PDA

View Full Version : Featherweight Singularity



!Dorentus!
September 3rd, 2005, 05:30 PM
From what I've gathered through watching both Stargate Sg-1 and Atlantis, ZPM's are powered by an artificial singularity. Just like the way a black hole would provide power for the gate to keep it open indefinitely, a smaller version of a blackhole, a singularity, would provide energy to whatever you're powering.
I don't have any doctorates, degrees, or diplomas in physics or astronomy, and I haven't read any books dealing with theories that concern subjects such as these, so I might need some help with defining a singularity and what not. Basically (I think), its so dense and has so much mass that it's gravity sucks light and everything else into it just like a blackhole, so obviously it is very heavy. My point is, how can you just walk into a room and pick up a ZPM like it's a five pound weight? Or does the word "artificial" have something to with it? If it does, I'm obviously going to ask for a theory on what makes this "artificial" singularity so light and non-destructive, needless to say also, how would you make it.
-Have fun...

ColdZero
September 3rd, 2005, 05:46 PM
A ZPM has an artifically created little universe inside of it. The power is drawn from the zero point fluctuations in that universe. The goal of project Arcturus (sp?) was to draw power directly from our universes's zero point fluctuations. There isn't a black hole or anything, just a pocket of subspace time.

captain keys
September 3rd, 2005, 05:47 PM
i belive it is powerd by a vacum as for its density i have no clue and its mass be to large cause ur right they pick it up like its a peice of paper


A Z.P.M. derives its enormous power from vacuum energy, derived from a self-contained region of subspace time, and has a potential life of many millions of years.

!Dorentus!
September 3rd, 2005, 06:02 PM
Thank you very much. That clears things up.:)

Tain
September 3rd, 2005, 06:10 PM
Also, a singularity isn't just a mini black hole. All black holes contain a singularity.

IMForeman
September 3rd, 2005, 06:48 PM
If you want to read up on it some more, Wikipedia has an article on Zero Point Energy. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_point_energy)

-IMF

!Dorentus!
September 3rd, 2005, 06:49 PM
Also, a singularity isn't just a mini black hole. All black holes contain a singularity.So, before a black hole becomes a black hole it has to become a singularity? Right? So do singularities not stay just singularities for very long because they start pulling everything in around them and thus become a black hole?
So, does anyone have somewhat of an idea as to how you would make a ZPM?
P.S.- I am very glad I was wrong, and that this is not a plot hole, because it would have been a bad one, and very annoying.;)

ColdZero
September 3rd, 2005, 08:02 PM
So, before a black hole becomes a black hole it has to become a singularity? Right? So do singularities not stay just singularities for very long because they start pulling everything in around them and thus become a black hole?
So, does anyone have somewhat of an idea as to how you would make a ZPM?
P.S.- I am very glad I was wrong, and that this is not a plot hole, because it would have been a bad one, and very annoying.;)

Singularities are points of infinite density. Black holes like a whole package deal. The have an accretion disk, a singularity and a event horizon. Singularities are found almost all the time inside of a black hole, but recently they've found that singularities can be naked.

Singularities won't suck up everything around them. If our sun for some reason became a singularity, nothing in the solar system would care, it only has the same gravitational pull as it did before. The amount of mass there is nto different, its just in a much denser form.

!Dorentus!
September 3rd, 2005, 08:27 PM
The have an accretion disk, a singularity and a event horizon. What's an accretion disk?

Singularities are found almost all the time inside of a black hole, but recently they've found that singularities can be naked.:eek: :eek: We don't want a whole bunch of NAKED singularities running around our universe. Or do we? Hmmm...fascinating, indeed.

IMForeman
September 3rd, 2005, 08:48 PM
What's an accretion disk?


Wikipedia to the rescue again. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accretion_disk)

-IMF

!Dorentus!
September 3rd, 2005, 09:02 PM
Wikipedia to the rescue again. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accretion_disk)

-IMFCool, thanx. I read all of it plus some other links on that page.

_Owen_
September 4th, 2005, 08:23 AM
Lol, the accretion disk, put simply, is the part of the black hole that we can see, all that matter spiraling in.

Owen Macri

smartquin
September 14th, 2005, 03:50 AM
Ok, this is my theory for a ZPM.

The planck mass is somewhere around 2.176 45 x 10-8 kg. This can be said to be the most matter you can put into a quantum unit of space, which is (1.616 24 x 10-35 m )^3. That is pretty dense, so there must be VERY efficient inertial dampeners in the ZPM. now, even if there is on 10 cm^3 of 'artificial universe' to extract energy from, that would give (according to E=mc^2) 4.6331093218608832677775510310323 x 10^110 Joules of energy... which is A LOT of turkey sandwiches!!!!

