Thoughts on the Universe

  • Thread starter Thread starter Iceman
  • 57 comments
  • 1,266 views
What about the theory from Event Horizon, where they send out acrew on a ship a certain distance, then they set up a field at that point so the next crew can open a portal from Earth to that point and travel there instantly, and then from the first point they send the second crew out even further, and they create a portal there so the third crew can travel there instantly, and so on and so forth? I know, I know, it's just a movie, and not a terribly good one at that. But is it not possible that the shortest distance between two points is not actually a straight line, but zero? To be able to bend space so the two points actually co-exist within the same field, and then to "jump" from one point to the other and close the warp field?

Fortunately, with some duct tape I was able to keep my head together this time. Sorry for getting all my science from movies...I am, after all, an English Major and History Minor!
 
The problem with Event Horizon is that not only is it scientifically plausible, the film is complete and total crap.
 
Famine
The problem with Event Horizon is that not only is it scientifically plausible, the film is complete and total crap.
Click to expand...
Do you mean it is totally implausible or really actually plausible? But I do agree with you that it is akin to watching paint dry...
 
Anderton
Do you mean it is totally implausible or really actually plausible? But I do agree with you that it is akin to watching paint dry...
Click to expand...

No, it really IS plausible. It's part of the whole "warping space-time" theory of faster than light travel.

But I was wanting to rip my own eyes out too.
 
But even if you could travel at the speed of light, what difference would it make? The universe is so huge you still wouldn't be able to get to 99.999999999999% of the universe in one persons lifetime.
 
The concepts of space travel at the speed of light are very different from those at the speeds we now travel. I've read several places that when traveling that speed you wont age as a person on earth would. It's kind of hard to explain so I'll let Famine clear it up if he cares to :lol:.
 
Famine, you forget that velocity is relative. A passing meteor might be going at 80x the speed of light relative to us, but if you're standing on that meteor then the rest of the universe appears to be traveling the speed of light. Think of it this way; relative to earth, you've managed to build a rocket that has enough fuel to propel itself to just short of the speed of light (we'll say 186,499 mps for arguement's sake). Once it's at that velocity, it is stationary; not accelerating nor decelerating relative to the speed it's going (because we have no defined points from outside of our dimension). Now, take that speed, 186,499, and say that the rocket is now stationary, but the earth is flying away from it at that speed. All that would need to happen for the rocket to reach lightspeed relative to earth would be for it to accelerate 1 mps more. Therefore, it is possible to obtain lightspeed. However, it is not possible to out-accelerate light (go at 186,501 mi/s^2). That would cause the particles in an object to exist in a quantum state with one another, and as you may or may not agree, that is not a possibility (a single atom cannot be in two locations simultaneously). THAT is how I have interpreted Einstein's theory of relativity.

(of course this is all excluding the principal of bending spacetime, which is what happens in a wormhole).
 
My friend who is really smart when it comes to astrophysics and he said that he manipulated E=MC² to show that it is possible to travel faster than the speed of light. He managed to cancel out the infinities in the problem. I think it is BS, but the math seems correct. His logic might be faulty, though. If Einstein couldn't disprove it in his entire life, He can't in a single period.
 
Event Horizon
My friend who is really smart when it comes to astrophysics and he said that he manipulated E=MC² to show that it is possible to travel faster than the speed of light. He managed to cancel out the infinities in the problem. I think it is BS, but the math seems correct. His logic might be faulty, though. If Einstein couldn't disprove it in his entire life, He can't in a single period.
Click to expand...

The equation isn't E=MC²; there's a ∆ in there somewhere, but I'm not entirely sure where. It could be E=∆MC², or E=M(∆C)², but I honestly don't know...
 
Jpec07
The equation isn't E=MC²; there's a ∆ in there somewhere, but I'm not entirely sure where. It could be E=∆MC², or E=M(∆C)², but I honestly don't know...
Click to expand...
Well, in the setup of the equation, there are deltas (∆.) all over the place. In E=MC², there are no deltas. It is Energy equals Mass times The speed of light squared. Delta means a change in something. There are no changes in E=MC².
 
