Spacewarp Technology; Applications & Implications

Hi everybody,
.
Can anyone tell his/her opinion(s) on the security aspects of the spacewarp technology? I want to review all such ramifications before it goes to higher levels. I am talking about a theory in the realm of the gravity & quantum physics, more specifically a by-product of combination of the general relativity and quantum field theory.
I cannot be quite clear on its present situation, due to my circumstances, however it doesn't make basic differences for others, but I thought maybe there are some people in here to have good ideas about this subject.
.
To know about the subject, please review these links:
.
Wormhole - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wormholes and Time Machines
Wormholes II: Getting There in No Time
Natural Wormholes: Squeezing the Vacuum
NASA Goes FTL - Part 1: Wormhole Physics
New Improved Wormholes
"Outlawing" Wormholes and Warp Drives
All About Teleportation
.
Then, assume the mentioned concept would become a reality, I mean a technology; … then tell me what can be done to maximize its benefits and minimize its drawbacks?


[edit on 3-5-2010 by mansouryar]

IMO, the actions should be under surveillance of the UNO. I think this is the only way of preventing it to go into the black projects. Actually, more international collaborations, more peace and friendship among the countries, and maybe we could move toward a world without the concept of state & nation. I hope to realize it.
.
Another pages:
.
Extreme Technology: Macroscopic Traversable Spacewarp!
.
Creating a Traversable Wormhole

There already have been much discussion on the subject in here which I didn't know about:
.
"Warp Drive" site:Abovetopsecret.com
"Traversable Wormhole" site:Abovetopsecret.com
.
I couldn't read whole of the threads, but among those I read, I found these more informative:
.
Is the Search for Warp Drive Dead?
Poll: Should Faster than Light propulsion technology be released to the public?
.
I appreciate the poster of those threads.

I think the discussing the technological aspects of this technology would be a science topic.

However I think the topic of the security aspects of this technology belongs in another forum since it's not a science topic maybe the gray area since we have no proof any of this technology exists. So I vote for moving the thread since the topic as you defined it isn't science.

I am a Sci-fi fan and I thought the way the handling of the wormhole technology was portrayed in stargate SG-1 was somewhat plausible: At first the stargate technology was controlled by one country but eventually a 2nd country was involved and finally the members of the UN security council. So if you want to speculate on how the security aspects might be handled, I think stargate SG-1 the TV series is pretty decent speculation. They even modify the stargate by adding an iris to prevent unfriendly invasion forces from invading the Earth, and even when it's open they have guards posted at the entrance. And the technology is secured under Cheyenne mountain in a heavily guarded underground base. Decent speculation about how such technology would be handled, if it existed.

Thanks for the reply. I don't see any problem on discussing the technical aspects and (security) applications together. One could consider it as a subset of the science policy too. On the other hand, I don't think a deserved technical debate could be happened on the internet forums, …
I chose the science section because the posts are rather more serious in this section in respect to other areas of the boards. Also note that all the links in my first post are from a mainstream physicist of the University of Washington, Seattle: faculty.washington.edu...
, plus a Wikipedia entry.
Also, the links among the science / technology and politics and social ramifications are pretty strong and deep; just look at the history of the nuclear physics developments, birth of the WWW at DARPA labs, the motivations of the space race between US & Soviet Union at the cold war era …
This spacewarp subject is not a technology yet, but it can be considered as the science IMO. I dealt with it in an interview: www.americanantigravity.com...
At last, I should add that I think it's better to think about the futuristic technologies & their probable applications before realizing them, to get ready for the wonders of a world where can be only imagined in the Sci-Fi movies & books for now …
Cheers,
MM
P.S.: Your points were useful, I must watch this SG-1 series someday …

[edit on 14-5-2010 by mansouryar]

[edit on 14-5-2010 by mansouryar]

From what I understand, the U.S. Government constantly monitors both private and public scientific study in any field that might represent either a threat or an opportunity to national security. This includes theoretical study that shows promise of direct application, particularly if it looks like it can be done with technology with relatively low power requirements. If it takes a reactor the size of the Moon to make a wormhole for spacetime travel, for instance, nobody's going to be too worried about it. A time machine that can work on the power of a car battery, however, is a different matter.

