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.

 

Portaling, spacetunnels, FTL travel

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 02:17 PM
link   
People who have seen the pictures of the "portal over Norway" have brought up the question of asking if it could be in any way a portal, wormhole, or otherwise anything UFO related. To talk about that we need to understand how spacecraft move, how wormholes work, and how space, time, and gravity need to be manipulated to and how they cause phenomenon like this.

The poor job I did here with this image is because I feel that the time this post will be relevant to the threads I wish to link to this is short, I can create a better set of diagrams in photoshop and upload them later.



OK, now lets jump right in by explaining what we know about ufo propulsion...oops, most of you don't even understand how terrestrial propulsion works, oh well, I'll just give you a quick refresher on how rockets in space work.

All rockets created on earth rely on the ability to expel something out the back of the rocket engine or motor, literally this is the same thing as you jumping on the floor, only at the top of your jump, you were to put another floor down to jump off of, continuing that into space. This is Newtons law of motion, this is also why a gun kicks when it is fired. A rocket engine can be thought of as a machine gun, spitting out lots of bullets and pushing against the spacecraft.

But I know you must be asking yourself what this has to do with portals, and besides, we almost have ION drives right?

A cool little protip, Ions have mass, that's how an ion engine works. We are still using the idea of pushing ourselves through space by expelling something. Ion drive is more efficient and can be powered by electricity, but its the same concept as we are currently using on the space shuttle.

All "alien" propulsion systems are way beyond the need to expel something as in reaction engines. You see, the problem with reaction engines is that you are pushing small parts of your total mass in the opposite direction of travel. To travel past the speed of light this way would require that you keep throwing bits and pieces of your total mass away until there was nothing left to be pushed beyond the speed of light.

A better form of propulsion is what we see when people talk about UFO craft, making small balls of gravity around the craft in question in the direction of desired movement. Literally, a disc UFO is falling around the sky, like a yoyo on a string, the person holding the string being the source of gravity.

Gravity drives are a great form of propulsion, so long as you can maintain the energy needed to maintain the high gravity field needed to drag you through space. This is not a bad technology at all, it will allow one to achieve incredibly high speeds, pull insane turns without being crushed, fly through any atmosphere, including water if the structural integrity of the craft can handle the extreme forces.

Gravity drive has one drawback or flaw, it cannot go faster than light. By creating a source of gravity, you are moving the rest of space and time around a bit, and that is the drawback. To go faster than light, you would have to push back against space/time hard enough to break through the barrier that Einstein predicted. To illustrate crudely, if you had a balloon at the center of the earth and wanted to blow it up, you would have to put enough energy into the balloon to overcome the gravity of the entire earth. This crude example is the same reason antigravity will not achieve FTL travel, its pushing against infinity, and thus, would need an infinite amount of energy.

So how to achieve faster than light travel? Simply, ignore light and focus on getting from point A to B, as fast as possible, even if it means having to bend reality a bit. Fig.3

So now we get down to the nitty gritty of "wormholes" "portals" or whatever else you want to call it. Wow I hate these terms, they are so hard to equate with what I am describing here.

I want you to draw two dots on a piece of paper near each corner. now find the shortest distance between them by moving the paper around. The shortest possible route is to fold the paper so the dots are touching. Now, all that little dot demonstration shows is that it is not about moving the dots so much as it it moving the space between them. The point is, the key to faster than light travel, is not speed, but distance.

The reason we cannot travel faster than light is that we are pushing at a barrier. You know what happens when we hit the sound barrier, a massive crack and powerful shockwaves are produced. How much greater would the consequences be if we brute forced our way through a much faster barrier? When we finally got past the sound barrier, we did it not by making larger airplanes, but smaller, more streamlined, thinner wings that sliced through the air, only after we thought about streamlined did we finally break the mystical barrier.

With FTL travel, one cannot brute force their way through to beyond the speed of light. You must create a tear in the space/time, slip in, slip through, pop out. How? By creating a tear, and how do we do that? Gravity! If you can produce antigravity, you can produce gravity. If you can produce gravity on hand, such as small black holes, you can tear holes in spacetime. By creating an odd number of areas of intense gravity around a center point, you can pull apart spacetime.


Now I would like to explain how this corresponds with what happened over Norway.
en.wikipedia.org...

