Star Trek

Okay, as far as I know the uncertantity principle shows us that at the smallest possible magnification space is a seething foam of particles and antiparticles that pop into existence briefly before annihilating one another leaving behind only energy which drives the expansion of the universe, and is referred to as dark energy. Stop me if my understanding of this phenomenon is incorrect...

My question, could controlled annihilation of matter and antimatter somehow increase Hubble's constant locally?

Something similar to this (assuming my assumptions are correct) could be used to drive the expansion region behind a warp drive perhaps? I kinda like the idea of them being driven by matter antimatter annihilation... Now all there is to figure out is the contraction of space, and the bubble itself...

Quote (4_of_20 @ July 22 2009, 10:40 pm)

Okay, as far as I know the uncertantity principle shows us that at the smallest possible magnification space is a seething foam of particles and antiparticles that pop into existence briefly before annihilating one another leaving behind only energy which drives the expansion of the universe, and is referred to as dark energy. Stop me if my understanding of this phenomenon is incorrect... My question, could controlled annihilation of matter and antimatter somehow increase Hubble's constant locally? Something similar to this (assuming my assumptions are correct) could be used to drive the expansion region behind a warp drive perhaps? I kinda like the idea of them being driven by matter antimatter annihilation... Now all there is to figure out is the contraction of space, and the bubble itself...

Good Question, virtual pair production is a factor of the uncertainty of the amount of energy lock up in the fabric of space itself.

If you some how drain a region of space of some of energy you could literally speed up the Velocity of Light. There is an interesting article on this at this site:

http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw43.html

By use of the Casmir effect we could literally create a FTL space craft..Suppression these Vacuum fluctuation would create a region with negative energy density and literally travel at any speed you want..

How would we apply such a suppression of vacuum fluctuations on a macroscopic scales, such as to engulf our star ship?

Quote (4_of_20 @ July 24 2009, 3:06 am)

How would we apply such a suppression of vacuum fluctuations on a macroscopic scales, such as to engulf our star ship?

Wow, if i could solve that one i would get a noble prize in physics.  

Best guess would be using a cloud of nanobots, each design to push nanosize plates together to create a region of negative vacuum energy around a star ship.

Quote

Okay, as far as I know the uncertantity principle shows us that at the smallest possible magnification space is a seething foam of particles and antiparticles that pop into existence briefly before annihilating one another leaving behind only energy which drives the expansion of the universe, and is referred to as dark energy. Stop me if my understanding of this phenomenon is incorrect... My question, could controlled annihilation of matter and antimatter somehow increase Hubble's constant locally? Something similar to this (assuming my assumptions are correct) could be used to drive the expansion region behind a warp drive perhaps? I kinda like the idea of them being driven by matter antimatter annihilation... Now all there is to figure out is the contraction of space, and the bubble itself...

The Universe does not expand as this would suggest an edge to the Universe itself and would allow for a religious assumption to what was on the outside of the Universe, the Universe is infinite and does not expand, only a galaxy will expand and or contract.

Quote

Wow, if i could solve that one i would get a noble prize in physics.   Best guess would be using a cloud of nanobots, each design to push nanosize plates together to create a region of negative vacuum energy around a star ship.

Or we could look at how a blackhole works. We know that a blackhole has an immense amount of gravity present that pulls all of the particles to it's center that is within it's gravitational perimeter.  We would need to invert this function so that instead of pulling particles into the center, the effect of the gravity would be exerted in a spherical form upon the particles within local space. Now since the force of exertion would only force the particles away we would need to contain the particles within a localized space. The localized space would created by adding five more spheres that are tangent to one another. The six gravitons gravity would then compress the particles within the local space to create an extreme amount of energetic release.

Quote (dryson @ July 26 2009, 11:04 am)

Quote Okay, as far as I know the uncertantity principle shows us that at the smallest possible magnification space is a seething foam of particles and antiparticles that pop into existence briefly before annihilating one another leaving behind only energy which drives the expansion of the universe, and is referred to as dark energy. Stop me if my understanding of this phenomenon is incorrect... My question, could controlled annihilation of matter and antimatter somehow increase Hubble's constant locally? Something similar to this (assuming my assumptions are correct) could be used to drive the expansion region behind a warp drive perhaps? I kinda like the idea of them being driven by matter antimatter annihilation... Now all there is to figure out is the contraction of space, and the bubble itself... The Universe does not expand as this would suggest an edge to the Universe itself and would allow for a religious assumption to what was on the outside of the Universe, the Universe is infinite and does not expand, only a galaxy will expand and or contract.

