PDA

View Full Version : Subspace



whatswiththehairtealc
August 20th, 2005, 11:24 AM
Is subspace real or fiction?
If so what is it? how does it work?

Gargen
August 20th, 2005, 11:42 AM
yes subspace is real stargate or any other scifi shows that use it may make alterations to the theory for there needs but it was theorized by many leading physists basically it is the space between universes you could rip into subspace and into another of the infinite number of universes or you could rip into subspace and then back into your own universe in a different place

aAnubiSs
August 20th, 2005, 12:06 PM
How real is subspace? Well do a search on google for "subspace" or "subspace physics" and I think you'll find out how "real" subspace is. Star Trek, The Subspace Project, A Computer game and company names are the primary hits.

Qasim
August 20th, 2005, 12:38 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation

http://www.physicsguy.com/subphys/

http://www.physicsguy.com/subphys/SubspacePhysics.html

Gargen
August 20th, 2005, 12:43 PM
How real is subspace? Well do a search on google for "subspace" or "subspace physics" and I think you'll find out how "real" subspace is. Star Trek, The Subspace Project, A Computer game and company names are the primary hits.

umm well subspace is the a kinda of hard thing to prove it takes alot of energy to tear into subspace about the equivelent of the collapse of universe and so all of the work people like hawking have done is what a pipe dream

myst
August 20th, 2005, 01:04 PM
I have seen something like sublight drive and subspace terms in many Sci-Fi shows.

aAnubiSs
August 20th, 2005, 01:08 PM
sublight have nothing to do with subspace. Sublight engines just mean that they are used for travel below the speed of light.

myst
August 20th, 2005, 01:11 PM
Well I guess I was just saying that they both have "sub" in them. Subspace anyways, does sound perfectly real to me.

aAnubiSs
August 20th, 2005, 01:14 PM
How does it sound real to you? Because it's used in alot of SciFi-shows? Subspace is included in some theories, but afaik most of them don't have subspace in them.

myst
August 20th, 2005, 01:17 PM
Well, they have Theoretical Physics, and thats real. I guess I am getting no where on this subject.

Gargen
August 20th, 2005, 01:25 PM
ok science fiction shows did not create subspace it was fundimentally theorized by einstein when he theorized that there were an infinite number oh universe for every possible out come and everypossible moment in time

AsgardCarnage
August 20th, 2005, 06:42 PM
subspce is normal used to describe another dimension of which as defined by string theory there are about 11, our 4 unraviled dimensions (3 space dimensions and time as the 4th) and 7 that are kind of bundled together, a lame describtion i know.

when shows like star trek and stargate talk about subscape they normally mean a dimension that has its atoms and energy tightly compacted together with not space inbetween so any transmision or anything traviling in that space will move faster then in ours allows. for example sound travils faster underwater then in air because waters atoms are tighter together.

kind of a loose explination but u get the gist

Three PhDs
August 21st, 2005, 05:29 AM
yes subspace is real stargate or any other scifi shows that use it may make alterations to the theory for there needs but it was theorized by many leading physists basically it is the space between universes you could rip into subspace and into another of the infinite number of universes or you could rip into subspace and then back into your own universe in a different placeHow many leading physicists? What are their names? What theories were they?


umm well subspace is the a kinda of hard thing to prove it takes alot of energy to tear into subspace about the equivelent of the collapse of universe and so all of the work people like hawking have done is what a pipe dreamWhere did you get that figure for energy? Your grammar is pretty poor and I don't understand the rest of your post. Perhaps English is not your first language, please could you try and explain a bit more?


ok science fiction shows did not create subspace it was fundimentally theorized by einstein when he theorized that there were an infinite number oh universe for every possible out come and everypossible moment in timeSaying theorised over and over doesn't make your post any more credible. Einstein did not create the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, and even so, there is no mention of subspace in it.


subspce is normal used to describe another dimension of which as defined by string theory there are about 11, our 4 unraviled dimensions (3 space dimensions and time as the 4th) and 7 that are kind of bundled together, a lame describtion i know.

when shows like star trek and stargate talk about subscape they normally mean a dimension that has its atoms and energy tightly compacted together with not space inbetween so any transmision or anything traviling in that space will move faster then in ours allows. for example sound travils faster underwater then in air because waters atoms are tighter together.Even at that, the laws of physics still apply in other dimensions of our own universe. I should clarify for all the less well versed out there, that "other dimension" doesn't mean some fancy place you can fly a ship or whatever, it's simply another direction you can head in, as opposed to up/down left/right and forward/backward.

