Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

Austin Stanley · 2008-02-03 17:30:16

If they allow information to be transmitted FTL (to some observers) then it is also possible that they transmit information into those observers past, causing causality violations. How would this be avoided?
Indeed, the information in my framework can be sent with FTL speed. Also, a combination of the Hawking chronology protection conjecture, along with the Novikov consistency conjecture would prevent the formation of a time machine and causality violation out of a wormhole system IMO.

I'm not so sure that if Hawkings chronology protection conjecture is true that worm-holes would could be created at all. As I understand it this conjecture states that in situations in which a closed-time-curve could occur, a horizion forms causing the loop to be destroyed. The problem with that is that in any situation in which information can be transmited FTL, the possibility for a closed-time-curve exists, (indeed it _MUST_ exists for some frame of reference). This seems to me to indicate that such a machine would thus be destroyed a soon as it could be created (if indeed it could be created) as it would be in violation of this principle. Or it simply may not be possible to create at all.

As for the Novikov consistency conjecture, that seems to me to be simple hand-waving. There is no mechanisim proposed as to how causality violating events would become impossible, just that their probability is 0. With no real explanation as to why.

In any case both of these 'conjectures' hardly even rise to the level of theory as they both appear to be impossible to test. And make-handwaving assumptions of physics that we do not know to be true.

mansouryar · 2008-02-03 19:51:35

Your wormhole work is interesting and - in another forum, where the reaction was unreasonable scepticism - you've asked what the implications of wormholes might be. I'd like to put a few thoughts out there.
Firstly, the impact of wormholes will depend on the necessary technology and power-levels. If they're easy to generate and maintain, then the impact will be incredible - I'll elaborate in a moment. If they require lots of energy and are difficult to keep open, then their uses will be much more limited until the energy problem is solved.

Thanks for the comment. I believe there is the required technology to do vital experiments to verify if we could build a traversable wormhole. Theorization is enough, the only obstacle between me and realizing my ideas, is the problem of funding & facilities.

Secondly, if wormholes are restricted to being made and connected locally, then moved around at sub-light, they will be useful short-cuts, but the wave-front of human endeavour will expand at sub-light. If wormholes can be projected, or moved via warp-metrics, at FTL speeds then that situation changes totally.

We can have both situations technically.

But let's look at the possible uses, starting with direct travel.
To ship a wormhole, assuming it's low-mass, we can attach a rocket to its cage and fire it off - just about any rocket will do, then we can pipe propellant to it via the wormhole. To push a wormhole/rocket combination weighing 1 ton to near lightspeed would take ~ 100,000 tons of propellant - assuming we're using a steam rocket with 3 km/s exhaust velocity. That water is a lake a hectare in area and ten metres deep. A cubic kilometre of water lets us move ~ 10,000 tons, or 10,000 wormholes. That's enough wormholes for roughly every star within ~ 94 light-years, which would be reached in ~ 127 years at the latest. In about ~ 110,000 years every star in the Galaxy could be linked up via wormhole. Using merely Earth's water - which we wouldn't - the job would be done with just ~ 0.74% of the total.
Assuming a 10 gee rocket we could send a wormhole to Pluto in ~ 5 days. If wormhole maintenance costs are low enough, then we could profitably ship frozen nitrogen and methane from its surface. We could mine hydrogen clathrate from Sedna or some other Inner Oort Cloud object. Or suspend a wormhole mouth via a balloon and funnel hydrogen/helium direct from the Jovians, petrochemicals from Titan's lakes, raw sunlight from Mercury, or - assuming advanced reflective materials - pipe intense sunlight straight from the photosphere of the Sun.
Assuming a wormhole stable against the conditions we could send them into the core of the Sun to cause mixing between the Core and the outer layers, thus increasing the Sun's remaining lifespan 10-fold. The process would take ~ millions of years because the inner regions are very dense, but we're talking billions of years anyway.
The transport implications are complex because we have so few parameters on what wormholes will be possible - there's questions of conservation of momentum and energy when transferring between different points on the Earth or in-space: Will masses moved between planets keep the momentum they had relative to their original position? Does an equal amount of mass need to pass both ways to keep the balance?
Imagine wormholes at different heights in a gravity well - say a mass falls into the lower wormhole then emerges from the upper wormhole aimed at the lower again - would the mass keep gaining energy indefinitely, looping through the holes to ridiculous speeds? Would that drain energy from the wormholes instead? Do you have answers to these questions Mansouryar?

I am not sure about such possibilities; let us take the first step; … then we could appropriate a long time to deal with such details.

