Hyperdrive Technology Thread

[boberth2o]

teleportation? now im not going to shoot down the idea of it but it would be practicly impossible. To sucessfully transport someone from one place to another it would take trillions of yottabytes( incase you dont know what a yottabyte is it's 1,208,925,819,614,629,174,706,176 bytes) to remember how to code ans label every atom, not molecules, and atoms are MOVING, IN NO RIGHT MIND COULD ANYTHING REMEMBER WERE ANY ATOM IS AT ONE TIME, AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO REMEMBER GOOGLEPLeX OF A GOOGLEPLEX FOR EVER ATOM IN THE HUMAN BODY. We're talking about number that would be ungodly. Even for the scifi world like stargate.

Oh and theres this

Ultimately, it is all THEORY. None of it is proven, and at best it is just popular in academia. I don't think too highly of academia too often. They can be closed to new ideas, and overly-protective of the old ones. That isn't to say that some 'old' ideas aren't right, just that they should always be up for debate. I can't claim to know too much about it, but I'm currently interested in Heim Theory right now. It allows for the possiblity of hyperspace travel, and the guy even designed a theoretical hyperdrive engine. He was VERY popular back in the day, but because of severe disabilities (caused by a lab accident in his youth) he shunned the spotlight. As a result he went into relative obscurity, along with his theories. He was a contemporary of Einsteins, and Godard was VERY interested in his ideas about potential hyperspace travel.

I'm not saying the guy was right, I'm just saying he's got some very interesting ideas, that I think merit further research. Unfortunately, many in academia would rather bash his theories than actually study them to find out how relevant they are. In his hyperdrive engine design he himself used an artificial gravity generation machine to move into and through hyperspace. At least as far as I understand it he did.

As far as Hyperspace and Subspace go, they are all theoretical and there are alternate versions of each, both in science and science fiction. Here, we are dealing with sci-fi, so I've taken my own ideas from what I know in science and applied them to what is supposed to be happening in the fiction. We could go round and round all day long about which theory is better, or more accepted, or has more evidence, or... etc. etc. etc. I'm not going to do that. My post about hyperdrive technology was NOT meant to be a scientific paper on the subject, rather a detailed explanation of how it might possibly work.

As to the whole 'bowling ball on a mattress' analogy... I am very well aware of it, and in fact it had a LOT to do with my description about the focused potential of a gravitational field such as what a planet might have. The big difference being that a planet's gravity well occurs in all three dimensions, not just the two in the analogy. It is also theorized that gravity's effects are translated into other dimensions, and that that is why gravity seems so weak. In other words, its power is being diluted because it is working in more than just the three dimensions we exist in. It is because of that theory that some have surmised that gravity could be the key to creating a portal into other dimensions. But... like I said. It is all theory. No one is going to prove anything here.

Now it seems that you are writing contradictorily statements that you had said in the past.

What I was tring to say before was that you CANT make a supermassive amount of controlled gravity to rip a hole in the fabic of space. Even if that were true why dont ships or better yet planets be drawn toward the ship when it enters and exits hyperspace?That would be saying that a blackhole is a wormhole, its not, its just a huge gravitationial feild created by a star collapsing in on itself. and last you still havent explain the errors in your post yet.

[Seastallion]

Yea, but the point is that this theory is based in fact, it wasn't just a shot in the dark. I mean, "energize"? Energize what? What are they talking about?

Well, if you ever watched the show (and I'm assuming you have), then you should know that "energize" is simply a command. NOT a description per se of what happens during teleportation. I assume it refers to the fact (in the show) that there is an 'energy' transfer, ergo...

Ultimately someone compensated for that mistake and came up with a whole new theory about how the transporter, like the coding of our molecular structure into a massive hard drive, then transferring that data to another hard drive. Kind of Stargatesque. The point is, Roddenberry is creative, and other people fill in the blanks. Stargate is built on theory, not imagination. Doesn't Amanda Tapping read astrophysics books in her spare time?