Gargen
August 21st, 2005, 11:10 AM
ok lets see is Stephen Hawking enough of a leading physist for you

Qasim
August 21st, 2005, 12:22 PM
Do you have a link to a paper by him on subspace?

Jeffer
August 21st, 2005, 12:32 PM
Its just like travling faster then the speed of light so in theory you could end up in an alternet reality my fav movie on that thought of sapce travel is Event Horizons its a great Sci-fi movie

Three PhDs
August 21st, 2005, 12:37 PM
ok lets see is Stephen Hawking enough of a leading physist for youNamedropping is pointless if you can't back it up. For the record though, I just googled Stephen Hawking +subspace and all I got were pages and pages of results about the time he appeared on Star Trek.

Gargen
August 21st, 2005, 01:01 PM
Well I havent read it in a few years but im pretty sure Universe in a Nutshell covers it but also i just reread hyperspace a month ago so i know that covers it so if oyu doubt Hawking then Kaku. Honestly i dont think you can contest subspace as a scientific theory

Three PhDs
August 21st, 2005, 01:05 PM
Well I havent read it in a few years but im pretty sure Universe in a Nutshell covers it but also i just reread hyperspace a month ago so i know that covers it so if oyu doubt Hawking then KakuKaku's Hyperspace, if you had read it correctly, deals with the proposed microscopic dimensions of our own spacetime sometimes referred to as Kaluza-Klein space. Had you understood the book, you'd know that the same laws of physics that apply here, also apply there. They are not a magical and mystical place we can go to avoid the light speed limit. They are just very small regions of the same everyday space we occupy whilst going about our daily lives.

Gargen
August 21st, 2005, 01:09 PM
Yes but it does atleast breifly mention subspace when going into the whole infinite number of universes and wormholes part, and subspace isnt magical nor mystical it is merely the space between universe of which there are an infinite number

Three PhDs
August 21st, 2005, 01:15 PM
Yes but it does atleast breifly mention subspace when going into the whole infinite number of universes and wormholes part, and subspace isnt magical nor mystical it is merely the space between universe of which there are an infinite numberAnd if it is not magical nor mystical, why is it bandied around like a place where one can travel faster than light?

Gargen
August 21st, 2005, 01:28 PM
hmmm well i would hardly call it bandied and there are multiple theories on how subspace works but most dont imply that matter can travel faster than light there just happens to be less space between two points in the universe in subspace so oyu could get to the other side of a galaxy in seconds (the gate itself) if you had read hyperspace you would have heard the crumpled ball of paper explaination

Three PhDs
August 21st, 2005, 01:47 PM
hmmm well i would hardly call it bandied and there are multiple theories on how subspace works but most dont imply that matter can travel faster than light there just happens to be less space between two points in the universe in subspace so oyu could get to the other side of a galaxy in seconds (the gate itself) if you had read hyperspace you would have heard the crumpled ball of paper explainationI read Hyperspace in 2001. My apologies if I was a little rude to you, you do appear to be smarter than I gave you credit for. My frustration is aimed at those who babble on using words like hyperspace and such with absolutely no scientific reason.

Gargen
August 21st, 2005, 02:11 PM
Yes, well with any show you will get people who tend to be much like trekkies that develop a science based on the show, but i recomend Hyperspace and Universe in a Nutshell to anyone who is interested in the real science stargate is based on. But there are changes the Stargate writers made to these theories such as the energy requirements to open a wormhole, earth couldn't power their gate with all all the power the entire planet produces. It would take the harnessed power of an entire universe, and some even say it would take the energy created by the collapse of a universe, please realize that there is a difference between SciFi and real science.

And phd you are one of the few people on here who pays any attention to the real science so i salute you.