Oh, and qraal, if it was on a loop like the one you mentioned, it wouldn't keep gaining energy indefinately. On Earth it would hit 37 m/s then stop accelerating. What we might be able to do is to xract free enrgy from it, as once we extract energy the object would accelerate under gravity again. Any answers for that Mansouryar?

Do any manipulation with that, but you cannot violate the physical laws; however if you could, that wouldn’t be the known physics, and we would need some generalized rules, novels interpretations, or additional exceptions.

Hmmm... if I had one end of a wormhole with me and piloted into a black hole, saw what it was like beyond the event horizan, then hopped through the wormhole back to a safe distance, I wonder what would happen? Would the wormhole be destroyed, or would the black hole travel through the Wormhole and destroy wherever the other mouth was?

Quite unsolved scenarios in this branch of physics. Although, Sean Hayward et al, have written some related papers on this subject:

S. A. Hayward, "Dynamic wormholes", Int. J. Mod. Phys. D8 (1999) 373, gr-qc/9805019
S. A. Hayward, "Unified first law of black -hole dynamics and relativistic thermodynamics", Class. Quantum Grav. 15, 3147 (1998), gr-qc/9710089
D. Ida, S. A. Hayward, "How much negative energy does a wormhole need?", Phys. Lett. A260 (1999) 175, gr-qc/9905033
S. A. Hayward, "Black holes and traversible wormholes: a synthesis", gr-qc/0203051.
S. A. Hayward, "Recent progress in wormhole dynamics", gr-qc/0306051
H-a. Shinkai, S. A. Hayward, "Fate of the first traversible wormhole: black –hole collapse or inflationary expansion", Phys. Rev. D66 (2002) 044005, gr-qc/0205041

mansouryar · 2008-02-03 20:20:04

I'm not so sure that if Hawkings chronology protection conjecture is true that worm-holes would could be created at all. As I understand it this conjecture states that in situations in which a closed-time-curve could occur, a horizion forms causing the loop to be destroyed. The problem with that is that in any situation in which information can be transmited FTL, the possibility for a closed-time-curve exists, (indeed it _MUST_ exists for some frame of reference). This seems to me to indicate that such a machine would thus be destroyed a soon as it could be created (if indeed it could be created) as it would be in violation of this principle. Or it simply may not be possible to create at all.

Traveling with FTL speed and violating the causality in our own universe are two different things. Hawking’s argument is a strong tool against time machines, not wormholes.

As for the Novikov consistency conjecture, that seems to me to be simple hand-waving. There is no mechanisim proposed as to how causality violating events would become impossible, just that their probability is 0. With no real explanation as to why.
In any case both of these 'conjectures' hardly even rise to the level of theory as they both appear to be impossible to test. And make-handwaving assumptions of physics that we do not know to be true.

Who knows? Maybe we could do it! The nature must reply us at the lab. This is not math, it’s physics, the science of experiment.

noosfractal · 2008-02-04 22:16:23

any situation in which information can be transmited FTL, the possibility for a closed-time-curve exists, (indeed it _MUST_ exists for some frame of reference).

I don't think _must_ is right. Say you create a wormhole with two mouths close together (i.e., ~ Planck wavelength) and then move them apart. The acceleration induces a timeshift, but as long as you don't move them back together, you won't make a CTC.

This is simplistic of course, since timeshift is created, for example, just by being at different "heights" in a gravity field, and you can get a CTC if you have ongoing timeshift with no relative motion - but there seem to be situations where the motion of the mouths can compensate for the timeshift. It may even be that chronology protection prevents other sorts of movement (who'da'guessed there was an ultimate speed?).

At least, that is my understanding from ease-dropping on physicists discussing this guy ...

Matt Visser, From wormhole to time machine: Comments on Hawking’s Chronology Protection Conjecture
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/9202/9202090v2.pdf

Terraformer · 2008-02-06 07:25:17

My guess is a wormhole would need constant Negative Energy to stop it from collapsing? Anyone done any work on that?

Even if just a small tiny wormhole could be created it would still allow instant communication, wouldn't it? So there wouldn't be a time lag between colonies.

JoshNH4H · 2008-02-06 15:03:41

That would be true. Imagine-wormhole computer.

mansouryar · 2008-02-07 17:19:03

Thanks noosfractal; there are many possibilities in theory. We need to verify the related mathematical framework and check the results at the lab.

My guess is a wormhole would need constant Negative Energy to stop it from collapsing? Anyone done any work on that?

You need it for some moments to traverse through it; then the apparatus could be off, like a communication by mobile phones.

Even if just a small tiny wormhole could be created it would still allow instant communication, wouldn't it? So there wouldn't be a time lag between colonies.

I guess so too.

mansouryar · 2008-02-07 17:21:40

That would be true. Imagine-wormhole computer.