I don't disagree. Roddenberry was never a scientist, he just came up with a nifty 'magical' way to solve a budget and visual FX problem. It was the young fans that became scientist (largely as a result of their fandom) who later filled in the actual possible scientific details. There are in fact multiple theoretical forms of teleportation, not just one. Some are better known than others. One of them (if you've ever read Battlefield Earth) is a teleportation technique that actually swapped the space in two locations regardless of what was within the area. I don't know if anyone has ever tried to figure out if it could be done, but I wouldn't be suprised if someone eventually did. Star Trek teleportation is significantly different, and not at all the same.

I do beg to differ on one point. Stargate IS about imagination. They DO use science as a basis for potential plots and devices, but much of it is made up to some degree. That is WHY it is 'science' fiction. They use science, but it is ultimately all fictional as far as real world science goes at this point. That isn't to say that in the future, some of it couldn't become reality. It might.

But if you ask me, we should just try reversing the polarity. Or maybe it has something to do with the quantum emitter?[/quote]

[Seastallion]

teleportation? now im not going to shoot down the idea of it but it would be practicly impossible. To sucessfully transport someone from one place to another it would take trillions of yottabytes( incase you dont know what a yottabyte is it's 1,208,925,819,614,629,174,706,176 bytes) to remember how to code ans label every atom, not molecules, and atoms are MOVING, IN NO RIGHT MIND COULD ANYTHING REMEMBER WERE ANY ATOM IS AT ONE TIME, AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO REMEMBER GOOGLEPLeX OF A GOOGLEPLEX FOR EVER ATOM IN THE HUMAN BODY. We're talking about number that would be ungodly. Even for the scifi world like stargate.

Yeah. Like I said, there are different possible theories on it, and not all of them involve having to use that kind of memory. We don't even know for sure exactly how the teleportation on Stargate works exactly. Carter did mention that crystals hold information on a quantum level, so it is possible that MAYBE those things could handle the kind of number crunching your talking about. By the way, I was aware of that as well. So far very little you've said is new to me. I've done quite a bit of reading and study of my own, in times past. I actually own several science books specifically about Star Trek and other things as well.

Oh and theres this...

*quote of previous Seastallion post*

Now it seems that you are writing contradictorily statements that you had said in the past.

What specifically are you referring to? I like specifics sometimes. This is one of those times. Specifically, what did I say that was contradictory? You said it 'seems' as though I wrote contradictory statements, but you didn't say what they were.

What I was trying to say before was that you CANT make a supermassive amount of controlled gravity to rip a hole in the fabic of space. Even if that were true why dont ships or better yet planets be drawn toward the ship when it enters and exits hyperspace?

For one thing, the 'portal', 'tear', 'hole', 'hyperspace window', or whatever the hell you want to call it wouldn't be in existence for very long. For another thing, their effects would be highly localized and concentrated to a very small area of space. For yet another thing, a planet wouldn't fit into it, and I doubt there would be anywhere near enough force exerted on said planets to even be affected on any consequential level.

So in short, a 'hyperspace window' (as a term generalization) would be far too small in size, scope, and duration to effect anything as massive as a planet. It would only be just large enough to allow the ship creating it passage, unless the ship made it bigger for some reason. Such as towing a large asteroid through hyperspace as they did in Stargate. The gravitational effects would be so highly focused and short of duration that it would be like trying to knock a train of its track by throwing a ping-pong ball at it. Not very likely.

As to ships, like I said the affect of said 'window' would be highly localized, and said ship would likely have to be directly in line of sight to the 'opening' to be pulled in. Any pull into the 'window' would probably be highly unidirectional, not unfocused like a planet or blackholes gravity well. The ship generating it WOULD be in direct line of sight to it, because it was creating it in the first place.

That would be saying that a blackhole is a wormhole, its not, its just a huge gravitationial feild created by a star collapsing in on itself. and last you still havent explain the errors in your post yet.