At least that is what I think, anyone else get a different answer, I rushed it?

Wandering Tamer
September 14th, 2005, 04:53 PM
as fascinating as this all sounds... I'm wondering how the lowest energy level would work better then a higher energy level. I'm sorry... I'm still foggy on that.

captain keys
September 14th, 2005, 06:49 PM
i dont no ether

smartquin
September 14th, 2005, 07:34 PM
as fascinating as this all sounds... I'm wondering how the lowest energy level would work better then a higher energy level. I'm sorry... I'm still foggy on that.

Where did you read this from? Could you quote your source please?

lethalfang
September 14th, 2005, 10:35 PM
ZPM does not draw energy from zero point energy. It is impossible. Zero point energy cannot do work.

smartquin
September 14th, 2005, 10:54 PM
ZPM does not draw energy from zero point energy. It is impossible. Zero point energy cannot do work.

Not exactly... a ZPM is suppose to get energy from a vaccuum. If remove all particles from a region of space, and lower the temperature to absolute zero (ie zero point) energy is still observed via matter-antimatter pairs which exist for a split second and then anihilate each other. This is also refered to as quantum fluctuations. The problem is storing the said anti-matter, its pretty much impossible at the moment, since the particles interact with other matter very quickly.

Auralis
September 15th, 2005, 01:54 AM
ZPM does not draw energy from zero point energy. It is impossible. Zero point energy cannot do work.

It does work with a ZPM because the ZPM contains its own space-time continum outside of our own. That was the whole plot point of the SGa Trinity episode that a ZPM works because its outside our own SPace time and the trinity device does not work because it draws on our own space time vacuum energie.

smartquin
September 15th, 2005, 02:20 AM
Yay for Mcay! He blew up project Arcturus! BOOOOOOMMMMMMMM!!!!!!! WHOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHH <streaming particles with immense heat and kinetic energy scream past my head>

Ok, im back lol

Three PhDs
September 15th, 2005, 06:18 AM
Ok, this is my theory for a ZPM.

The planck mass is somewhere around 2.176 45 x 10-8 kg. This can be said to be the most matter you can put into a quantum unit of space, which is (1.616 24 x 10-35 m )^3. That is pretty dense, so there must be VERY efficient inertial dampeners in the ZPM.Why? I don't get the link between density and the need for inertial dampeners.


now, even if there is on 10 cm^3 of 'artificial universe' to extract energy from, that would give (according to E=mc^2) 4.6331093218608832677775510310323 x 10^110 Joules of energy... which is A LOT of turkey sandwiches!!!!

At least that is what I think, anyone else get a different answer, I rushed it?This... I don't know. You've made the calculation for the assumed density, but it's a mysterious unnamed material.

smartquin
September 15th, 2005, 06:24 AM
Why? I don't get the link between density and the need for inertial dampeners.

Well, its not so much the density, but just the sheer amount of matter. Since there is such a great mass inside the ZPM (for E=mc^2), it has to be counteracted some how. On the show, the ZPM looks like it only weighs a kilo or 2, but if it converts all possible space inside of it into matter for energy conversion, it would get VERY heavy.



This... I don't know. You've made the calculation for the assumed density, but it's a mysterious unnamed material.

I've just worked out if you had this 'region of subspace time' that can be turned 100% efficiently into energy, it should give these results. It does break the rules of thermodynamics and quantum theory (totally smashes them to oblivion), but hey, its in the show, it has to be real :p

Ryuu
September 15th, 2005, 11:40 AM
Well, all of you please stop talking about singularities all the time. Singularity is a mathematical term. It is a point where function goes to infinity. When you talk only about "singularity" it can be almost anything. There is also sexy term quantum singularity invented by sci-fi writers (I believe) but it's not right since black holes don't have (almost) anything to do with quantum mechanics. Gravitational or even general relativistic singularity is more appropriate. There are even two singularities per black hole if I remember correctly. One is located in its center and the second one is the whole event horizon itself.


Basically (I think), its so dense and has so much mass that it's gravity sucks light and everything else into it just like a blackhole, so obviously it is very heavy.
Black holes don't need to be extremely dense nor massive. There can be even black hole with mass of 1 kg, but it will be extremely short-lived. Also while black hole's size increases with increase of mass, it's density decreases. For example black hole of the size of our solar system would have the same density as water.

lethalfang
September 15th, 2005, 07:29 PM
Not exactly... a ZPM is suppose to get energy from a vaccuum. If remove all particles from a region of space, and lower the temperature to absolute zero (ie zero point) energy is still observed via matter-antimatter pairs which exist for a split second and then anihilate each other. This is also refered to as quantum fluctuations. The problem is storing the said anti-matter, its pretty much impossible at the moment, since the particles interact with other matter very quickly.