Electric glow discharge is what we all were witness to, the cause of that, is something very few people would think of. It is very possible a spacecraft warped out, not in(for clarification) too close to earth's atmosphere, possibly even in the Ionosphere. The result of the tearing of spacetime I talked about caused a spiral of gasses to form in different densities, with all the energy used to create that rip, it is possible that the area above Norway was glowing much like a neon light.

Why the spiral shape? When a ship creates the tear in spacetime, the area around the tear has a strange shape. Space is round, gravity is round, the universe, is visually round. When you push a round water balloon, you get a doughnut shape. When a craft makes a tear in spacetime, it creates a doughnut shaped ring around the tear of intense gravity.

[edit on 10-12-2009 by Happyfeet]
 
Mod edit: image tags corrected to show the whole image.

[edit on 11/12/2009 by ArMaP]




posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 02:33 PM
link   
Why a doughnut shape instead of a circle? Because we are in a 3d universe. So now that we have a ship tearing apart space in our upper atmosphere, the ship slips through undetected, great. We have an explanation for the glowing and stuff, cool! But why the vortex shape, and what's with that long line of blue?

When this doubledonought shaped tear is made in spacetime, the ship still needs forward momentum to slide through the tear, once that is completed, the tear no longer needs to be open and collapses without incident to the ship. For anyone wondering, if the tear were to collapse before the spacecraft was completely inside, you would have part of the ship popping into it's destination, and the other half ripped apart by the intense shockwaves of gravity and space slamming back into the void to fill the tear.

When a portal is open, it swirls, when it collapses, its still swirling.Fig.4 Think of this tear in spacetime as a raindrop, Fig.5 you have the drop going in, and a rebound popping back up. Space has surface tension and springs back into place once it is allowed to. That springing takes the momentum of the vortex and throws everything that was in the area of the portal to be flung around with some of the same momentum of the vortex. The reason some areas of the sky were bright, and others dark, were because there was a literal vortex as the gasses high in our atmosphere swirled around the portal.

The reason for the blue line, is because like a raindrop hitting a pond, the top and bottom of the vortex were popping out and back into shape. But there is one last thing. If you had a way to make two portals anywhere in the universe, and chose to put one on the surface of the moon, a vacuum, the other in your bedroom. You would find that the air in your bedroom would be sucking into the portal until the air pressure was equalized on both sides of the portal.

This is one reason why you would never want to try to jump into a tear in the atmosphere of a planet, you would take half the air of the planet with you.

Since some of the gasses in our high atmosphere were being sucked into that tear when it closed, some where trapped when the portal closed, and those gasses were forced into either side of the portal, the intense pressure is why they were glowing. so far away from the initial spiral.


I hope this post makes sense. Please feel free to critique this, or just let it die.



posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 02:36 PM
link   
I think a ring exhaust is possible as demonstrated in the
Rex Heflin case presented in the UFO Hunters available
on youtube.



posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 01:43 AM
link   
yeah.. wiki pedia.. um not a good research site.



posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 10:13 AM
link   
Fisrt good analyses of the subject got a little mixed up where you discribed let put it in quote "To illustrate crudely, if you had a balloon at the center of the earth and wanted to blow it up, you would have to put enough energy into the balloon to overcome the gravity of the entire earth. This crude example is the same reason antigravity will not achieve FTL travel, its pushing against infinity, and thus, would need an infinite amount of energy. " My opinon think you are still try to explain space-time travel with Newton law, first of all their will be a difference between a protal and a worm hole and if an alien space craft was to travel through space or warp after it has left earth gravity it will be pull space toward itself and not push infinity and you have not address to problem of high g-force, think the switching the electrode when high voltage is applied will help counter the g-force, Correct me if am wrong just my opinon.



posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by stanlee
yeah.. wiki pedia.. um not a good research site.


wikipedia is A GREAT SITE

btw i really like your avatar



posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 10:43 AM
link   
I have a couple questions regarding Wormholes and Space-Time.

Wormhole:
1. If a wormhole is opened near Earth and Jupiter (just as an example) and assuming the two points on a piece of folded paper represent the wormhole, then why have I never heard of the gravity of these two large bodies attracting each other through the wormhole?