Actually, some scientist DO think that there are wormholes attached to blackholes. Some scientist believe that those wormholes may connect to other universes, possibly even creating them in the first place. The point of my previous post was to tell you that I'm not going to go into a point counter point with you over theories. They ARE just theories. They've never been completely proven or disproven.

MY point was that you were using theories to try and PROVE what I was saying was invalid. Using unproven ideas to prove unproven ideas wrong. You see the irony? In any case, most of what you wrote was an explanation of various theories. Not so much an argument against what I said about how a hyperdrive might work. In fact the most argumentative part of your first post was the part about the 'tear' and the bending of space-time. Almost everything else was an explanation of various ideas, not so much arguements for OR against.

On the specific point about hyperspace having nothing to do with gravity or the force of gravity, then why did Burkhard Heim (an actual scientist of high esteem in his time) think it did? I'm sure he probably knew more about it then either of us. But, like I said, there are various theories on the construct of the cosmos, and NONE of them have been proven definitively correct, most ESPECIALLY not String Theory, cool though it may be. Heim Theory does at least make actual predictions on things that could be tested. It is just that few have bothered to try. It is only just now starting to get a bit of attention again, after years of relative obscurity.

[VolrathEvincar]

teleportation? now im not going to shoot down the idea of it but it would be practicly impossible. To sucessfully transport someone from one place to another it would take trillions of yottabytes( incase you dont know what a yottabyte is it's 1,208,925,819,614,629,174,706,176 bytes) to remember how to code ans label every atom, not molecules, and atoms are MOVING, IN NO RIGHT MIND COULD ANYTHING REMEMBER WERE ANY ATOM IS AT ONE TIME, AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO REMEMBER GOOGLEPLeX OF A GOOGLEPLEX FOR EVER ATOM IN THE HUMAN BODY. We're talking about number that would be ungodly. Even for the scifi world like stargate.

Oh and theres this




Now it seems that you are writing contradictorily statements that you had said in the past.

What I was tring to say before was that you CANT make a supermassive amount of controlled gravity to rip a hole in the fabic of space. Even if that were true why dont ships or better yet planets be drawn toward the ship when it enters and exits hyperspace?That would be saying that a blackhole is a wormhole, its not, its just a huge gravitationial feild created by a star collapsing in on itself. and last you still havent explain the errors in your post yet.

What about biosynthetic memory? We would be able to store the the actual yottabytes of information in an appropriate entity. An actual DNA memory storage device might be able to do it. Besides, isn't basically EVERYTHING we are saying conjecture anyway?

[VolrathEvincar]

I do beg to differ on one point. Stargate IS about imagination. They DO use science as a basis for potential plots and devices, but much of it is made up to some degree. That is WHY it is 'science' fiction. They use science, but it is ultimately all fictional as far as real world science goes at this point. That isn't to say that in the future, some of it couldn't become reality. It might.

No doubt. I think that is the basic idea in SciFi, recognizing that we can become more than we are. I think that is the whole point, what makes it attractive to so many people.

[AcidSquid]

Well, Hyprspase is weird,
In math, Hyperspace is the "4th dimension" Now how would we be able to expierience anything that we wern't designed to see?

[AcidSquid]

BlackHoles do not 'tear' hole in our layer of space time it is an intense gravitational field that compresses att matter down to the size of an atom, but it does bend space, like a marbel on a bed sheet. If they did why are black holes super heavy, that would go against all the rules of general relativity. Otherwise it would be a drain for matter.



Here is the geometry of a blackhole





Now with quantium theory its different. Normally, quantum field theory models are considered in flat Minkowski space (or Euclidean space), which is an excellent approximation for weak gravitational fields like those on Earth. In the presence of strong gravitational fields, the principles of quantum field theory have to be modified. The spacetime is static so the theory is not fully relativistic in the sense of general relativity; it is not background independent nor generally covariant under the diffeomorphism group. The interpretation of excitations of quantum fields as particles becomes frame dependent. Hawking radiation is a prediction of this semiclassical approximation.
If you dont believe my check it out-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole





Hyperspace has nothing to do with gravity, if you were to use massive amount of controlled gravitational energy your ship ans hyperdrive would collaspe in on itself. and you cant say its coming from subspace because you have not accessed that dimension yet.