Three PhDs
August 21st, 2005, 03:14 PM
Yes, well with any show you will get people who tend to be much like trekkies that develop a science based on the show, but i recomend Hyperspace and Universe in a Nutshell to anyone who is interested in the real science stargate is based on. But there are changes the Stargate writers made to these theories such as the energy requirements to open a wormhole, earth couldn't power their gate with all all the power the entire planet produces. It would take the harnessed power of an entire universe, and some even say it would take the energy created by the collapse of a universe, please realize that there is a difference between SciFi and real science.

And phd you are one of the few people on here who pays any attention to the real science so i salute you.
Just a small amount of negative energy would be required to inflate a naturally occurring wormhole to usable standards.

Gargen
August 21st, 2005, 03:25 PM
but even that much negative energy would by hard to come by, but the plus side to negative enrgy is it would create a two way wormhole. But in the entire stargate negative energy hasnt been discuss so i doubt the ancients were even able to even create but i dont really know much about anti-matter anto-gravity or negative energy (there really isnt much to read on the subject)

Lord ┬žokar
August 22nd, 2005, 05:24 PM
ok science fiction shows did not create subspace it was fundimentally theorized by einstein when he theorized that there were an infinite number oh universe for every possible out come and everypossible moment in time
BZZZT. Subspace was, in fact, created by science fiction. Gene Roddenberry, to be precise. You will not find any references to subspace on any media but Trek and SG-1 websites. Look up the Wiki definition if you don't believe me.

Gargen
August 22nd, 2005, 05:53 PM
Ah yes so all of those books i read that i bought out of the physics section, were accidentally placed there when they should have been in the science fiction section. Subspace is simply the space betweem universes, and you cant deny that there multiple theories on multiple universes andmost of those include atleast a brief explanation of subspace.

Ok and many sceintific theories get blown off at first so I dont mind, I mean look at what happen to that Darwin guy and that Bull**** he called evolution, i personally beleive the Orii created all life.

Lord ┬žokar
August 22nd, 2005, 08:19 PM
Ok and many sceintific theories get blown off at first so I dont mind, I mean look at what happen to that Darwin guy and that Bull**** he called evolution, i personally beleive the Orii created all life.
The wit in that statement was positively palpable. I prostrate myself before the worlds' greatest living satirist. I'm still smarting from the deftly delivered, wickedly derisive, multi-faceted, cuttingly acerbic... mmm I'm done now.

Ah yes so all of those books i read that i bought out of the physics section, were accidentally placed there when they should have been in the science fiction section. Subspace is simply the space betweem universes, and you cant deny that there multiple theories on multiple universes andmost of those include atleast a brief explanation of subspace.
"All those books?" Can you name one of them or quote page, paragraph and passage where the word "subspace" is contained, not to mention any reference to the "space between infinite universes"?

_Owen_
August 22nd, 2005, 08:30 PM
Is subspace real or fiction?
If so what is it? how does it work?

A solid answer is, within the Stargate universe, subspace is real.

Basically, (please not from here on I refer to events within the Stargate universe) subspace is... very very difficult to explain. Subspace is basically, here, all around us, if you reach your arm out infront of you, your arm is both above, below, infront, behind, subspace, as well subspace continues right into your arm. Subspace is basically, inside, normal space. Hypothetically you can cut the fabric of space time and have a "portal" to subspace.

We have many ideas on how subspace works. If you would like to know more, just ask.

Owen Macri

whatswiththehairtealc
August 22nd, 2005, 09:41 PM
A solid answer is, within the Stargate universe, subspace is real.

Basically, (please not from here on I refer to events within the Stargate universe) subspace is... very very difficult to explain. Subspace is basically, here, all around us, if you reach your arm out infront of you, your arm is both above, below, infront, behind, subspace, as well subspace continues right into your arm. Subspace is basically, inside, normal space. Hypothetically you can cut the fabric of space time and have a "portal" to subspace.

We have many ideas on how subspace works. If you would like to know more, just ask.