First of all, absolute zero temperature is physically and theoratically unattainable.
Secondly, fluctuation cannot be used to do work.
It is impossible to get work out of the so-called zero point energy. It's merely one of the stargate non-science thingies.

lethalfang
September 15th, 2005, 07:34 PM
It does work with a ZPM because the ZPM contains its own space-time continum outside of our own. That was the whole plot point of the SGa Trinity episode that a ZPM works because its outside our own SPace time and the trinity device does not work because it draws on our own space time vacuum energie.

This is incorrect.
Thermodynamically speaking, if you can find a way, to extract energy from our universe is possible.

To use a simple analogy, our atmosphere has 1 atm of constant pressure. It's the analogous of "zero point energy" in our environment. This pressure cannot be used to do work because it is everywhere.
In order to use this pressure to do work, you must create a pressure difference. Clearly, there are two ways to do it.
1) To create a container with pressure higher than 1 atm. The container will do work by expanding.
2) To create a container with pressure *lower* than 1 atm. In this case, our environment will do work on the container, and it is possible in this case to extract work from our environment.

Likewise, in order to extract energy from anything, you must create a difference in energy.
To use zero point energy to do work is non-sense because you cannot create a lower energy level, hence you cannot create a difference in energy level, therefore it cannot do work.

The "trinity" device is analogous to the 2nd case. To create a space/region of very low energy, so work can be extracted from our universe thru the flow of energy into this region. This is the only way it can work.

smartquin
September 16th, 2005, 03:30 AM
First of all, absolute zero temperature is physically and theoratically unattainable.
Secondly, fluctuation cannot be used to do work.
It is impossible to get work out of the so-called zero point energy. It's merely one of the stargate non-science thingies.

Well, your sort of correct. You see, scientists have been able to lower temperatures to lower than 3 degrees kelvin in the lab, and have observed the fluctuations that they say can only be attributed to ZPE. So your right, absolute zero isnt attainable with the tech we hav atm. Same with using the said fluctuations to do work, we simply don't know how to harness it.

Google ZPE, you'll find some good sources of info, hardly any with equations or anything scientific tho :(

lethalfang
September 16th, 2005, 01:19 PM
Well, your sort of correct. You see, scientists have been able to lower temperatures to lower than 3 degrees kelvin in the lab, and have observed the fluctuations that they say can only be attributed to ZPE. So your right, absolute zero isnt attainable with the tech we hav atm. Same with using the said fluctuations to do work, we simply don't know how to harness it.

Google ZPE, you'll find some good sources of info, hardly any with equations or anything scientific tho :(

I know thermodynamics and statistical mechanics quite well.
I can tell you right now that majority of "zero point energy" stuff on the internet is just plain wrong.
People heard the phrase "zero point energy," and they think it's a really cool name, and imagination took over. The problem is most of them did not look deep enough to understand what it really is.

smartquin
September 17th, 2005, 02:08 AM
I know thermodynamics and statistical mechanics quite well.
I can tell you right now that majority of "zero point energy" stuff on the internet is just plain wrong.
People heard the phrase "zero point energy," and they think it's a really cool name, and imagination took over. The problem is most of them did not look deep enough to understand what it really is.

True, a random conglomeration of energy just sitting there, with no way of using it for anything useful.

Just to clarify, the Casimir effect isnt ZPE is it? I was under the impression that the virtual particles were ZPE. Lethalfang, could you clear this up for me plz?

lethalfang
September 17th, 2005, 02:30 AM
True, a random conglomeration of energy just sitting there, with no way of using it for anything useful.

Just to clarify, the Casimir effect isnt ZPE is it? I was under the impression that the virtual particles were ZPE. Lethalfang, could you clear this up for me plz?

One can argue that Casimir effect is a consequence of zero point energy, but the point is that Casimir Force is not infinite nor perpetual, i.e. the amount of energy is finite.
Casimir force occurs when you have two plane sheets very close to each other, so close that some virtual particles are too "large" to exist in this region. Therefore, there will be a higher concentration of virtual particles outside than there is inside, creating a force pushing the two sheets together.
The Casimir effect is not unlike the suction, i.e. higher concentration of air molecules outside than there is inside.
You can also find similar effect in water solution, a well known phenomenon is given a fancy name called the depletion force: when you have large molecules and small molecules in water, the large molecules will attract to each other, because once large molecules come together, the small molecules cannot get in between these large molecules, so there is a higher concentration of small molecules outside than there is inside, pushing the large molecules together.
No one has ever claimed vacuum suction or depletion force to be source of infinite zero point energy. They are, along with the Casimir force, simply a consequence of concentration/pressure difference.

smartquin
September 17th, 2005, 03:34 AM
Cool. Thanks Lethalfang.

We all learn from each other. :)