Now here, is Hyperspace

Hyperspace theories are concerned with theoretical systems that have more than the familiar three spatial dimensions. Hyperspace theories are largely a mathematical theory but their developers often attempt to make them of use to physicists. Hyperspace theorists generally believe that the laws of nature are simpler in higher dimensions.

Superstring theories are a particular class of hyperspace theories that are of interest to physicists who are attempting to find a fundamental physical theory that unites all known physical forces and particles. Such hyperspace theories suggest the possibility that everything in the universe can be described in terms of fundamental physical components that vibrate within the constraints imposed by the multiple extended and compact dimensions of hyperspace.

There is a completely separate class of hyperspace theory where "hyperspace" is generally seen as the flat space 'above' (ie faster than) ordinary space. These are called 'Flat hyperspace' theories because they generally assume that space is completely flat and rigidly tied at three spatial dimensions that are fixed in dimensionality up to the largest scales. In most of these theories time is regarded as a single point and not seen as a separate 'dimension'. Obviously gravity cannot then be explained by spatial curvature and another explanation is needed - one method is to allow local inertial frames that can accelerate relative to each other, other possibilities include quantum theories of gravity which are based on things like gravitons or quantum states. These hyperspace theories obviously conflict with some parts of relativity, and are not generally seen today as part of mainstream science. We must remember however that Quantum mechanics and Relativity themselves also have severe incompatibilities. Even today though we find people using a notional version of flat hyperspace at least in astronomy, where it makes thinking about the universe far easier. Astronomers constantly consider distances and measurements of light years and greater even though by definition these are vastly outside the light cone of space and strictly don't exist.


Spacetime

In physics, spacetime is a mathematical model that combines three-dimensional space and one-dimensional time into a single construct called the space-time continuum, in which time plays the role of the 4th dimension. According to Euclidean space perception, our universe has three dimensions of space, and one dimension of time. By combining space and time into a single manifold, physicists have significantly simplified a good deal of physical theory, as well as described in a more uniform way the workings of the universe at both the supergalactic and subatomic levels.

In classical mechanics, the use of spacetime over Euclidean space is optional. In relativistic contexts, however, time cannot be separated from the three dimensions of space as it depends on an object's velocity relative to the speed of light

HEY!
I saw that on the simpsons

[Locutus_Of_Borg]

lol me to
wonder if there is a way using the hyperdrive to travel through time
because think of Star Trek The Voyager Home, sling shot around the sun at maximum speeds and you'll travel back in time, but since subspace is a sun short of actually having a sun, maybe a.............something to make us go back in time or foward at that

[boberth2o]

So far very little you've said is new to me. I've done quite a bit of reading and study of my own, in times past. I actually own several science books specifically about Star Trek and other things as well.

I currently studing at osu and a have a minor in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics, so i know quite a deal more about these things than you think i do and when i say that some of the principles that you stated before are DEFYING that laws of physics, and its given that this is scifi but there are exceptions to a point.

For one thing, the 'portal', 'tear', 'hole', 'hyperspace window', or whatever the hell you want to call it wouldn't be in existence for very long. For another thing, their effects would be highly localized and concentrated to a very small area of space. For yet another thing, a planet wouldn't fit into it, and I doubt there would be anywhere near enough force exerted on said planets to even be affected on any consequential level.

You CANT localize gravity, it pulls anything and everything towards it that doesnt have a force pushing it the other way. You are talking about creating a gravitational force that would be equilivant to the black hole at the center of the milky way and it having no effect on any objects that are near it. And NO scientists DO NOT believe that black holes are wormholes. if they are explain to me how a super strong gravitational force can create a valid link to another place?

