We will be able to visit the stars once dark matter end energy are "developed" Might be a fluid too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive
An Alcubierre warp drive would fold spacetime up in front of a starship and expand it behind, effectively bringing he destination closer and pushing the starting point farther away.
This would involve surrounding a starship with a bubble that kept spacetime flat inside (keeping the mass and time in side the ship normal), but squashed outside.
The starship wouldn't technically be travelling faster than the speed of light, but the result would be the same.
Unfortunately, to operate such a drive would involve hypothetical negative mass (that accelerates towards you when pushed!) and the input of an insane amount of energy!
https://www.askamathematician.com/2...lly-building-one-and-going-faster-than-light/
This would involve surrounding a starship with a bubble that kept spacetime flat inside (keeping the mass and time in side the ship normal), but squashed outside.
The starship wouldn't technically be travelling faster than the speed of light, but the result would be the same.
Unfortunately, to operate such a drive would involve hypothetical negative mass (that accelerates towards you when pushed!) and the input of an insane amount of energy!
https://www.askamathematician.com/2...lly-building-one-and-going-faster-than-light/
Attachments
You just need dilithium crystals and can arrive before you started out, Seems a long time after is also possible.
Yep, time travel in Star Trek, The Original Series (TOS) is such a hoot!
Here's a reminder: https://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/treknology/timetravel-tos.htm
I'm fond of "The City on the Edge of Forever" episode which featured a young Joan Collins as Edith Keeler.
"There may be some logic to the belief that time is fluid, like a river, with currents, eddies, backwash." (Spock, TOS: "The City on the Edge of Forever")
Here's a reminder: https://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/treknology/timetravel-tos.htm
I'm fond of "The City on the Edge of Forever" episode which featured a young Joan Collins as Edith Keeler.
"There may be some logic to the belief that time is fluid, like a river, with currents, eddies, backwash." (Spock, TOS: "The City on the Edge of Forever")
And of course, if not mentioned here already, Floyd's Barber Shop of "The Andy Griffith Show" fame is somewhere on that street and in that scene.
There is so much to that episode (in addition to Floyd's and time travel), such as the quote "I'm endeavoring, ma'am, to make a mnemonic memory circuit using stone knives and bearskins."
There is so much to that episode (in addition to Floyd's and time travel), such as the quote "I'm endeavoring, ma'am, to make a mnemonic memory circuit using stone knives and bearskins."
It looked to me more like he was building a high fidelity audio amplifier using those stone knives and bear skins. Were those 2A3’s?
And you've got to watch it a hundred times to fully appreciate it (same with Spectre of the Gun, which was just on for me recently).
And you've got to watch it a hundred times to fully appreciate it (same with Spectre of the Gun, which was just on for me recently).
"Physical reality is consistent with universal laws. Where the laws do not operate, there is no reality." - Spock to McCoy, at the O.K. Corral
There is IMV a fine balance between using mathematics to prove a hypothesis (so it then becomes a theory) and using mathematics to lead the way. Some of course may argue they are the same thing. You can write an equation down to describe any hypothesis but it still doesn’t make is feasible or correct. The Alcubierre drive is one such example, and if one wants to be provocative, String Theory another.
I think Einstein had the balance right. Mathematics was a tool to prove his deductions.
I'm not sure if they expand or are at odds with your statement, but the following quotes differentiate between proof in mathematics and science.
"In mathematics, a proof is a little different to what people usually think. A mathematical proof must show that something is the case without any doubt."
"In science, we can never prove a hypothesis to be true, but there will be a certain stage at which we decide that there is sufficient supporting experimental data for us to accept the hypothesis."
I found this link interesting as it discusses the differences between deductive reasoning (mathematics) and inductive reasoning (science).
https://nrich.maths.org/6178
“People would be generally much better off if they believed in too much rather than too little.” - PT Barnum
In the audio hobby specifically coming up with a hypothesis can oft be rather challenging. For example, the Intelligent Chip, WA Quantum Chips, high end fuses, Schumann frequency generator, Red x Coordinate Pen, Silver Rainbow Foils, Morphic messages, why high purity silver conductors oft sound worse than high purity copper conductors. Why very hard materials, e.g., tempered steel, make for better audio cones than relatively softer materials, e.g., carbon fiber, brass, aluminum, and especially semi-soft materials like Sorbothane, rubber. not too hard, not too soft, just right. 😛
as far as math goes, I seriously doubt it can serve any purpose regarding the list of things in the above paragraph. Yes, I realize Uber skeptics will probably say, but if math can’t decide what good is it?
I like the expression, “you can never prove a hypothesis to be false.”
In the audio hobby specifically coming up with a hypothesis can oft be rather challenging. For example, the Intelligent Chip, WA Quantum Chips, high end fuses, Schumann frequency generator, Red x Coordinate Pen, Silver Rainbow Foils, Morphic messages, why high purity silver conductors oft sound worse than high purity copper conductors. Why very hard materials, e.g., tempered steel, make for better audio cones than relatively softer materials, e.g., carbon fiber, brass, aluminum, and especially semi-soft materials like Sorbothane, rubber. not too hard, not too soft, just right. 😛
as far as math goes, I seriously doubt it can serve any purpose regarding the list of things in the above paragraph. Yes, I realize Uber skeptics will probably say, but if math can’t decide what good is it?
I like the expression, “you can never prove a hypothesis to be false.”
Last edited:
Can you give a reference to that quote?
In science, it is possible to show that a hypothesis is false, but impossible to prove that it is true.
Reference: my link above.
Mathematics: Deductive reasoning
Science: Inductive reasoning
Pseudoscience: Lack of reasoning
Science knows it doesn’t know everything? Do you have a source for that quote? It’s adorable.
“Because it’s what I choose to believe.“ - Dr. Shaw, Prometheus
“Because it’s what I choose to believe.“ - Dr. Shaw, Prometheus
Last edited: