PDA

View Full Version : space expansion travel



IV@N GOODITCH
2002-Feb-13, 08:25 PM
The Big Bang theory tells us about strange properties of space itself, that is space could be expanded and that expansion could be faster than light. Now, we don't know really what space is and therefore there's no way for us to manipulate with that strange properties. But if we knew how to do that question is whether we could use it to travel. Space we would use for a start would be a 50 yard cube, large enough to put a spaceship in it, and the point of expansion would be just behind the spaceship!
OBJECT 2
1./---SPACESHIP OBJECT 1 /
2./-----------------------SPACESHIP OBJECT 1
our space after exp.
Why did the SPACESHIP moved away from the point of expansion? Why galaxies move away from the point of start of the universe? I certainly hope space expansion is the answer to that! As you can see in graph, our space is expanding in a STRAIGHT LINE and STRAIGHT LINE ONLY and NOT AT ALL LATERALLY OR SOMEHOW ELSE!!! As you can also see in graph, the SPACESHIP is now closer to OBJECT 2. But why would "new" space interact with the "old" one as a solid body physically moving it away? It seems funny, right? It would be much more resonable if space behaved like liquid or air, than these two spaces would interact just as an aircraft does when it cuts through the air. However, getting closer to other objects would be possible. Do you agree with me?
Q. Why we should use this to travel?
A. Because space can go much faster than light!

IV@N GOODITCH
2002-Feb-13, 08:38 PM
Accidental error occured on the graph. OBJECT 2 is not in position I wanted it to be. It should be just above 2.SPACESHIP,and not on the start of the line! Sorry for that.

Chip
2002-Feb-13, 09:59 PM
Hello,

There are a lot of ideas wrapped up in your message. Some are interesting and some do not match tested theories and observations in physics and astronomy. I realize also that English is not your first language.

It sounds like what you are thinking about is faster-than-light travel. This concept is what scientists describe as "problematical."

One place to start when thinking about spaceships and dimensions of time and space are the concepts of "worm holes" and "negative energy bubbles" (i.e. space warping.) There are very few serious articles about these ideas, and many pseudo-scientific ideas.

Look here for an article from Scientific American (http://www.megafoundation.org/UltraHIQ/HIQNews/Warp_Drives.html) about negative energy.

Also start here for a discussion about Worm Holes (http://www.sciam.com/askexpert/physics/physics34.html).

<font color = blue>Note: This entire thread should be transported at the speed of light to the "Against the Mainstream" board.</font color = blue>

Welcome /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Chip on 2002-02-13 17:03 ]</font>

Russ
2002-Feb-14, 03:01 PM
Iv@n, I'm no expert but I think you missed a couple of points regarding the expansion of the universe. This is leading you down the wrong road with your space ship idea.
1) Space expands independantly of the matter within said space. (matter is not expanding)
2) Space expands in all directions at the same time.
3) Expansion is detectable only on the Megaparsec or larger scale. (3.26 million ly) On the Solar System scale, space is expanding less than the physical size of a quark per unit time.

So 50 meters of space ship will take 100's of billions of years to have a measurable spacial displacement due to universal expansion. This assumes of course that you could find a way to "attach" it to the "space" that was traveling in the direction you wanted to go.

I don't know if I cleared anything up for you but.....I'm just here for the fun of it anyway. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

DJ
2002-Feb-14, 04:01 PM
Actually, it's a misnomer to say that "space expands faster than light"...

Instead, over huge Vast TREMENDOUS distances, the effect of the expansion would create such a situation where far away objects, fully 3/4 of the visible universe, become inaccessible to us because the light eminated by these distant objects cannot overcome the distance/expansion equation.

DJ

Another Phobos
2002-Feb-14, 05:33 PM
Like Russ said, you would need some way to attach the ship to a certain point in space in front of the ship so that it could be carried away from its starting point. Otherwise, objects 1 and 2 will just get farther apart as space expands in between them. (nitpick...objects 1 and 2 would have to be far apart and far away from any galaxies, etc. in order for gravity not to counteract the expansion of space).

And like DJ said, space is currently not expanding faster than the speed of light.

And galaxies are not moving away from the start point of the universe (there is no starting point in 3D space).

And like Russ said, the expansion of space is only significant on vast scales. Assuming a Hubble Constant of 70 kps/Mpc...well, with a 50 yard spaceship at that rate, I could walk faster.