On the specific point about hyperspace having nothing to do with gravity or the force of gravity, then why did Burkhard Heim (an actual scientist of high esteem in his time) think it did? I'm sure he probably knew more about it then either of us. But, like I said, there are various theories on the construct of the cosmos, and NONE of them have been proven definitively correct, most ESPECIALLY not String Theory, cool though it may be. Heim Theory does at least make actual predictions on things that could be tested. It is just that few have bothered to try. It is only just now starting to get a bit of attention again, after years of relative obscurity.

The mathematics behind Heim's theory requires extending spacetime with extra dimensions; various formulations by Heim and his successors involve six, eight, or twelve dimensions. Within the quantum spacetime of Heim theory, elementary particles are represented as "hermetry forms" or multidimensional structures of space. Heim has claimed that his theory yields particle masses directly from fundamental physical constants and that the resulting masses are in agreement with experiment; however, many of the particles whose masses he calculated (specifically the hadrons) are now known to be composite particles and not elementary after all. For Heim, this composite nature was an expression of internal, six-dimensional structure. After his death, others have continued with his multi-dimensional "quantum hyperspace" framework. Most notable are the theoretical generalizations put forth by Walter Dröscher, who worked in collaboration with Heim at some length. Their combined theories are also known as "Heim-Droescher" theories


Heim attempted to resolve incompatibilities between quantum theory and general relativity.
In physics, unified field theory is an attempt to unify all the fundamental forces and the interactions between elementary particles into a single theoretical framework. The term was coined by Einstein who attempted to reconcile the general theory of relativity with electromagnetism in a single field theory. His quest proved elusive and a unified field theory, sometimes grandiosely referred to as the Theory of Everything (TOE, for short), has remained the holy grail for physicists, the long-sought theory which would explain the nature and behavior of all matter.

MY point was that you were using theories to try and PROVE what I was saying was invalid

So your saying that your correct and that the fundimental law of physics is wrong?

So in short, a 'hyperspace window' (as a term generalization) would be far too small in size, scope, and duration to effect anything as massive as a planet. It would only be just large enough to allow the ship creating it passage, unless the ship made it bigger for some reason. Such as towing a large asteroid through hyperspace as they did in Stargate.

A black hole is the size of a couple atoms if that, and it creates a huge gravity field soo. it would most likely affect the over all surrounding area.
what i am tring to disprove is that your saying that hyperdrive uses a gravity field to rip a hole into subspace. unless your can prove your statement at the beginning of the thread like your a theoretical physicist.

Subspace might be described as another layer or dimension of normal space through which gravitational effects are translated

Can you prove it, c'mon tell me pleasee. . .
Unless poking holes in your thinly put together ideas?

[boberth2o]

What about biosynthetic memory? We would be able to store the the actual yottabytes of information in an appropriate entity. An actual DNA memory storage device might be able to do it. Besides, isn't basically EVERYTHING we are saying conjecture anyway?

Scientists are currently working on a 'bio-hard drive' so say. Yet they have not been able to create one. Thats mostly likely because brain tissue is not like the computer that im typing on. Our computers can take complex mathematical equations and find them out in seconds, but it would take a human a couple of minutes and a piece of paper to get the answer. However if you teach a little kid the letter 'E' they can recongize it in any form or shape, that a computer cannot do. An further yet computers have separate components (processing and memory), but in the brain each cell holds information ans processes information. if we can find a way to harness that type of processing power we would be able to hold immense amounts of information in the size of a normal hard drive. Once they do it I would love to have one, it would be sweet!!

[SoulReaver]

Unlike warp technology, most of the speed is generated by Hyperspace itself, kind of like a ZPM, which draws the power it needs from subspace

if that were so then it'd only be a question of time before subspace travel became impossible

[SoulReaver]

But if you ask me, we should just try reversing the polarity. Or maybe it has something to do with the quantum emitter?

d00d you're so wrong - I say we should reconfigure lateral sensor arrays :|

[Seastallion]

I currently studing at osu and a have a minor in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics, so i know quite a deal more about these things than you think i do and when i say that some of the principles that you stated before are DEFYING that laws of physics, and its given that this is scifi but there are exceptions to a point.