A good way to look at it would be to see what happened to the atomic bomb project. Or the Internet. For the most part, any advanced technology, including those relating to the manipulation of spacetime, is first assessed as either a military asset or threat. If it's either one of those, then the government generally tries to gain control of it. That might require anything from claiming legal right to it to going to war over it. Whatever it takes. After that, then it's a matter of experimentation to determine what the parameters of use are.

Most high technology is both useful and dangerous at the same time. A reasonable assessment of the danger would have to be made. Bacteriological and chemical warfare was so dangerous that even Hitler didn't encourage its development. Manipulating spacetime would have obvious dangers, including the destruction of complete spacetime matrices or constructs that we need (or needed at some point) to exist. Access to such technologies would be as extremely limited as possible. Experiments would have to be conducted that would minimize the Butterfly Effect and Grandfather Paradoxes. Optimally, these would be done as far away from Earth as possible, as quickly as possible, as soon as it was possible to predict and control a stable wormhole or dimensional bump (vectored implosion).

Look for the first large spacetime manipulation research stations to be built as far away from populated areas as possible. The Siberian tundra. Northern Canada. Hopefully, they'll be able to avoid a lot of mistakes that might end up taking huge chunks out of the planet. That would obviously create some problems, although as ordinary citizens, we probably wouldn't have a lot of say about it either way.



[edit on 14-5-2010 by Blue Shift]

reply to post by mansouryar


As I understand it there are a few historical patterns in the development of new technologies. There are additional factors when a technoloy, it's componants and when intergrated as a system, are considered a national security threat if obtained by other nations or other groups. A good example of this is the Manhatten project, and the result's there of. The technologies mentioned on this thread would be so revolutionary they could disrupt our current industrial base if widely known. To give you an idea what may already be possible but would be not just black, but a void. If true check out this:

Sorry I can't give you a link, but just Google the name; Ben Rich, former director of Lockeed Skunk Works. Scroll down to "we can now travel among the stars". I think he said that at his retirement party.

reply to post by Blue Shift

Thanks Blue Shift for the reply.

From what I understand, the U.S. Government constantly monitors both private and public scientific study in any field that might represent either a threat or an opportunity to national security. ... For the most part, any advanced technology, including those relating to the manipulation of spacetime, is first assessed as either a military asset or threat. If it's either one of those, then the government generally tries to gain control of it. That might require anything from claiming legal right to it to going to war over it.

Luckily the USG is not the entire world government, so it cannot have absolute power on the emerging technologies out of its borders. Since I am in Iran where is one of the places with the minimum USG access, I guess there wouldn't be remarkable concern about that. Also regarding the cost of war, I don't guess the USG would involve in any more war …

If it takes a reactor the size of the Moon to make a wormhole for spacetime travel, for instance, nobody's going to be too worried about it. A time machine that can work on the power of a car battery, however, is a different matter.

My wormhole idea does not require a Moon-size power source, in fact as it's recently been brought up in the field, this could be achieved by low amount of energy: …
.
Can a wormhole supported by only small amounts of exotic matter really be traversable?
Wormholes supported by small amounts of exotic matter: some corrections
More on wormholes supported by small amounts of exotic matter
Viable models of traversable wormholes supported by small amounts of exotic matter
Theoretical construction of stable traversable wormholes
.
…
Also, building time machine is impossible IMHO.

Most high technology is both useful and dangerous at the same time. A reasonable assessment of the danger would have to be made. Bacteriological and chemical warfare was so dangerous that even Hitler didn't encourage its development.

Thanks again for sharing your thoughts, I had another interview about similar issues: www.starstreamresearch.com...

Manipulating spacetime would have obvious dangers, including the destruction of complete spacetime matrices or constructs that we need (or needed at some point) to exist. Access to such technologies would be as extremely limited as possible. Experiments would have to be conducted that would minimize the Butterfly Effect and Grandfather Paradoxes. Optimally, these would be done as far away from Earth as possible, as quickly as possible, as soon as it was possible to predict and control a stable wormhole or dimensional bump (vectored implosion). ... Look for the first large spacetime manipulation research stations to be built as far away from populated areas as possible. The Siberian tundra. Northern Canada. Hopefully, they'll be able to avoid a lot of mistakes that might end up taking huge chunks out of the planet.

