half the moon, or the whole thing, would go missing. Thankfully they put more offerings on the sacred tree stump to make it come back, or we might not have a moon today. I thank them, fore I'm quite fond of the moon.

Ok, people were quite stupid back then, even though they probably thought that they were brilliant. But this is 2008! We worked out the kinks in humanity, grew intellectually by leaps and bounds to the immaculate species we are today. So now, now we know everything. Really!

If our research concludes that nothing can go faster than light, then nothing can. Period. Even though our science is wrapped up in revised theories, it is nonetheless sound and 100% accurate. There is also no way to cheat the system with wormholes or some other cosmic trick to cut the distance because we haven't figured a way to do it. If we haven't done it yet, it's obviously impossible.

In conclusion, aliens cannot get here because we're by far the smartest know-it-alls in the universe. If we can't get there, they sure as heck can't get here. If they could, that would mean that they're smarter than us, and we all know that that's impossible. [/sarcasm]



posted on Feb, 3 2008 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by TheAgentNineteen
 


These modes of translation are all based on the concept that in order to move an object from point A to point B, you apply a force to an object, and pass through all intervening points between A and B. This is a very old fashioned way of moving objects - we call it "push technology".

The constituent particles of an object have a positional attribute. Instead of indirectly changing the positional attribute by using push technology, it's much more efficient to simply edit the positional attribute directly. This avoids all the conventional problems which are related to velocity such as inertia, gaining mass, generating then subsequently dissipating ridiculous amounts of energy, etc.

The only implementational difficulty with this method is that all attributes of the particle related to position need to be modified simultaneously otherwise the particle will momentarily appear in unintended places before arriving at the final position. Therefore, you need to use an indivisible "atomic write" to modify all attributes of the particle simultaneously.



posted on Jul, 23 2008 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Nohup
 


I think that the fact that we do not know how to travel large distances in space does NOT necesarily mean it is impossible. 110 years ago we didn't have airplanes. 60 years ago we didn't have computers. 20 years ago we didn't have Internet. I remember, as a kid, that some scientist once said that Earth would be communicated by computers. You know, back in the VERY early 1980's, to me, it sounded like science fiction. Something that would not happen before another 100 years. Genetics has also been considered to be science fiction, yet today's scientists are trying to destroy the AIDS virus via genetic procedures (basically). My point is, the fact we don't know about something, does not necesarily mean it isn't there.

I wish Einstein existed once again. Maybe he would have the opportunity to write a corolary to his relativity theory.

Andlast but not least: There has been hundreds and hundreds of claims of people sighting UFOs. Granted, we dismiss all of those as lies and imagintive stories. But think about it: If only one, (yes, THATS RIGHT, ONE), if only one of said UFOs was ever for real, it would be living proof that there are plenty of stuff we don't know about.

-SomeNick



posted on Jul, 23 2008 @ 10:36 PM
link   
Sure space travel is possible.
But not too fast.

The Tesla UFO craft uses the free energy in the atmosphere and
perhaps there is enough ether in outer space.

Why would Von Braun, way back in Germany, be talking about
going to Outer Space if he did not have a good chance to do it.

Rocketry was just a sideline and the military made the V2 so
powerful.

If Von Braun knew of Tesla and Sperry's 1917 test flight he surely
made the most of any 1937 visit he made on behalf of Willy Ley to
meet with Tesla. Imagine, 20 years later Von Braun meets his
hero.

After all, Von Braun took all the Tesla's unlocked effects since 1943
to Los Alamos in 1945. No A bombs from Los Alamos but UFOs yes.



posted on Jul, 23 2008 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheAgentNineteen
It is very similar to some individuals claiming we must find certain elements in order to find life elsewhere. Water is the most often mentioned element, which of course is total garbage. Who's to say that life elsewhere won't find H2O to be poisonous? Even here on Earth we have life thriving around deep ocean vents that find Oxygen poisonous. When the chemical process first began for the creation of multi-celled organisms here on Earth, O2 was actually a lethal gas, and did not resemble the so called life sustaining element we know it as today.

So very true, and well said. I was thinking of this same similarity myself. As interesting as this discussion has been, and it has been interesting, the technical logistics of space travel is not the question.

The question is arrogance. Scientists are the most arrogant people in the world (a generalisation, I know, but for the most part I honestly believe it to be true). You see, they cling to their beliefs just as tightly as religious people. Except that their beliefs can be 'proven' by 'fact'. So they become even more arrogant about the superiority of their beliefs.