Well, honestly, I'm glad for you and congratulations. On the other hand, from what I've gathered so far, what I've said hasn't defyed the laws of physics per se, only the more accepted THEORIES. There is a difference. Evidence isn't proof, popularity isn't confirmation, and beliefs aren't necessarily reality. All I'm saying is that we have a very long way to go in our understanding of the outer edges of science. That is what we are discussing here. I'm not saying that current theories or ideas surrounding higher physics are wrong, but I am saying that we don't have a complete picture yet, and we shouldn't just assume that some things are impossible or 'just ain't so'.

You CANT localize gravity, it pulls anything and everything towards it that doesnt have a force pushing it the other way. You are talking about creating a gravitational force that would be equilivant to the black hole at the center of the milky way and it having no effect on any objects that are near it. And NO scientists DO NOT believe that black holes are wormholes. if they are explain to me how a super strong gravitational force can create a valid link to another place?

I don't claim to be an expert. I'm an amateur enthusiest at best. I can admit that. On the other hand, I'm not an idiot. I've done a lot of reading, about many different theories (as I'm sure you have.), and what I've learned has led me to believe that things aren't nearly as simple as is commonly accepted. One of those things I've learned is that some of the latest ideas on gravity is that there may be different forms of it, beyond the simple gravity and antigravity. Dr. Ning Yi has a device that produces gravity like force fields whose effects are contained within a tight beam stretching right up into space (from the ground) potentially. They have specifically stated that the force field is NOT gravity per se, but the field MAY be a variant of gravity.

If you are student of the topic, how can you NOT know about General Relativity and the prediction of possible wormholes and such? The whole thing about 'White Holes', etc.? The whole theory about blackholes possibly creating baby universes? The problem of course being that you would never survive long enough to actually find out, seeing as the blackhole would pretty much kill you long before you got there. I didn't say that scientist believe that blackholes ARE wormholes per se, but rather that they are strongly connected to them, in theory anyways.

Also, I don't know if you watched the special on the science behind stargate at the beginning of the season, but they had a scientist (can't remember his name) SPECIFICALLY saying that they theoretically might use gravity to create a wormhole creating a link between to locations. That guy isn't just a student, rather a full blown scientist actually getting paid to do the stuff. I'd say he probably knows more than either of us.

The mathematics behind Heim's theory requires extending spacetime with extra dimensions; various formulations by Heim and his successors involve six, eight, or twelve dimensions. Within the quantum spacetime of Heim theory, elementary particles are represented as "hermetry forms" or multidimensional structures of space. Heim has claimed that his theory yields particle masses directly from fundamental physical constants and that the resulting masses are in agreement with experiment; however, many of the particles whose masses he calculated (specifically the hadrons) are now known to be composite particles and not elementary after all. For Heim, this composite nature was an expression of internal, six-dimensional structure. After his death, others have continued with his multi-dimensional "quantum hyperspace" framework. Most notable are the theoretical generalizations put forth by Walter Dröscher, who worked in collaboration with Heim at some length. Their combined theories are also known as "Heim-Droescher" theories

Heim attempted to resolve incompatibilities between quantum theory and general relativity.
In physics, unified field theory is an attempt to unify all the fundamental forces and the interactions between elementary particles into a single theoretical framework. The term was coined by Einstein who attempted to reconcile the general theory of relativity with electromagnetism in a single field theory. His quest proved elusive and a unified field theory, sometimes grandiosely referred to as the Theory of Everything (TOE, for short), has remained the holy grail for physicists, the long-sought theory which would explain the nature and behavior of all matter.