proof of this? We have proof of the expansion from galactic redshifts mapped by  edwin Hubble, see :

http://www.wwu.edu/depts/skywise/hubble_history.html

and by the observation of Cosmic Background radiation:

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/bb_tests_cmb.html

which gives evident of the Big Bang.

as for what outside the universe, there is no need for any regilion assumption as several solutions of relativity basically allows for our universe to be Finite and boundless, a concept support by Einstein and even Hawkings.
In Hawkings "Universe in a Nutshell" he furthers this argument, by hold that a universe that his finite but boundless has no beginning or end point, and no need for a creator. Hawkings himself declared that this point would not possess any 'special' status. It would be akin to any other point in a circle - or more accurately, a globe. Hawkings states rather plainly that his model proposes a boundless, yet finite universe - without any special points in space or time. He covers this in Universe in a Nutshell.

Quote

proof of this? We have proof of the expansion from galactic redshifts mapped by ¿edwin Hubble

GALACTIC EXPANSION is the correct term used not Universal Expansion. Galactic refers to a galaxy which is a collection of solar systems which is a collection of atoms in the form of planets and suns that reside in the Universe.

The Universe does not expand and any attempt to correlate that because the galaxy is expanding then so must the Universe is completely unrelated.

Galaxy and Universe are two different terms that do not mean the same thing.

Quote (dryson @ July 26 2009, 1:31 pm)

Quote proof of this? We have proof of the expansion from galactic redshifts mapped by ?edwin Hubble GALACTIC EXPANSION is the correct term used not Universal Expansion. Galactic refers to a galaxy which is a collection of solar systems which is a collection of atoms in the form of planets and suns that reside in the Universe. The Universe does not expand and any attempt to correlate that because the galaxy is expanding then so must the Universe is completely unrelated. Galaxy and Universe are two different terms that do not mean the same thing.

No Galactic redshift is the correct term, as it a measure of their Velocities as a function of their distant from earth. This show that the universe is expanding.

Our Galaxy is not what expanding ( As least not that we can detect) but is moving just like the all the other galaxies that we view. Our just happen to be heading in direction of space with the rest of local cluster toward an object called the great attractor, but on the whole, all galaxies generally are moving away from each other due to the expansion of universe.

We can plot the motion of the stars in our own galaxy and see that they rotate around a common center. So his is different from what Hubble observed which isn't stellar motion. He mapped individual Galaxies and ploted their motions in relationship to our own!

Hubble's work is why Einstein commented that the Constant he added to his equation of General Relativity to show that the universe was static was his biggest mistakes!! With out this constant the Equations show that space either has to expand or contract. The First person to actually create a Model of universe using Einstein equations of Gravity show a universe that rapidly would expand.

This solution named after it creator , Desitter, is a prime example of what happen to space time under specific conditions. In Desitter case, his universe lack any matter, but it was the first hint that the universe around was not a static object.



These redshift show the motions of Galaxies not stars!!
This is not expansion of a galaxy but moment of galaxies in the universe!! As Edwin Hubble states:

" The motion of galaxies in the universe, in relation to each other, appears to be a smooth recession away from each other. The relative velocity of a galaxy to any observer is proportional to the distance from that observer. "

The differents of velocity as a function of Distant, is easily shown in the following graph,



So what you are stating is incorrect!!! This is an actual proof of universal expansion not Galactic expansion!!

Quote

So what you are stating is incorrect!!! This is an actual proof of universal expansion not Galactic expansion!!

Where does it say anything about the Universe, all I see is the term galaxy which relates to a certain number of solar systems that have planets and stars within the solar system that revolve around a sun or suns where the solar system then revolves around the galactic center where there are billions of suns located.

The Universe is what solar systems reside in and do not expand nor contract but are infinite. To say that the Universe is expanding is the same as saying that there is an edge to the Universe. Like I have asked repeatedly what happens when you come to the edge of the Universe? I guess we just fall off the edge of the Universe into what? More space?

Who'd have thought my thread would turn into an argument between dryson and lancer?

Lancer - nanobot's, cool. I never even thought of such a possibility. I think in stead of arguing with dryson you should get to work on one and get that nobel prize, hey?
Seriously though, is this your concept? Or a previously published work? If it's an old theory, do you have any links that explore this in further detail?