And sure, some facts can be proven, but a repeatable experiment simply proves that the experiment can be repeated, not that the way this data has been extended to a scientific conclusion is proven. But you won't find many scientists willing to admit this.

This gets amplified when we talk about things that can't yet be explained scientifically. Because science clings to 'proof' like a child to a security blanket, when you have a subject or hypothesis that defies proof, science refuses to acknowledge it. In other words, if it can't be proven scientifically, it doesn't exist.

So when you come to intergalactic & interplanetary travel, you have the same problem. Science hasn't been able to prove it possible, so as far as science is concerned, it isn't possible.

It's an incredibly blinding arrogance that holds back our scientific progress in the worst possible way, and until we exorcise the religious fanatics from the field of science, we're not going to make any scientific advances.

Proven data does not prove the conclusion. If something cannot be proven possible, it is not impossible - no matter how unlikely it might seem.

[edit on 23-7-2008 by TheStev]



posted on Jul, 23 2008 @ 11:55 PM
link   

The universe works in a "binary code" of numbers its what creates non linear events to happen on earth and other places. Through various means the numbers which are part of mathematical physics can be moved or replace to reshuffle events. Earth has a certain frequency which alien craft can tap into kind of like a "number radar" if earths frequency is picked up on their system the shift in the binary signal is registered then "they know we are here" so to speak. When they first discovered earth I don't know.

There is a binary number for every event that ever happens. This includes gravity, speed. friction, inertial and many others.


To be charitable, the above is unscientific mumbo-jumbo.

The universe works according to the laws of physics, which as best we can tell is described as an evolution of a wave function in some very complicated Hilbert space (an abstract space) and this is mediated through an (at least) 4-dimensional physical space+time.

The interactions in this space are the laws of physics. The issue of quantization---what is continuous and what is discrete is in fact very complex and subtle, and not at all like how a conventional computer works, which is in a simple binary discrete space.

In fact, it may sound paradoxical, but the powerful capabilities of "quantum computing", which is a hot but still very young emerging field of physics and engineering, ironically rely on the *analog* and non-discrete and non-quantized nature of full quantum mechanics. Quantum computers are analog computers.

And people also say "X has a frequency" ---- frequency of what? Earth has a frequency? This is like saying your cat has a tense.

A physical object in oscillation---the SOMETHING of the SOMETHING might (or might not) be oscillating in a way that is well described by a periodic function in which case that property has a frequency.

Earth is a rather big collection of lots of atoms all doing all sorts of different things. There certainly is no one "frequency".



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 12:07 AM
link   


The only problem I have with this is HOW do we create gravitational forces strong enough to do this? how do we create and manipulate gravity to begin with?


Exactly!! If wishes were Ferraris, we'd all have a sweet ride.

To be only slightly more technical: What are ALL the source terms in the stress energy tensor which goes into the Einstein equation?

The Einstein equation is the fundamental law of physics for gravity, which says, effectively that "the warpage of space (a differential operator on the metric) is a function of the stress energy tensor evaluated in warped space"

Right now, as far as we can tell, the only terms in this that matter are mass and the mass-equivalent of other fields (like E&M) which are very small. And the coupling constant in front---Big G---the gravity constant is extremely small. This means that something huge like the mass of the Sun is only able to warp space sufficiently to deflect light by a tiny fraction of a degree.

To do something to engineer the metric, there would have to exist some coupling which is astronomically more powerful than what we know (trillions of times bigger). And yet, it would have to be so subtle and hidden that despite all of our physics experiments and observations, even though it is at least trillions of times bigger than the gravity we know, there is no observed reproducible evidence whatsoever for it. This seems damn unlikely.

If there were such a thing, the exact physical details of "what atoms, and what stuff in what configuration and how" would really really matter, not some general platitude about "warping space" (which is obvious).

Partial analogy: how much did Einstein and E=mc^2 contribute to developing the atom bomb? Contrary to general opinion, the answer is jack squat. What mattered was the specific details of the strong force interactions and unusual consequences (fission) in particular nuclei and curious other facts of nature about uranium. Enrico Fermi and Glenn Seaborg are the fathers of the A-bomb, not Einstein. Even if we didn't know anything about relativity, we could have made the A-bomb just fine, though some computations would not have matched experiment until we got the right correction.


[edit on 24-7-2008 by mbkennel]



posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 12:01 AM
link   
Vast space travel is not possible.

The nearest galaxy to us is 25,000 light years away. Time doesn't magically change b/c they are in a different place than we are. Light travels at the same speed everywhere.

