It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

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

Help ATS via PayPal:

# How to travel the universe using inertia

page: 1
4
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 01:26 AM
In a nutshell; if you can disengage from the inertial effects of the speed and direction you are traveling at this very moment, you would speed away at an instantaneous ultra high velocity to an observer on earth. What you are doing is standing still in reference to the speed and direction the universe is moving, but an observer would see the complete opposite. I don't have the knowledge of how to cancel the inertial effects without exploding into a million pieces but in concept that is what I am expounding. How? I am guessing it has to do with being mass-less instantaneously and letting the inertia you do have decay away. How do you manipulate mass? I took college physics so I can't tell you how to manipulate mass because I was not taught that. How do you change direction and stay still to the observer? Well if you can manipulate mass you can turn in any direction if you know the speed and direction of the universe at that given moment and manipulate your mass to "gain speed". Direction? Well IDK! Turn off inertia in the opposite direction of the speed and direction you want to go? lol Stay still to the observer is to gain the speed and direction you originally had...with a humungous mass you can do this lol!
All in all who knows how much energy you need to manipulate your mass but is it less than plasma rockets? IDK Who knows how fast we are traveling at right now with respect to any frame of reference (sun, galaxy, universe, etc) but is it faster than light? IDK!

posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 01:46 AM
Without being rude I want to tell you that the other night some guy was talking about flying cars using magic cats or magic gems or something like that. I told him it smelled like bullpoop. This smells the same.

posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 01:52 AM
There was a great thread on this just yesterday.. interesting that both of you have the same idea.. and until you have 5 trolls... you have not presented something interesting... looks like you have one so far..

posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 01:52 AM

Ask Ernst Mach, he was into that sort of thing.
Although with a name like "emeraldous" you might be related to "orange gem"/Bernard...
edit on 18-6-2013 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 01:53 AM

Originally posted by Emeraldous
In a nutshell; if you can disengage from the inertial effects of the speed and direction you are traveling at this very moment, you would speed away at an instantaneous ultra high velocity [...]

In a nutshell; if you can disengage from the logical effects of logic and reality, you are talking complete and utter nonsense to the listeners who did not do that.

Why did you?
edit on 18-6-2013 by Nevertheless because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 01:55 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift

posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 02:00 AM

There are some pretty good cosmologists on ATS whom will explain it better but just after the so called big bang was the only time anything moved faster than light in the material universe and this lasted for only a few fractions of a second, You can not cancel inertia but displacing it may be possible at the sub atomic level though macro molecular displacement, well you need a theoretical physicist on that one, there may be methods to cheat and get from point A to point B faster than light but you can not go faster than light in the physical universe.

Please don't be disheartened it is a fascinating subject and there may be way's to do just what you suggest but I know of none and I believe no physicist does either but it would still not go even near as fast as light.

Fold space, wormhole, quantum resonance transference. These are the areas to begin thinking on, displacing gravity may be possible but not yet for us and that would work in the way you mean but is not inertia.

posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 02:00 AM

It's been done. Or will be. Or something.

For the next several pages the starship is taken on a trajectory very near the sun, the idea being that Libby’s machine will be turned on, the inertia in the ship will go away, and the Sun’s light and wind will instantly accelerate the ship to near light speed.

www.analogsf.com...

posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 02:07 AM
the best way to travel the universe would to create a system that allows the senses to remote view such as a pair of gogles and headphones connected to a beam aimable by hand, the beam would act like sonar and return an image of the planet you want to view, so you could see lifeforms or plantlife of everything in the beams sonar range.

posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 02:16 AM
edit on 18-6-2013 by Emeraldous because: add bedlam

posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 02:20 AM

How do you manipulate mass?

By manipulating the Higgs Field I would assume.

posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 02:34 AM
Thanks Phage for the link. It is a better idea to use a laser to push off other objects with mass. And if you are mass less, then the change in direction and velocity will be quick with no adverse course change of the mass object you pushed off of.
edit on 18-6-2013 by Emeraldous because: grammar

posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 02:45 AM
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 05:06 AM

I wrote some thread about the speed you are currently experiencing: 627 km/s, relative to the unmoving microwave background radiation.

posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 05:36 AM
This makes me think of the 'Lensman' series written by E E 'Doc' Smith where the 'Bergenholm Generator' was invented to do exactly this (defeat gravity and inertia).

Bergenholm Generator

Gave me all sorts of fantastic ideas when I read the books about 40 years ago

Fictional but inspiring stuff

posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 09:19 AM

Originally posted by ManFromEurope

I wrote some thread about the speed you are currently experiencing: 627 km/s, relative to the unmoving microwave background radiation.

Thank you! Now this is going to sound strange but: Can you selectively remove inertial effects of the earth but still be subject to the sun? Remove the IE (inertial effects) of the earth and sun and be subject to the next mass object and so forth down the line to background microwave radiation...and beyond that? How does the vector of constant velocity that we currently experience change direction (and magnitude?) per unit of time and can this be modeled? If I wanted to travel to mars and knew the dynamics of the IE during my trip can I make the trip without the need for directional thrust? But by standing still and allowing mars to come to me, allowing it to attract my mass towards it when we are near enough?
edit on 18-6-2013 by Emeraldous because: made it clearer

posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 11:21 AM

Originally posted by Phage

It's been done. Or will be. Or something.

For the next several pages the starship is taken on a trajectory very near the sun, the idea being that Libby’s machine will be turned on, the inertia in the ship will go away, and the Sun’s light and wind will instantly accelerate the ship to near light speed.

www.analogsf.com...

Thanks, that is a fun read.

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 01:51 AM

Originally posted by Emeraldous

Originally posted by ManFromEurope

I wrote some thread about the speed you are currently experiencing: 627 km/s, relative to the unmoving microwave background radiation.

Thank you! Now this is going to sound strange but: Can you selectively remove inertial effects of the earth but still be subject to the sun? Remove the IE (inertial effects) of the earth and sun and be subject to the next mass object and so forth down the line to background microwave radiation...and beyond that?
Nnnnno.
No, you can't take out inertia with any known technology - if you understand this as "take my kinetic energy out of my body and store it somewhere else".

If you understand this in terms of "use some machine to slow me down over a period of time", there are rockets to do so. The shorter the period of time, the more intense would be the used decelerating (relative to the background radiation, not to Earth..) force - resulting possibly in brutal or even lethal powers working on your body.

How does the vector of constant velocity that we currently experience change direction (and magnitude?) per unit of time and can this be modeled?
Easiest way to understand this: General Relativity Theorie's picture of the rubber mat - you spindle around a massive object if you intended to just pass by. Gravitation influences your path (vector, etc.).

If I wanted to travel to mars and knew the dynamics of the IE during my trip can I make the trip without the need for directional thrust? But by standing still and allowing mars to come to me, allowing it to attract my mass towards it when we are near enough?

Yes, but the concept of "standing still" isn't working out.

posted on Jun, 24 2013 @ 03:32 PM

If you don't subscribe to the theory of a helical model, that is fine but just to show what I mean but inertial effects of the sun etc.

We are being dragged by the wake of the sun as it rotates around the galaxy and goes above and below the galactic plane. Right now we are aligned with the galactic plane. If you believe this then it would only be natural to assume that the galaxy orbits something else and itself carries everything caught in its wake ad finitum (ie universe doing the same)

posted on Jun, 24 2013 @ 03:54 PM
I am also bad at physics as you can see, but if when you approach the speed of light your mass becomes infinitely large then if you slow down or "stand still" to all frame of references then will you have no mass? Does velocity give you mass?
edit on 24-6-2013 by Emeraldous because: grammar

top topics

4