2. How can we assume that the wormhole collapses after we've passed through? Would it depend on the method by which it's opened? Also, why do we assume, at least in movies, it's a long journey (relatively speaking) instead of something short and sweet (like walking from one room to another where the door is the wormhole)

Space/Time
1. Why is it when people speak of time travel they seem to forget one possibility. I have yet to see it in a movie or mentioned by physicists. It appears to me that if a person was to be standing at a location on Earth, that could transport him 6 months into the past, listed as x,y,z & t (time) on Dec 21, 2009 (winter solstice) would, in my mind, be theoretically remain where they are while the Earth would reverse to the opposite side of the Sun leaving them in the vacuum of space.



posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 04:32 PM
link   
I have a couple questions regarding Wormholes and Space-Time.


Wormhole:
1. If a wormhole is opened near Earth and Jupiter (just as an example) and assuming the two points on a piece of folded paper represent the wormhole, then why have I never heard of the gravity of these two large bodies attracting each other through the wormhole?

They can, and the reason they don't go flying towards each other is momentum. If you are running away from me, and I grab you, your kinetic energy needs to somehow be removed for me to stop you. The brief time a wormhole is open is not long enough to cause longterm shifts for planetary bodies. Also, it might be worth noting that gravity can pass through a wormhole.




2. How can we assume that the wormhole collapses after we've passed through? Would it depend on the method by which it's opened? Also, why do we assume, at least in movies, it's a long journey (relatively speaking) instead of something short and sweet (like walking from one room to another where the door is the wormhole)

We can assume that the wormhole collapses as soon as the source of energy to maintain it is either turned off or gone. Remember, the wormhole is held open by the craft generating extreme gravity to pull spacetime apart. Once the source of power is gone, spacetime bounces back into shape.
"(like walking from one room to another where the door is the wormhole)"
Exactly! It is literally like opening a door and walking through.
www.youtube.com...
See how in this game the portals are 2d doors to another set of coordinates? You must power yourself through the portal, but the movement from location to location is almost instant.


Space/Time
1. Why is it when people speak of time travel they seem to forget one possibility. I have yet to see it in a movie or mentioned by physicists. It appears to me that if a person was to be standing at a location on Earth, that could transport him 6 months into the past, listed as x,y,z & t (time) on Dec 21, 2009 (winter solstice) would, in my mind, be theoretically remain where they are while the Earth would reverse to the opposite side of the Sun leaving them in the vacuum of space.


I don't understand. What location on earth would provide the means to timetravel? As far as remaining in the same location in space, you are partially correct. So long as you are attached to the planet by gravity, you would remain there. If you were to somehow turn gravity off, as opposed to the levitation style antigrav, you would indeed be left behind as the planet raced around the sun.



posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Happyfeet

All "alien" propulsion systems are way beyond the need to expel something as in reaction engines.


First, I'm not trying to be rude here.

The above you made as a statement of fact. How do you know this?

Are you and Alien engineer visiting Earth?
Were you schooled by Aliens?
Have you yourself reverse engineered known Alien Craft?
Something else?

Regarding the video I'm posting below. Since Russia has admitted the third stage of one of their rockets failed and is in fact the source of the phenomena in Norway; why is what is in the video not a factual representation of what occurred.



If this is not the case, why did Russia lie? Why did they put out the warning in advance of the launch?



posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555

Originally posted by Happyfeet

All "alien" propulsion systems are way beyond the need to expel something as in reaction engines.




If this is not the case, why did Russia lie? Why did they put out the warning in advance of the launch?


I will refrain from answering the above questions out of fear for a major S##Tstorm any way I answer it. To answer why Russia lied, you must answer why there are so many conspiracies about NASA, denial of UFOs, and secret government UFO secrets done secretly.

The easiest way to debunk the missile test is to ask why noone in neighboring nations saw this phenomenon. A missile on the edge of space would have been seen by a much larger area than reported. Also, if the missile was leaking fuel as stated, then the rings could not have been so well formed, as winds at extremely high altitudes would have blown away any symmetry.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Lastly, I direct you to this thread, apparently even our own space agency is hiding whatever that was.
Hopefully this was a flop of some terrestrial or other spacecraft and nothing sinister like bluebeam

[edit on 11-12-2009 by Happyfeet]



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join