Assuming they even could go light speed (impossible), it'd take them years upon yrs to get here. Why in the world would any sane being attempt such a long trip? Also wouldn't they send out probes like we do? And wouldn't we find evidence of suck Probes?





Aside from the possibility of black holes being time portals, vast space travel is and will forever be impossible/



posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by blvr5
This may have been discussed before, if so, sorry...


Because scientists in general have this bizarre notion that they understand the universe. They seem to forget that once upon a time the world was flat. Or that before relativity, f=ma ruled the day. Or that the sun revolved around the earth.

But our current understanding of physics MUST be right.

That's not only hysterically funny, but also very sad.

Vas



posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 12:59 AM
link   
I would have to agree with "welivefortheson", his final statement in part anyway


lastly there is no need to travel in a bodily form,its only really your consciosness thats needs to travel,if conscionsess can be encoded/digitised then it can be transfered via the qauntum entanglment method(if the information paradox is nulified) and thus you can instantly be anywhere you want in the universe if theres a body waiting for you at the destionation point.

and most of what I can understand by "mbkennel".
At the level of conscienceness needed for time/space travel, I believe the physical does not play a role and mere thought would suffice. Thought being the only thing in my opinion that does not obey the law of physics. At that enlightened level, you would have far more responsibility toward your own existence to warrant the gift of travel.



posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 01:38 AM
link   
Guys, I'm a bit woozy from a bottle of wine but I have to throw in my hypothesis and please forgive any wording mistakes...

* Mass = Energy
* Mass = Gravity
* Mass = Curvature of space time
* Mass has 3 dimensions (I think?)
* Light represents to us a physical limit in our speed within our current space time
* The faster mass moves the more space time curves therefore you encounter more gravity reaching a physical limit in speed

We have a big issue, at the speed of light (which is impossible) to travel from one end of our galaxy to the other would take 120,000 years (to the observer). What do we do? We have to take the space and time out of the picture? How do we do it? We puncture space time and move into whatever is beyond it. (star trek warp fields and worm holes involve bending space-time, that's good and all but is not fast enough for me)

Imagine space time as a water bed. You put a bowling ball on that bed and you see the bed curve around it. This is how gravity works, the more mass the more curvature and therefore the more gravity.

So how do we bend space-time to the point that it ruptures without a lot of mass/energy (i.e. black hole)? Very carefully! J/K!

This problem hasn't been solved yet but I think it comes down to focus and frequency. Imagine trying to pop the water-bed with a spoon moving slowly. It ain't going to work well. Now imagine trying to do it fast with a knife.

Presto... What happens next.... I have no idea but my bet is that when we figure this out - we will master the dimension of time and possibly others we don't encounter in our current reality.

I'm a lunatic I know but just wanted to clear my chest of this theory of mine and hear your opinions. Perhaps this was already theorized, would love to find that out...



posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 01:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nohup

The biggest problem with traveling long distances in space is not one of intelligence, but of the distance and the speed of light limit.


There we have it ladies and gentlemen. They sole reason mankind will never get off this planet. The closed mind of the scientist.

These are the 3 reasons why aliens have been here and the above is the reason why they don't want us to know about them.
1. The lightspeed limit is because of mass. Create a machine that can defy or ignore gravity and your problem is solved.
2. Human scientists say the above is impossible. There are aliens out there who are millions if not billions of years ahead of us. I say none of their scientists told them "we can't leave home because of the speed of light limit".
3. Who says linear travelling is the only way of travelling? Just because it is fiction for us right now does not means it's impossible for aliens.



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 09:36 PM
link   
A Mission To Earth.

Let’s look at this simple story of an intelligent being who wishes to travel from his home planet to Earth then return safely to his home planet. Just for the sake of easy math we’ll say that Earth is only 100 light years away from his planet. We’ll start in the Earth year 1409.

Mission one: View Earth from our home planet.
The image of Earth that the viewer sees is 100 years old given the fact of the speed of light.
So the image is Earth year 1509.