To the best of current theoretical knowledge, I can assure you there would be no such dangers during the spacetime manipulations tests. The simulations on the extreme spacetime influencing events such as colliding two black holes or neutron stars have not shown similar consequences as you assumed. I think the experimenters love their own life and shall imply all the control factors on the tests.

reply to post by arbiture

Thank you arbiture for the reply. Any revolution has a starting point, …

Google the name; Ben Rich, former director of Lockeed Skunk Works. Scroll down to "we can now travel among the stars". I think he said that at his retirement party.

I think he was wrong while saying that sentence. If he meant traveling among the solar system planets, he might be right, there is no physical law preventing that, the only problems are the engineering difficulties and huge costs. But since the birth of the related known physics to travel with faster that light speeds backs to the 1988, along with another theoretical breakthrough in 1994, I have no idea why he said so.

Originally posted by mansouryar
I think he was wrong while saying that sentence. If he meant traveling among the solar system planets, he might be right, there is no physical law preventing that, the only problems are the engineering difficulties and huge costs.

I don't think someone of Bens level would confuse planets with stars and there are no physical laws which prevent travel amongst the stars.

The only 'major' problems are power source and inertia.

With inertia control and a suitable power source almost anywhere in the universe can be reached whilst remaining at sub light velocities without any more exotic 'warp drive' technologies.

Even without inertia control there are still a large spread of locations that could be reached within a human lifetime.

A target of say 100 light years doesnt take over 100 years to travel with respect to the traveller @ 99.99% of the speed of light due to relativistic effects. With respect to the departure point the journey will take over 100 years however.

reply to post by LightFantastic

Thanks for the reply.

I don't think someone of Bens level would confuse planets with stars and there are no physical laws which prevent travel amongst the stars.

Well, a simple Google searching gave interesting results that there is no tight evidence of such a statement from Ben Rich: Ben Rich, Former Head of Lockheed Skunk Works , Ben Rich , Ben Rich - Lockheed - UCLA Lecture , A true statement? , The Ben Rich Statements , ...
Anyhow, as long as I don't see them in the real world, I assume their non-existence.

The only 'major' problems are power source and inertia. With inertia control and a suitable power source almost anywhere in the universe can be reached

I don't see how inertia is relevant? Can you give more explanation please?
BTW, I don't know what you mean by the term " a suitable power source". The present technology is not so good on this case.

A target of say 100 light years doesnt take over 100 years to travel with respect to the traveller @ 99.99% of the speed of light due to relativistic effects. With respect to the departure point the journey will take over 100 years however.

Of course; although there would be several problems with that scenario:
1. Inertial mass increasing; 2. Length Contraction; 3. Controlling problems of the spaceship while moving among the interstellar masses, dust, asteroids, … along the way; 5. Still vast distances (the nearest star but Sun is about 4 light years away!); 6. That travel would mean only for the passengers, not the observers on the earth whom time passes for them faster due to the time dilation effect …
Forget this approach, only distance reduction is the solution …

[edit on 15-5-2010 by mansouryar]

[edit on 15-5-2010 by mansouryar]

reply to post by mansouryar


Of course Ben can't comment, he's been dead many years. Given who he was, and some of the areas SW was involved in, they would bury applicable technology or theory so deep the devil would have to get a new place.

reply to post by arbiture

Ben Rich & his team surely did great things, but talking about the black projects cannot give definite results, IMO. Because it's not clear what exactly we are talking about, no details, no data about the tests' conditions, … only sci-fi like conjectures. If they've gained such technologies from the ETs, good for them, I would not know what to say about the related science.
However, if one cares to the official science, as I mentioned above, the main events started to happen at 1988, 1994, and a rather slow advancement up to now. It's not secret, it's not commercial neither and all can read them. I believe for humanity sake we need to let this kind of technology won't get black … if I were a black projects guy, I'd vote to stop this old tiring trend for once …

Originally posted by mansouryar
Well, a simple Google searching gave interesting results that there is no tight evidence of such a statement from Ben Rich

I agree.

I don't see how inertia is relevant? Can you give more explanation please?
BTW, I don't know what you mean by the term " a suitable power source". The present technology is not so good on this case.