Dryson - I don't care. I don't even read your posts. Please stop bugging this forum, and go study astrology or something equally worthless.

Quote (4_of_20 @ July 27 2009, 1:36 am)

Who'd have thought my thread would turn into an argument between dryson and lancer? Lancer - nanobot's, cool. I never even thought of such a possibility. I think in stead of arguing with dryson you should get to work on one and get that nobel prize, hey? Seriously though, is this your concept? Or a previously published work? If it's an old theory, do you have any links that explore this in further detail? Dryson - I don't care. I don't even read your posts. Please stop bugging this forum, and go study astrology or something equally worthless.

Well the idea of using the casmir effect to lower the Vacuum energy is idea mention in the link i submitted. As for the Nanobots, well that from the King of scientific Sci Fi Arthur C Clarke.

In one of his last novel , he used nanobots equipped with Small Casmir plates to create microscopic region of negative energy. These bots were then use to open wormholes.

The Wormholes became the ultimate spie holes, allowing people to see any event, any where in the world. There was no blocking them, or hidding from them and all personal privately disappeared. Eventually they learn how to open wormhole into the past, even viewing historical events.


The name of the novel,was "The light of another Day", while the concept about it opening wormhole seem a bit far fretch, I can see using the same approach to achieve the effect as the Analog's article mention.

Lower Vacuum energy would allow you to slightly change the limit on the speed of light. Under the right conditions, this slight different can actually create a large FTL velocity. You still need to accelerate close to the speed of light to take advantage of the effect, but compare to the space surrounding the craft, you could be traveling several time the speed of light.

so look over the Link i gave again, it may be the first way we achieve FTL travel.

http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw43.html

Clarke, hey? What a legend...

I really like this nanobot idea and have been thinking it over recently... I was thinking about it in conjunction with the Obousy-Cleaver model too. The nanobots could be outside the warp bubble, manipulating the cosmological constant in the manner stated in the Obousy-Cleaver paper.

I thought of this because previously there was the problem of the ship being inside the bubble, and it having to manipulate the space surrounding the bubble, which it is cut off from by the bubble itself. Another intelligence outside it could do all this nasty work, and the crew can sit back and enjoy the ride. This is of course if the expansion/contraction doesn't destroy the bots, like it would to anything else in it's path.

Just a theory. If it doesn't work then suppressing the vacuum fluctuations it is. But I must ask, why is it that this method is not as popular as the Alcubierre model? It seems, somewhat... easier.

Now, I'll get to work on those nanobots if I could just remember where I left my intelligence...

Quote (4_of_20 @ July 30 2009, 10:17 pm)

Clarke, hey? What a legend... I really like this nanobot idea and have been thinking it over recently... I was thinking about it in conjunction with the Obousy-Cleaver model too. The nanobots could be outside the warp bubble, manipulating the cosmological constant in the manner stated in the Obousy-Cleaver paper. I thought of this because previously there was the problem of the ship being inside the bubble, and it having to manipulate the space surrounding the bubble, which it is cut off from by the bubble itself. Another intelligence outside it could do all this nasty work, and the crew can sit back and enjoy the ride. This is of course if the expansion/contraction doesn't destroy the bots, like it would to anything else in it's path. Just a theory. If it doesn't work then suppressing the vacuum fluctuations it is. But I must ask, why is it that this method is not as popular as the Alcubierre model? It seems, somewhat... easier. Now, I'll get to work on those nanobots if I could just remember where I left my intelligence...

LOL, because it base on Quantum mechanics.. When dealing with Space every one look to Relativity for solutions....

No serious, it may be on the count that the nature of Vacuum energy is still pretty much a mystery. Countless calculations show that alot of what Quantum Physics said should be happening to space and time doesn't really pan out. Massive amounts of energy should be lock into every cubic centimeter of space, we should be seeing space being warp on a scale that would easily be detected.

But the Casmir effect is a proven, according it does create a lower level energy region of space between the plates, but the region is tiny. There has been a paper submitteed a while back by the old NASA Break thru propulsion Group, that reviews attempt to use the Casmir effect to create oscillation in MEM, micro Electrical machines, and other means of using utilizing Vacuum forces to power a space craft by altering the energy make up of the vacuum.

see
http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/reports/2004/CR-2004-213311.pdf

The real pity is the fact that due to funds, Nasa disbanded the BTP Group..

Yeah, I remember that, it's a shame...