Yeah, I knew it. Most of it anyways. But, so what? Extra-dimensional physics is a common belief these days. There are those who believe (particularly Super-string advocates) that there are either 10 or 11 dimensions, and possibly more. Fine, I have no beef with that. Just because Heim got a FEW things wrong doesn't mean he was completely wrong. I'd say what we know is STILL far too little to dismiss it outright. As you've said above, there can be (and are) multiple variations of a single theory, one of which may be closer to the truth than others. It isn't uncommon for old discarded theories to suddenly gain new life based upon new observations. Like I said before, all I'm saying is that we still don't know enough to be absolute in our judgements. Not for a long time yet.

So your saying that your correct and that the fundimental law of physics is wrong?

No. I'm saying that you what you are calling LAWS so far, have only been well accepted THEORIES. They are NOT the same thing. Unless there is something I missed. Correct me if I'm wrong, but when when or if you do, please be specific about what you are referring to.

A black hole is the size of a couple atoms if that, and it creates a huge gravity field soo. it would most likely affect the over all surrounding area.

No doubts whatsoever that a blackhole is extremely small at its inner most point, but we ARE talking about a star that was so massive it collapsed in on itself. That is a LOT more than a few atoms, so it has to go someplace. That is part of the whole 'baby universe' thing that physicist Alan Guth is currently claiming might be the case. In any case, the gravitational energy that a ship might theoretically use to create a hyperspace window is a very different beast altogether. It would be one of those 'variants' I mentioned above, not the 'normal' garden variety of gravity. Also, it would be controlled, not a raging beast like a blackhole whose effects are running rampant. In addition, the amount of necessary energy would NOT be equivalent to a blackhole in the first place. I was thinking possibly the sum potential of a moon or planet or something, only concentrated at a single point rather than spread out like a normal gravity field. That isn't to say I'm right, it is only a guess. But then so is most of science, particularly the really juicy stuff. Granted, they are educated guesses, but I'm not going in completely blind either. I'm just allowing for more possibility. Anyways, what we're talking about IS fiction. So we need not sweat it.

what i am tring to disprove is that your saying that hyperdrive uses a gravity field to rip a hole into subspace. unless your can prove your statement at the beginning of the thread like your a theoretical physicist.

Well, I'm NOT a theoretical physicist, nor did I ever to claim be. I'm just saying it MIGHT be possible. But then, so did Burkhard Heim, and he WAS a theoretical physicist. Maybe he didn't say 'rip a hole into subspace' (I didn't say that either by the way, I said 'in the fabric of space', as in 'normal' space), but his ideas DID convey a method of passage INTO hyperspace (or whatever you want to call it) that would drastically reduce travel times making interstellar travel potentially possible. And he DID use the force of gravity as the means of such transit. I doubt you or I are as smart as him, and he WAS highly respected in his time. Since then he and his theories have gone into relative obscurity. Just to say that he was wrong on a certain point, isn't to say he was completely wrong. Going back to the earlier discussion point. I'll not repeat all that, as it is unnecessary.

Can you prove it, c'mon tell me pleasee. . .
Unless poking holes in your thinly put together ideas?

Nope. I can't prove it. Nor do I have to. But you can't disprove it either. Like I said, we're dealing with theories here. We aren't going to prove or disprove anything here in a forum about a fictional tv show. Just a possible theory, and no more than that. At least until someone actually builds a ship that can go and do it. That would be cool.

I don't see how you poked any holes in 'my' ideas really. I've admitted they are only theories at best. The whole point of this subforum is to discuss how things in a fictional tv show MIGHT be possible. I never said that I was bang on correct. I just provided an illustration that might serve as a reasonable explanation of how it might be possible. That is all.

No need to get too worked up over it.

[boberth2o]

Well that first thing i have to say is that some of the physics 'theories' arn't theories. All of the classical pyhsicals theories are proven like gravity. if you dont beleive me jump off your roof and see what happens lol.