With internal inertia reduction the ship can accelerate and decelerate faster whilst remaining comfortable for the occupants. With whole ship inertia reduction the vessel could travel closer to C on the same power source

Without inertia control we reach the strange position of more distant targets being quicker to reach.

A suitable power source means a device that can constantly supply enough power to accelerate the ship and travel with the ship. Without inertia reducton for the whole ship this is likely to be virtually impossible to contruct with known physics. The best attempt I have seen is to create a certain mass black hole then capture it for use as a propulsion device.

Of course; although there would be several problems with that scenario:
1. Inertial mass increasing; 2. Length Contraction; 3. Controlling problems of the spaceship while moving among the interstellar masses, dust, asteroids, … along the way; 5. Still vast distances (the nearest star but Sun is about 4 light years away!); 6. That travel would mean only for the passengers, not the observers on the earth whom time passes for them faster due to the time dilation effect …
Forget this approach, only distance reduction is the solution …

Yes, difficult and not ideal, but not impossible.

And in answer to the OP; any technology that may give a perceived military advantage to the holding state will be hidden until it no longer confers an advantage. The greater the advantage, the more hidden it will be become.

reply to post by LightFantastic

With internal inertia reduction the ship can accelerate and decelerate faster whilst remaining comfortable for the occupants.

I don't know about the related mechanism, I wish you had mentioned a source/reference at least. I guess that would require a magnetic levitation in order to prevent the high accelerations of the ship on the humanoid passengers.

With whole ship inertia reduction the vessel could travel closer to C on the same power source

Without inertia control we reach the strange position of more distant targets being quicker to reach.

If that scenario would actually work, I doubt it could reach to close amounts of the speed of light.

A suitable power source means a device that can constantly supply enough power to accelerate the ship and travel with the ship. Without inertia reducton for the whole ship this is likely to be virtually impossible to contruct with known physics. The best attempt I have seen is to create a certain mass black hole then capture it for use as a propulsion device.

I don't know any law of physics allowing to capture a black hole! The suitable power source for the future spaceship should be fusion power:
en.wikipedia.org...
, or a matter-antimatter colliding reactor, IMHO. That would be big and massive and need to be rescaled for a practical spaceship, another technological challenge.

Yes, difficult and not ideal, but not impossible.

That's the reason I suggest the distance reduction solution as the spacewarp framework. However all the possible methods should be verified.

And in answer to the OP; any technology that may give a perceived military advantage to the holding state will be hidden until it no longer confers an advantage. The greater the advantage, the more hidden it will be become.

I wish for one time in the history it would be far from the militaristic hands at the starting steps, and I like to be informed how. Also, this special innovation would change the meaning of the state, country, national borders, … almost everything related to the concept of the "physical distance", that's awesome, isn't it?

Are you saying that you have physically invented a wormhole device? Or that you have a theoretical idea of how to build it?

Imagine someone using this to instantly transport a nuke into any location from any point on Earth. That is what Iran will want it for and that is why the US will want to keep it secret.

Not to mention any country could simply fly a jet on a suicide mission, drop the wormhole in the next country and instantly transport troops, transports and logistical support. It would completely negate the natural boundaries that protect our countries. It would cause mass chaos. The implications of being able to go to any point in the world instantly when you think militarily are...not good.

Civilly it would be a wonderful device. Rather than think of it for space travel (which it will eventually be used for I'm sure) I would recommend marketing it commerically and terrestrially as a quick mode of public transportation. Being able to travel to anywhere in the world instantly without having to fly would make it so that people could go on a day trip to anywhere in the world! Imagine that! It would put airlines out of business, so to prevent it from being swept under the rug I suggest you market it to airlines first and pitch to them how they can make money off of it and reduce costs at the same time. People here will love it. I know I would.

People always wonder "how can I sell this tech to the government". If you have a benevolent purpose for it, I recommend marketing it commercially my friend. More money, and it won't get swept under the rug once the corporations see how much money its worth to them.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by dbloch7986

Thanks for the reply.

Are you saying that you have physically invented a wormhole device? Or that you have a theoretical idea of how to build it?

