Artificial warm holes

[Dominus_Noctis]

posted on June 2nd, 2009, 7:59 pm

Last edited by Dominus_Noctis on June 2nd, 2009, 8:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

And why pray tell don't I want to start a physics discussion with you? Please don't patronize me: I'm surrounded by astrophysicists and physicists alike (heck, that's what my girlfriend is studying) and have plenty of nice talks. And no, I was referring to the twin paradox, which can still be relevant (relativistic time dilation). That being said this ("In other words travelling trough a wormhole means a journey to the past") itself is not always true, as you should know (perhaps by accelerating one opening of the wormhole time travel can be brought about... you can even create a closed timelike curve  ) . Lastly time travel is only appropriate when considering that you can't actual travel into the past beyond the moment the wormhole was created. This is mostly hypothesis though (some is theory), and is obviously undergoing constant revision. However, need I remind you that we are not discussing our own universe? In DS9, we witnessed nothing that resembles what our own models do, so why try to inject this into a topic designed to discuss use of wormholes in a StarTrek RTS?

[Anonymous]

posted on June 2nd, 2009, 8:45 pm

Last edited by Anonymous on June 2nd, 2009, 8:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Arguments about artificial warm holes.... hmm...
Seems black holes are a hot topic for u guys     

posted on June 2nd, 2009, 9:33 pm

Topic is going places.

posted on June 3rd, 2009, 6:46 am

And why pray tell don't I want to start a physics discussion with you? Please don't patronize me: I'm surrounded by astrophysicists and physicists alike (heck, that's what my girlfriend is studying) and have plenty of nice talks. And no, I was referring to the twin paradox, which can still be relevant (relativistic time dilation). That being said this ("In other words travelling trough a wormhole means a journey to the past") itself is not always true, as you should know (perhaps by accelerating one opening of the wormhole time travel can be brought about... you can even create a closed timelike curve  ) . Lastly time travel is only appropriate when considering that you can't actual travel into the past beyond the moment the wormhole was created. This is mostly hypothesis though (some is theory), and is obviously undergoing constant revision. However, need I remind you that we are not discussing our own universe? In DS9, we witnessed nothing that resembles what our own models do, so why try to inject this into a topic designed to discuss use of wormholes in a StarTrek RTS?

As you are famliar with that stuff (btw.: cool, I'm happy to hear that  ), you should know, that relativistic time dialtion (in a significant way) only occurs at (what a wonder) at relativistic speeds (when velocity is near light speed, for all who are not familiar with that stuff) or at high accelerations, which would destroy the ship. (Reason why I propose passable wormholes to be big) So at a sensible wormhole-travel, there is no need for time dilatation, so the twin paradoxon is not discribing this scenario. In fact, whn one travels a wormhole, visits some friends there and returns through another wormhole (or even the same) the twins didn't olden different.

I'l give you a reason for the my (well not my own at all) proposition that every FTL is a travel to the past. I have to leave now, but I try to post this afternoon.

[Note for me: ST and Relativity?]

[mimesot]

posted on June 3rd, 2009, 10:03 am

Last edited by mimesot on June 3rd, 2009, 10:13 am, edited 1 time in total.

(Notes for me, please ignore this post :

Faster-than-light - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Some observers with sub-light relative motion will disagree about which occurs first of any two events that are separated by a space-like interval.[5] In other words, any travel that is faster-than-light will be seen as traveling backwards in time in some other, equally valid, frames of reference, or need to assume the speculative hypothesis of possible Lorentz violations at a presently unobserved scale (for instance the Planck scale). Therefore any theory which permits "true" FTL also has to cope with time travel and all its associated paradoxes,[6] or else to assume the Lorentz invariance to be a symmetry of thermodynamical statistical nature (hence a symmetry broken at some presently unobserved scale)."








http://www.theculture.org/rich/sharpblue/archives/000089.html

)

posted on June 3rd, 2009, 2:00 pm

Wow, I just realized how Completely un-original we are.  Has any one considered that what we were talking about was a Stargate? *facepalm*

posted on June 3rd, 2009, 2:15 pm

I realize that you are in the process of writing your post, but I feel the need to respond anyway:
It really shouldn't matter whether I am familiar with these hypotheses or not; it just isn't polite to talk down to anyone, regardless of their physics background. Anyway, in terms of relativistic time dilation, if you are accelerating the wormhole, you can achieve the same effect for a ship within it, without destroying the ship (as you only need not to destroy general relativity; local effects cause no problems)--hypothetically. This still doesn't change the fact that you can't go back in time further than the creation of the wormhole itself. Likewise, when we talk about time travel, we are talking about space moving. Interestingly, since you are using notes from Wikipdeia, if you look at the Wikipedia entry for wormholes, it describes much of what we've talked about

Indeed Zaxxon, we could indeed be talking about Stargate

[mimesot]

posted on June 3rd, 2009, 9:38 pm

Last edited by mimesot on June 3rd, 2009, 9:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I realize that you are in the process of writing your post, but I feel the need to respond anyway:
It really shouldn't matter whether I am familiar with these hypotheses or not; it just isn't polite to talk down to anyone, regardless of their physics background.

Well, I felt a little mocked, when you tried to tell me how special relativity works, especially with not very founded arguments, but nevertheless you are right.

I apologize for talking down to you, that's no correct way to treat good mates, never. Hope you accept my excuse.

Anyway, in terms of relativistic time dilation, if you are accelerating the wormhole, you can achieve the same effect for a ship within it, without destroying the ship (as you only need not to destroy general relativity; local effects cause no problems)--hypothetically.

I read this part of wiki and probably understand your thinking. I didn't take the acceleration (well it says accelerating to a velocity, which is misleading, it just means that a relativistic velocity is reached for one port of the hole) of wormholes-ports into account, as we would not have no moving wormhole ports in FO. At least I thought that we are talking about stationary objects like the transwarp-ports of the borg.

In case of having ports of diffenent speeds time travel is possible, but no race would use it for it's disadvantage, only for advantage, which means travel to past time. It sounds sensible that you can't go further into past than the wormholes creation.

If you are still interested I could provide an explanation for FTL = travelling back in time for some observers too.

Hope we are on good terms with each other again
mimesot

[mimesot]

posted on June 3rd, 2009, 9:43 pm

Last edited by mimesot on June 3rd, 2009, 9:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Wow, I just realized how Completely un-original we are.  Has any one considered that what we were talking about was a Stargate? *facepalm*

If I didn't misunderstand something, the iconians utilize something like stargates ports. So warmhole-technologies for open space are just an extension of that thought.

But indeed, many ideas were already there, we just wrap it differently.

posted on June 5th, 2009, 12:11 am

hmm maybe the icoanans and the people that created the stargates are the same?

posted on June 5th, 2009, 12:13 am

The universe converge