Blackholes are immensely dense objects. Take a nuetron star towards the end of its life, it will eventually become unstable. Since that gravitational force is still there that unstablity of the star will lead to its down fall. It will collaspe in on it self. in the universe size doesnt matter. So the star could collaspe only down to a size that the gravity will hold it at. Then because the gravity will increase due to the decreased size of the star gravitational field becomes more powerful. and that more stuff that come within the range of that field will be drawn toward is and 'sucked' into it and thus increaning the gravity which will then decrease the size of the blackhole. off the subject the Theory of time dilation is proven beleive it or not.
Voyager I was a probe that we are all aware of that was sent out into the solar system. In earily March 1977 voyager passed jupiter and took pictures over a series of 60 days and sent them back to us. When we got thoses pictures we found that the time was different on the probe at the time of the pictures that the one on earth. They compensated for the time that the radio signals travel and the other problems that they incountered but they still had a problem with the clock on the probe being slow. After some time they found that when voyager was approaching jupiter that time from the video and picture got slower and then faster again as it left the gravitational field. The same happened for Voyager II, Pioneers 10 and 11.

Amazing ain't it, well I thought so, and we now know that gravity is tranlated into the time dimension of the universe.

[Seastallion]

Well that first thing i have to say is that some of the physics 'theories' arn't theories. All of the classical pyhsicals theories are proven like gravity. if you dont beleive me jump off your roof and see what happens lol.

Well, duh. Of COURSE gravity's existence is NOT in question. What IS in question is precisely how it works and why. General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, both the most accepted 'THEORIES' there are, are not yet LAW. They're dang close, yes, that is true, but they still have gaps that have yet to be filled in. Which is of course the whole point of scientists trying to come up with a G.U.T. (Grand Unified Theory or sort of another way for saying T.O.E.)

Blackholes are immensely dense objects. Take a nuetron star towards the end of its life, it will eventually become unstable. Since that gravitational force is still there that unstablity of the star will lead to its down fall. It will collaspe in on it self. in the universe size doesnt matter. So the star could collaspe only down to a size that the gravity will hold it at. Then because the gravity will increase due to the decreased size of the star gravitational field becomes more powerful. and that more stuff that come within the range of that field will be drawn toward is and 'sucked' into it and thus increaning the gravity which will then decrease the size of the blackhole. off the subject the Theory of time dilation is proven beleive it or not.

Yeah, I knew that. There have been various examples of it discovered. One experiment involved two jets with highly precise clocks in sync with each other, and them flying in opposite directions, and then when they landed, they compared the two clocks. They found that the clocks were out of sync. Not by a lot, but enough to prove that there was a time dilation effect at work. Actually, Time Dilation is one of the biggest reasons for the desire to find a way to use hyperspace or some similarly advanced concept so as to sidestep Time Dilation. You can't very well have an interstellar civilization if your ships crossing back and forth between your planets, end up having hundreds or thousands of years pass during the trips. It would all be pointless.

Voyager I was a probe that we are all aware of that was sent out into the solar system. In earily March 1977 voyager passed jupiter and took pictures over a series of 60 days and sent them back to us. When we got thoses pictures we found that the time was different on the probe at the time of the pictures that the one on earth. They compensated for the time that the radio signals travel and the other problems that they incountered but they still had a problem with the clock on the probe being slow. After some time they found that when voyager was approaching jupiter that time from the video and picture got slower and then faster again as it left the gravitational field. The same happened for Voyager II, Pioneers 10 and 11.

Amazing ain't it, well I thought so, and we now know that gravity is tranlated into the time dimension of the universe.

Yep, it IS amazing. Kind of cool too. So far (according to theory and supported by evidence), the only two things that we know of that will cause time dilation is intense gravity and speeds approaching that of light. The jet experiment worked because the rotation of the planet increased the relative difference in speed between the two jets. The jet travelling with the Earth's rotation had the extra boost in speed inherit with the planets spin. The jet travelling against the Earth's rotation had its overall relative speed reduced for the same reason. All of that worked together to give the jets enough relative speed difference to make time dilation a detectable event. I thought THAT was pretty cool too.