I've presented the correct theory. If there would be any realized wormhole, we'd have a very different world …

Imagine someone using this to instantly transport a nuke into any location from any point on Earth. That is what Iran will want it for and that is why the US will want to keep it secret.

I don't know about the governments, but if I could build it in Iran, I'd like to transport good things through it for the good of the people, not nukes or any kind of weapon; although as the devilish applications, it could be much worse than that you pointed out …

Not to mention any country could simply fly a jet on a suicide mission, drop the wormhole in the next country and instantly transport troops, transports and logistical support. It would completely negate the natural boundaries that protect our countries. It would cause mass chaos. The implications of being able to go to any point in the world instantly when you think militarily are...not good.

I see the positive aspects of the situation. When you would be able to go anywhere by such a system, your world would be as big as the whole planet, not just your city. The borders are artificial man-made barriers between the humans; there were no borders when people were living freely in the nature before coming the civilization, why such things must "protect" us in this manner? I don't interpret it as a mass chaos. I think that technology shall naturally cause a single world government, a single universal army, a global police, a unit currency, a world president or board of presidency, … uniting many things in short.

Civilly it would be a wonderful device. Rather than think of it for space travel (which it will eventually be used for I'm sure) I would recommend marketing it commerically and terrestrially as a quick mode of public transportation. Being able to travel to anywhere in the world instantly without having to fly would make it so that people could go on a day trip to anywhere in the world! Imagine that! It would put airlines out of business, so to prevent it from being swept under the rug I suggest you market it to airlines first and pitch to them how they can make money off of it and reduce costs at the same time. People here will love it. I know I would. People always wonder "how can I sell this tech to the government". If you have a benevolent purpose for it, I recommend marketing it commercially my friend. More money, and it won't get swept under the rug once the corporations see how much money its worth to them

I agree with you, but the problem is the private-civil companies do not use something sooner than the military, and as all the users in here do know very well, such kind of researches are supposed to get black when the military is involved till an indefinite date. There is no brave & rich corporation interested in this at the level of theory, they might use the prototype device but not from their own labs. These are unfortunate realities, IMO.

Originally posted by mansouryar
I don't know about the related mechanism, I wish you had mentioned a source/reference at least. I guess that would require a magnetic levitation in order to prevent the high accelerations of the ship on the humanoid passengers.

More probably a gravity generator. Go to NewScientist.com and search for Ning Li. Also see star-trek!

I don't know any law of physics allowing to capture a black hole! The suitable power source for the future spaceship should be fusion power:

Have a look at NewScientist
Fusion power is too inefficient but an anti-matter engine would be much more efficient.


[edit on 18/5/2010 by LightFantastic]

reply to post by LightFantastic

Thanks my friend.

More probably a gravity generator. Go to NewScientist.com and search for Ning Li. Also see star-trek!

Unfortunately, there is no gravity generators for our interested purposes within the present technology, at least I don't know. This wiki entry is informative:
en.wikipedia.org...
According to the above link, Ning Li design has not shown new demonstrations since its beginning:

In 1989, Ning Li, of the University of Alabama in Huntsville theoretically demonstrated how a time dependent magnetic field could cause the spins of the lattice ions in a superconductor to generate detectable gravitomagnetic and gravitoelectric fields. In 1999, Li and her team appeared in Popular Mechanics, claiming to have constructed a working prototype to generate what she described as "AC Gravity." No further evidence of this prototype has been offered.[17]

And according to New Scientist, no new result either:

A woman called Ning Li began researching "gravity shielding effects" at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and announced that she, too, was getting somewhere. Then she dropped out of sight.
Source: www.newscientist.com...

Following the links in her wiki page:
en.wikipedia.org...
www.light-science.com...
www.space.com...
I couldn't find further breakthroughs about her work.
.
The Star-trek is a great show, but not the science!

Have a look at NewScientist
Fusion power is too inefficient but an anti-matter engine would be much more efficient.

Just my luck! That article needs subscribing, so I couldn't read whole of it. However, I'm somehow agree with you on the antimatter engines …


[edit on 18-5-2010 by mansouryar]

Originally posted by mansouryar
Just my luck! That article needs subscribing, so I couldn't read whole of it.

However, I'm somehow agree with you on the antimatter engines …

You should just be able to register on New Scientist. I am not currently a subscriber