Space Travel Physics

[crich70]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

But if the ball is politics or religion, you'll need to do it in the P&R forum, not the lounge.

Which is why I posted that this was the wrong forum for that discussion.

[geekmaster]

Originally Posted by crich70

Which is why I posted that this was the wrong forum for that discussion.

I was merely pointing out the "transparent eye" in relationship to "invisible eye". That "god" thing was merely an unfortunate coincidental part of its definition, not a religious discussion. More of a "The Devil and Daniel Webster" sort of thing. Oops, the "devil" word (but STILL not a religious discussion).

Now, regarding space travel physics, even scientists got the EM drive wrong, it seems, when they claimed it violated newton's Third Law. As it turns out, recent theory of operation indicates it complies with Newton. A photon beam is emitted from both ends, with more photons statistically emerging from the larger side. Because photons have mass, they therefore provide the "equal and opposite force" required for space travel. The reason they cannot be measured is the same reason they travel through the metal container. Like a laser, they bounce back and forth inside until they can escape. The mechanism that allows them to travel through solid metal is that they pair up with photons that are out of phase with them, which makes them invisible and unmeasurable due to cancellation effects, and ALSO makes them not reflect from metal but pass through instead.

And in another coincidence (also not religious) those invisible photons that cannot be seen, fit the premise of the blind invisible man in this subthread. Bazinga!

[wodin]

Originally Posted by geekmaster

... Bazinga!

Bazinga indeed, now we have a name for ALL of these little anomalies. Lets hear it for the Bazinga principal.

[geekmaster]

Originally Posted by wodin

Bazinga indeed, now we have a name for ALL of these little anomalies. Lets hear it for the Bazinga principal.

I worry about the EM drive being used as a weapon rather than a space travel engine. That invisible photon mass beam projector would not be trackable back to its source, except by retracing the path of its damage, and it would surely have moved by then. But an assured destructive force out the front would also emit a somewhat lesser destructive force out the back, somewhat like an RPG but with a longer reverse path of destruction. More of a space weapon. And it can travel through metal shielding. Though can it damage DNA at high exposure?

And can we uncouple those photons to detect them? Can we beam them through planets? What mysteries can these coupled photons unveil for us, besides Mars in 70 days and Alpha Centauri in 90 years?

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by geekmaster

I worry about the EM drive being used as a weapon rather than a space travel engine.

Perhaps you'd like to start a thread in P&R to discuss the EM drive.

Please do not start or continue discussions of non-mainstream scientific theories in the Lounge. They are contentious and belong in P&R.


Note (by the bold green) that that is an official ruling, and needs to be followed. Further messages on this topic will be deleted.

If you want to discuss this ruling, the correct way is either to report this post for the other moderators to consider, or start a thread in the Feedback forum.

[geekmaster]

Why would "space travel physics" (where an EM drive belongs) be more appropriate in "politics and religion? It is not politics or religion. It is not theoretical. They have proven working models. It was misunderstood until now, and the authors got it wrong. It is science. Science is not religion.

Or is this thread ONLY for fiction (though not clearly documented as such)? Or is the lough ONLY for fiction (some problem)?

And why is it okay to discuss the invisible man in this thread? Why is the "lounge" the wrong forum to discuss "space travel physics" (except for this thread)? How can I understand the meaning of this?

[Cinisajoy]

Geekmaster,
It was specifically the reference to God. Everything else is fine.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

Geekmaster,
It was specifically the reference to God. Everything else is fine.

Actually it wasn't. Non-mainstream science theories are restricted to the P&R forum because they can cause contentious arguments, and can lead to comparisons to alternatives to Evolution theory. This was discussed elsewhere, and I thought the moderators instructions above were very clear.

So, no more peeves about space travel physics in SF?

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by geekmaster

Why would "space travel physics" (where an EM drive belongs) be more appropriate in "politics and religion? It is not politics or religion. It is not theoretical. They have proven working models. It was misunderstood until now, and the authors got it wrong. It is science. Science is not religion.

Or is this thread ONLY for fiction (though not clearly documented as such)? Or is the lough ONLY for fiction (some problem)?

And why is it okay to discuss the invisible man in this thread? Why is the "lounge" the wrong forum to discuss "space travel physics" (except for this thread)? How can I understand the meaning of this?

Geekmaster, I have traditionally put cutting edge science/fringe science in the P&R because some of the people here get real upset when you try to make them think "outside the box". You might want to look some of them up, just to see the reactions. . .

Professional courtesy. . .

(Weaponization discussions are for P&R, as well.)

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by ApK

Actually it wasn't. Non-mainstream science theories are restricted to the P&R forum because they can cause contentious arguments, and can lead to comparisons to alternatives to Evolution theory. This was discussed elsewhere, and I thought the moderators instructions above were very clear.

So, no more peeves about space travel physics in SF?

I was responding to post #32. I hadn't seen Paul's comments.
Now where is that darn time extender?

[arjaybe]

Remember the old science fiction movies where the rocket would be going sideways on the screen, and the flame would come out of the back of it and then bend upward? Interesting physics in that universe.

[geekmaster]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Geekmaster, I have traditionally put cutting edge science/fringe science in the P&R because some of the people here get real upset when you try to make them think "outside the box". You might want to look some of them up, just to see the reactions. . .

Professional courtesy. . .

(Weaponization discussions are for P&R, as well.)

Thank you very much for the explanation. Such explanations help me file such rules (indexed by "Why?") in my memory. I recently decided to stray from the Kindle Dev Corner forum where the body of my contributions here can be found. I suppose I should spend more time reading to see the statistically significant structure (pretty much IGNORING the thread titles), to keep mass reactions out of the danger zone...

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by geekmaster

Thank you very much for the explanation. Such explanations help me file such rules (indexed by "Why?") in my memory. I recently decided to stray from the Kindle Dev Corner forum where the body of my contributions here can be found. I suppose I should spend more time reading to see the statistically significant structure (pretty much IGNORING the thread titles), to keep mass reactions out of the danger zone...

Happy to be of assistance. . . Don't crack the Dilithium crystals. . .

[crich70]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Happy to be of assistance. . . Don't crack the Dilithium crystals. . .

And remember to recomposite your crystals within the articulation frame.

[wodin]

I think it's the Bazinga principal.