Owen Macri

thank you owen.

i would like to hear more, and i realise that even if it was real, in our universe, it is not a solid thing. as with any physical science these very new complicated ideas have to start as theories as we don't have the smarts or technology to prove them laws as of yet. but in the stargate world please enlighten me!

jpf190279
August 22nd, 2005, 10:55 PM
subspce is normal used to describe another dimension of which as defined by string theory there are about 11, our 4 unraviled dimensions (3 space dimensions and time as the 4th) and 7 that are kind of bundled together, a lame describtion i know.

when shows like star trek and stargate talk about subscape they normally mean a dimension that has its atoms and energy tightly compacted together with not space inbetween so any transmision or anything traviling in that space will move faster then in ours allows. for example sound travils faster underwater then in air because waters atoms are tighter together.

kind of a loose explination but u get the gist

String theory states there are 10 dimensions not 11, Super String theory that includes gravity are an extra dimensional force is 11 dimensions. Both are wrong and this is why M-Theory with 11 dimensions is currently the favourite, plus it is the only theory that correctly deals with the universe on a whole so far.

Subspace is a term that is used out of context to the rest of physics, there is no subspace, there is no hyperspace, in that I mean no FTL space. So just because some Scientist watches SG1 a bit to much and B5 doesn't mean that RL subspace is Scifi subspace, the term is just used to get peoples attention.

-J

_Owen_
August 22nd, 2005, 11:13 PM
Ok, well, my hypothesis, which many on the forum agree with is that subspace is infitesimally small. Subspace is there, but takes up no space and contains no space, yet it is still there. Now, let us say that there is some kind of universal template, and all universes, all layers of the universe, all layers of hyperspace, and subspace, must fit this template. Howver, with subpsacebeing so small, it cannot possibly equal the size of our universe, so in order to exist, it is forced to stretch, to meet the specifications which it is required to meet. According to the expanding universe model the universe is getting bigger, so these specifications are constantly changing getting larger, but they are still there.

Now subspace had to stretched to fit the universal template, but seeing as subspace originally contained 0 space, it will continue to contain zero space, you must stretch subspace, but no matter how many times you multiply zero by another number you will continue to get zero.

So subspace has been stretched to fit the dimensions of the universal template, however it still contains zero area, so when you enter subspace you force the inside of it to stretch outwards, it will cling to you, within subspace will only be as large as you are. So now, you occupy all of subspace, and seeing as subspace was required to stretch to fit the universal template, you would be too.

Now before we go into this there is only one way you would be able to stretch subspace. Normally if you entered subspace, seeing as the space inside is shrunken, it would cause you to shrink, and since subspace contains no volume you would be shrunk down to nothing. So to enter subspace you must enter while encompassed in a self-contained region of spacetime, so while you are actaully entering subspace, you are still within normal space, however, you are within a "pocket" of normal space, which is within subspace. Now your bubble of spacetime has strecthed subspacetime, and you now occupy all of subspace, and seeing as subspace was stretched to fit this template of which we have been speaking, your bubble of spacetime is also equal to the entire size of the our universe. Seeing as subspace, as I mentioned in my last post is all around us, you are able to exit anywhere in the known universe, seeing as you are relativley occuping the entire universe at once.

Therefore you can enter subspace at one point in the universe, and exit at another point billions of lightyears away without having to travel at all through subspace. You can instantaneously travel anywhere in the universe via subspace.

With this idea, you do not have to break the theory of relativity seeing as you will always be traveling at sublight speeds, however, relative to our universe you will be travel far greater than the speed of light.

This is because speed is measured as distance traveled divided by time elapsed, miles/hour, kilometers/minute, meters/second, etc.

So let us estimate, if you travel a billion miles, in 10 seconds, for some reason you decided to stop and chat in subspace. relative to our universe, the speed at which you were traveling, was one billion miles/ten seconds, to round that to an hour you multiply both neumerator and denominator by six and then 10 seconds becomes one minute, and one billion miles becomes six billion miles, then you multiply both neumerator and denominator by 60, one minute becomes sixty, or one hour, and six billion miles per hour become 360 billion miles. Therefore, relative to our universe you are travel at 360, 000, 000, 000 miles per hour.

And if you find this interesting, the Stargate version of Hyperspace, and my idea on how it works is very similar. Might you like to hear about this as well?

Owen Macri