Simon
2002-Feb-14, 09:21 PM
...Erm, off topic here...

Another Phobos, is there any particular reason you didn't just cave to the inevitable and call yourself Deimos?

Don't mind me, I'm just awake at 1 am...

ljbrs
2002-Feb-15, 12:58 AM
Regardless, I am going to hazard a guess. The expansion of space is simply that. The SPACE around you is doing the expansion. You would be carried along with the expansion, but you would not be moving through space because the space would be doing the moving apart (away from you in all directions), and if you did not have an initial velocity, you would not progress THROUGH space, only WITH space. In a sense, that would be like remaining right where you began, going nowhere, with everything else moving away from you. Space has no mass and, therefore, supposedly can expand faster than light. Having mass, you would be carried along for the ride, but, unless you had an initial acceleration, there would be no headway in any particular direction and everything would be expanding away from everything else. Certainly, you would not be able to travel at the speed of light, 299,792,458 m/s, which is a *no-no*.

Or something like that....

ljbrs /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

IV@N GOODITCH
2002-Feb-15, 05:01 PM
Unfortunately, I see my idea is very hard to understand.
I'll try to clarify it. Idea is to DELIBERATELY produce a tiny, separate "bubble" of space within our expanding universe! This separate "bubble" would be completely independent from the rest of the universe, I think that goes without saying. Next step of this idea is to DELIBERATELY force this "bubble" into faster-than-light expansion. Don't forget this "bubble" expands only in a straight line, and is about 50 yards wide! Now we have a "stream" of expanding space speeding through the universe. Within that "stream" there's a spaceship. But, wouldn't it be then this spaceship expanding too? Well, I hope its gravity could prevent that happen. The spaceship doesn't move itself, but it is carried away by expanding space. That is why this spaceship couldn't be crushed by gravity either. Augmentation of mass applies only for a matter that ITSELF MOVES THROUGH SPACE at speeds of near super-luminal and faster. But, what could be the reaction of the rest of the universe to this new "stream" of space? Well, the "stream" could push away the universe's space it encounters, or another possibility is it could just cut through it. What way is right doesn'n matter. The "trick" for travelling is in a straight line expansion. So if we'd like to get closer to some object, we'd have to aim our "stream" slightly off that object, just to be sure our "stream" couldn't push "other" space that leads to this object away (the object would then be at the same distance no matter how long "stream" expands). Imagine our separate "bubble" of space expanding like when you blow a rubber balloon. It is expanding in all directions. In this case also, all objects in the universe would receed as our "bubble" would expand, and travel couldn't be possible.TODAY,we don't know how to make this separate "bubble" of space, neither we know how to force it into expansion. But, to say the truth, we dont know neither what are things like space and time... Until we don't know that we can't be sure whether it is possible to make that "bubble" of space, but what we can be pretty sure is ALL THAT IN OUR UNIVERSE IS POSSIBLE. Space of our universe is expanding, believe it or not, and that expansion CAN be faster than light too. Our space has the ability to go much faster than this today. Maybe you don't know, but the universe, due to space expansion, in its first second expanded to a distance of 20 LIGHT YEARS! Think a bit about this amazing expansion. 1sec=distance of 20 ly. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's "a bit" faster than the light!

IV@N GOODITCH
2002-Feb-15, 06:52 PM
I think I know now why don't you get some things, and it's my fault. When I say STRAIGHT LINE EXPANSION I mean EXPANSION IN ONE DIRECTION ONLY! SOMETHING LIKE A LASER BEAM! Sorry, I thought that would be clear from that unfortunate "graph".

Silas
2002-Feb-15, 08:43 PM
Hasn't it been suggested that the "expansionary phase" of the Big Bang was "faster than light?"

So: all you've got to do is find out what caused the expansionary phase...fine tune it and make it "directional," and make sure that you move "into" the new space...

It's also a great weapon: point it at someone, and suddenly they're very far away...

(The Scientific American article, back in '86 or so, that first introduced me to the expansionary phase, referred to a "Higgs Field." Dunno if such a thing has been demonstrated, or if it was just a prediction or model.)

Has there been any recent criticsm of the expansionary phase notion? And who is credited with it? I know that Alan Guth was involved in it, but is he the guy who gets the Nobel Prize for it, if and when?

Silas