But also Part of one of einstiens forumulas has square root(something/square root[c-v]). c=speed of light, v= velocity. We all know you can't have the square root of a negative so anything under 0 is not possible, neither is zero because you can't have zero on the bottom of a fraction. Therefor you can't reach the speed of light.

Also I heard that the faster matter travels it loses lenth, and and at c length=0. With 0 length you become 2 dimensional, so at the speed of light can we travel to different dimensions or do we just stop existing?
 
Event Horizon
Well, in the setup of the equation, there are deltas (∆.) all over the place. In E=MC², there are no deltas. It is Energy equals Mass times The speed of light squared. Delta means a change in something. There are no changes in E=MC².
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that it originally has to do with the change in the speed of light. I'm not entirely sure where the Delta is, I just know that it's there (and I am certain about that). Where is Famine? He'll be able to back me up...
 
Jpec07
I'm not entirely sure where the Delta is...
Click to expand...
At Swiss Alps, last time I looked.

Well, someone's got to say something sensible in this thread....
 
Blake
@Famine What I don't understand is what could the other dimensions possibly be? What comes after time? THAT is what gets me...
Click to expand...
Go to your local library and look through all of the Popular Science/Popular Mechanics magazines from the past few months or so. I remember seeing one and flipping through it that answered your exact question.
 
Yeah, I have that one on hand. The main headline is "Journey to the Tenth Dimension" I think (I got really lost reading it; it doesn't really explain what the dimensions are, just how to get through them).
 
I dont know if it has been mentioned, but on This TV show on TLC or I think it was on The Science Channel, they were talking about some thing with the age of galaxies and the exansion and collitions between them, but in that program they mentioned that the universe is expanding...and rapidly so. That its speed of expansion is increasing, wonder how fast it will eventually be with no sort of resistance, unless Dark Matter is resistance to its expansion. Maybe its expanding, but since its already infinate what exactly is expanding!!.....

Expanding Universe: http://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/Cosmos/ExpandUni.html

Expanding Universe:
http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast25may99_1.htm
 
It's really E=ΔMC² - Energy required = The change in mass multiplied by the speed of light squared.
 
tabs
There's this program called Celestia, let's you "travel" through space. Neat.
Click to expand...

I downloaded this as it looks very interesting. But it keeps crashing on me :grumpy: .

Has anyone else had this problem?
 
I haven't had any problems with it. Check the system requirements. Maybe you need to update some drivers?

Here's the FAQ.
 
I like Celestia. It runs on every computer I can get near.
 
Just thought about a way to explain the infinite yet spherical nature of the universe. It may be totally wrong but I'll give it a try. Heres how: Imaging you are standing on a point in space. You can rotate around that point a face any direction. Now imagine a line going in every direction possible (which is infinite in itself), the line is infinite, yet together they are spherical in nature.
 
iceman's on drugs! lol, jk man.

I don't find space all that intriguing. In my entire life i couldn't even explore the planet I am on. In space I could waste my whole life travelling through nothingness just for 1 look at a fairly close planet that is no more interesting than the one i started on.

Speaking of computer programs have you ever seen "life"? I think of the universe like complex equation. "Expanding" until it resolves. Now im on drugs.
 
John Gribbin's "In Search Of The Edge Of Time" raises a few interesting thoughts here. He, like Hawking seeks to prove that time travel is theoretically plausible, but remains a physical impossibility. At least until someone even smarter comes along and proves us all wrong!

Personally, I think time travel has been discovered and there are people from the future visiting us all the time. Wouldn't that explain the whole biblical story? Sorry if this offends anyone of a religious dispostion, but it kind of makes sense in a lot of ways to me.
 
It's an interesting theory with the lines. The fact of the matter is that we cannot truly comprehend the infinite. I've been having an arguement with a friend online about my theory of x/0 = I and x/I = 0 where I = Infinity. It is a compelling arguement, and I am but one step away from proving that I am right (I'll post a thread about it when I get it).
 

Latest Posts

Back