0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
... have a portal on a planet that all the inhabitants go through to another to end up on another planet which also has a portal on it which the inhabitants come through... Any thoughts?
I have posted a TOET (theory of every thing) that I think explains pretty well what gravity is and what matter is. just go to the new theory section to read it. it's quite simple, just think of it like this. Imagine a pond, when you throw a rock into the water you displace it and as a result you get waves in exactly the same way the big bang displaced space to get waves of light when light forms a photon cloud/electron/quark it bends space like a whirlpool inward this effect is gravity.
ScientificSorcerer No more links or adverts to your idea in New Theories please. many thanks
You will need a lot of 'exotic matter' for a wormhole, to keep it from breaking up, also it is a function of gravity as I remember, which makes it a 'hollow world' maybe? You can always place some black holes in a stable configuration inside it, two might work. Maybe one would work better, placed in a perfect center, 'rotating' as being 'at rest' with the 'Earth shell'? I'm not sure there. You will have to assume a ideal perfect sphere, I think, to begin with which should make visitors rather suspicious. =Why not use a 'quantum machine' breaking you down into quanta, connected via entanglement to some other place, that then retrieve the information? It will need to use light speed though to send the code for that exact 'copy' that will be built up, each time. So those who use it will not only be lost in space, but also in time. And then it also becomes a question if toughts, and the way you think, will be the same? Although that one is highly philosophical.
So there is LOTS of science FICTION on how to bend space time. Lots of different proposed (mostly bs) ideas. Now I am no nuclear physics phd albeit I do have a wealth of knowledge that applies to what I know. That last sentence is complicated seeing that I know nothing about anything nor does anyone else. We can only prove the science to a point. You don't even know that I exist. WHOO lets not go down that path eh?Back on point. We have a lot of assumptions in science. One thing I am leaning toward is a theory about things on a nuclear level to bend space time. What if gravity is just a side effect of nuclear force? Why do we assume that it is a substance thing? Also couldn't nuclear force be just centrifugal force that slowly breaks down over (time)? If that is the case then in theory a device can be made that spins(or vibrates) at an appropriate level to create a force that replicates what happens when there is a LOT of mass. Thus bending space-time.Let throw some holes in this theory. You people (know) much more about this subject than I do. My major is certainly not nuclear physics. I come from a theology background. From what I see there is a fundamental correlation to the hologram principle and most mythology/theology/religion/etc. there is just one thing I am missing to build upon my theory. What is actually bending space-time. Like most of theology people tend to overcomplicated things, at this point I think people, perhaps, are over complicating the science here. For example why is there creation? Well in theology there is something that most people miss, if there is a creator, that is what the creator does. Like a painter paints, the creator creates. Don't over complicate it. Its that simple. The correlation I have found in science and theology is that the hologram IS the creator. People didn't have the science then to communicate what it was they understood. They gave the hologram a persona. And I am getting off track again.SO in short, please throw some holes in my idea. Also if there is a more (logical) answer that I can research into. Please shout it out, kind sirs and madams!
i am dealing with the issue of mass gaining more mass at as the speed increases closer to the speed of light. where does the mass get more mass? does it suck in more matter and condenses it? etc-
... I do have a wealth of knowledge that applies to what I know.
We can only prove the science to a point.
We have a lot of assumptions in science.
One thing I am leaning toward is a theory about things on a nuclear level to bend space time. What if gravity is just a side effect of nuclear force?
Why do we assume that it is a substance thing?
Are you suggesting that gravity might be a centripetal force?That one I would like to hear Go for it, it may make a interesting SF, or maybe fantasy?I read both kinds myself.
Well, it's as Pete says, it can't be a centripetal force. But that doesn't mean that you can't construct a universe from your idea. As a writer it will be yours and I see nothing stopping you from constructing it. Unless you crave it to be a 'hard core' SF in which case you need to adapt to what science know and defines.
The entangled particles somehow contain or transmit information with no contact.
after some further reading - yup- i was wrong there. if the force is just the string holding the ball from flying off than yup i was wrong. i may look into taking advantage of quantum entanglement, and i need to read general relativity again- its been too many years since i have brushed up on it thoroughly.any other ideas?
Quote from: faytmorganafter some further reading - yup- i was wrong there. if the force is just the string holding the ball from flying off than yup i was wrong. i may look into taking advantage of quantum entanglement, and i need to read general relativity again- its been too many years since i have brushed up on it thoroughly.any other ideas?A centripetal force is merely the force required to move an object in a circle or a circular part of a trajectory. The force could be the gravitational force or an electromagnetic force. A charged particle moving perpendicular to the field lines in a uiform magnetic field causes the centripetal force in that case. For a satelite moving around the earth its the gravitational force. The force required to hold an object moving along a solid object (e.g. roller coaster) is electric in nature, as is the force exerted by a string.
Did you watch the you tube videos i posted?
Well, I was on a site where it was extensively discussed for some years, that doesn't mean I know it though Me, I want it simple. Relaying 'c' to a arrow is simple, and logically deductible.
as long as that it is not lude- then yes. btw the dictionary here is not picking up the word lude- that indeed, IS a word...