Mission two: Send a probe to Earth and get information.
The probe is launched and will take one hundred years to arrive Earth. (now 1609) Once it lands it will send us information back to our home planet. The information will take one hundred years to arrive. Earth year is now 1709

Mission Three: Launch a manned craft to orbit the Earth.
The round trip manned mission will take us two hundred years. Photos of Earth’s technology will assist us in learning about it’s inhabitants. (Images would be Earth in it’s year 1809) Of course given the time difference for information, fact gathering is expected to not be up to date by the end of mission three. Earth year is now 1909

Mission Four: Walk on the Earth.
Our third mission taught us that the Earth beings of 1809 do no have the technology of manned flight. They also are not capable of electronic communication. So a two hundred year mission is planned. Send a being one hundred light years to Earth. Land on the blue planet. Slaughter a cow. Draw designs on hay fields. Do not celebrate joyously of the successful mission or attempt to greet the Earth people. Do not leave a flag or any other evidence of your landing. Arrive back to the home planet. The Earth year is now 2109

In Closing:
Our crew members arrived Earth on Earth’s year 2009. The advancements of their technology took us slightly by surprise given the fact that this project has taken us 500 years to achieve. And it appears the Earthlings technology advances faster then our fact gathering capabilities.

Was the trip worth it?

Mission Five: Fake future Earth landings.
Much less expensive and we can claim to travel faster than the speed of light through our media.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 02:38 AM
link   
You really need to stop thinking light speed for a couple of reasons. One it would be way too expensive we have to think real here. Second off no human body can be sustained going as fast as 186k miles per second. Third it's pretty slow compared to even our galaxy. In fact a round trip to alpha Centauri would be 8 years
. No I do think space travel is possible though. It will have something to do with gravity for sure we will need to fully understand how to manipulate the fabric of space. By the way I don't think warp drive is an option either because just like light speed it needs infinite energy, and let me just put that in perspective for you. Every second of moving you will need more energy than the sun will put out in its' entire life time. I just think we are going about this the wrong way honestly to me speed means nothing in space because it is so big. Gravity is everything in space after all it can make a star collapse on its' own mass
.

Keep thinking though man It's just a law of physics and gravity we don't understand yet. In fact we should just get off the speed topic because speed has NOTHING to do with interstellar travel. The above post was a good example also of just how foolish the media makes aliens. My theory is that we would need something that can get to point a to point b in zero time. How? Haha i think thats the question because thats the only way space travel is going to work.

[edit on 16-6-2009 by getthateducation88]



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 05:00 AM
link   
this post may end up being very long but i've researched this before

firstly, why scientists say Et's wont come here.
they asume that any civilisation is at our own level or only a few hundred years ahead of us. the universe was here billions of years before the earth and the earth abillion years before us, so really, were the first life form to exist? the dinasaurs died out long before our ancestor were in the trees. so there is most definatly life forms older than us out there.

not only that but were about a thousand years behind in terms of were we should be the romans were close to an industral revolution, the even had plans for a steam powered wagon! but the F'ed up. leaving the world in the dark ages.

so, they also say there are no Et's nearby... says who? SETI? SETI's a god damn joke! they look for radio wave that at the frecuency of hydrogen! they'ed have to be metaly deficent to use that frequency! even we don't use it! and who even says that they'ed use radio?

and know for the fun part
space travel!

conventional (sublight engines)
the fastest convention engine will get you to the closest star (alpha centuri) within fifty years

Combustion engines:
dinasaurs go in, space flight comes out

its stupid but cheap, hence thats why we use it

Ion engines:
a nuclear reactor that streams particles out in the direction you want to go, there are a few verients of this inculding impulse engines from star treck.

Buzzard Ramjet:
scoop up a heap of hydrogen and comressess it, then its funneled out a nosle just like a bollon.

Solar sails:
the most elaborate and definetly the most expencive but suprisingly the most effective
basicly you build a big ass reflective sail and shoot lasers at it. you can get pretty close to the speed of light but then you have the problem of stoping and getting back home.

Nuclear pulse propultion:
stupider than stupid, blow up a atomic bomb behind you and ride the shock wave. its also illegal

Unconvetional (faster that light engines)
these are engines that are possible but beyond our abillity to do

Hyper space:
jump into a demention were the laws of physics don't aplly then pop back out once you get were your going

Alcubierre drive a.k.a. warp drive:
don't go faster just make the distance shorter


Wormholes:
wormholes do exist but they're just very, very small and to create one big enough or even one stable enough to go through would proberly take something like a black hole.

finaly the "speed" of light is an arbatrary messurement that they decided was an unbreackable fact.
one, the speed of light is not only relative but can be slowed or accelerated eg. water slows down light. and two there are particles that move faster than light already (i forget what there called)

i'll leave you all with a link to a vid by Michio Kaku, Theoretical Physicist, it covers et and some stuff about Et's
Youtube Vid



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join