You brought up a very cool application for that breakthrough.

Tom Kalbfus · 2008-03-13 13:51:04

Glad to see at least some physicists are taking wormholes seriously. Have you thought about wormholes that already exists? According to one Physicist, they would give of 'Negative Enegy', the stuff driving the expansion of the universe, so rapidly expanding areas could hide them. If so, one wormhole might be enough to stablise the others.
The implications for time travel would only occur if the time at one mouth was slowed down to cause a difference in time ewhen brought together again. Another implication could be if you enveloped someone in a wormhole, would you be able to draw it over them and compress them into a sort of disc?

In Kaku's Book "Impossible Things", He said it would take a Type III civilization and 2 particle accelerators 10 light years long to create a wormhole. The best place to find a Type III civilization would be near the cores of galaxies where there are also giant supermassive black holes. Probably the best place to look for such a civilization would be in one of the many satellite galaxies orbiting the Milky Way, since the view to them is relatively unobstructed by intervenining matter. If we can contact them, borrow one of their wormholes, we might be able to travel into our own past. Something like an interstellar ramjet would be the best way to reach them.

Terraformer · 2008-03-14 12:37:09

Good luck eaching for civilisations near black holes. Black holes = Gamma ray burst = Deadly radiation = No life. Also the stars are to poor in metals and necessary ingrediants for life.

Tom Kalbfus · 2008-03-15 09:14:20

A Type III civilization would use the closely packed stars and black hole as energy sources, but they would most likely live in heavily shielded artificial habitats. Natural Star Systems are likely unstable anyway due to the frequent close passes of stars by each other.

By definition a Type III civilization controls the resources of a galaxy, but in reality, they would most likely concentrate only on the stars clustered around the core of the Galaxy they inhabit, as they are conveniently close to each other and easily accessible as opposed to the stars out in the spiral arms that are tens of thousands of light years across.

Terraformer · 2008-03-15 10:56:59

If there realy was a type III civilisation in this galaxy, the best way to reach them would be to search for there devices (Von Neumman machines most likely) in our solar system.

But that's going way off topic into the realms of Sci-Fi.

Tom Kalbfus · 2008-03-17 09:47:19

Due to the restraints imposed by the speed of light, a galaxy-spanning Type III civilization is not possible, the best it could hope for is to inhabit a dense cluster of stars some tens of light years across, no more that 100 light years max I think, otherwise it would break up into seperate political units. If you want a whole bunch of stars under one government, they would have to be fairly close to each other, maybe light days apart instead of light years. There would be no permanent stable planetary orbits around these stars, instead planets and other debris would orbit the galactic nucleus seperately. Artificial habitats would orbit the stars and make adjustments whenever a neighboring star came to close. There would be trade and commerce between the stars, something that really isn't possible in our part of the galaxy due to the extreme distances involved. A galactic nucleus could have quite alot of stars in it however, bringing with it much greater resources than any single star system can supply.

Terraformer · 2008-03-20 11:19:24

And also lots of radiation, steller collisions, a few super/novas...

Tom Kalbfus · 2008-03-21 09:08:37

Relative to what occurs in our part of the Galaxy, but remember an interstellar civilization isn't exactly helpless. Imagine a part of the galaxy close to the core, where the nearest star next to the one your orbiting is only 4 light days away. There is still alot of space between your star and the next one out, you can have a stable orbit about 1 AU around the star, and maybe every couple of centuries, you may have a star approach too closely. Well, with stars this close, its easy to move to another star system, especially if you live in a movable artificial habitat.

Terraformer · 2008-03-21 10:16:50

Your'e talking stars, not planets. And the civilisation would have to start in a place like ours, with stars light years away from each other. Once they reach the core, they'd already have colonised loads of systems.

Doesn't this belong in the Intelligent Alien Life section anyway?

dryson · 2008-03-22 19:18:28

This will not follow popular Einstein Theory but is real.

Space cannot be warped. Space is nothing an absolute. You cannot take space and krinkle it up and expect to create a smaller distance. You can neither fold space like you can a piece of paper and create a shorter distance.

Time is the measurable distance an atom takes given the atom's energetic properties along with the medium that the atom is introduced into. The H2O atom functions differently in a freezing medium or 32 degrees fahenheit as opposed to the H2O atom functioning in a 70 degrees fahenheit medium.

This is also true with space. The only difference is that in space the main mediums encountered are

1. Gravity - produced by planets, suns and other planetary bodies that
have an active core that can produce an electromagnetic field. The
electromagnetic field will not spread throughout the entire Universe but
will be limited by the activeness of the core, the elements of the core
and the overall mass of the core. A key point to remember is that the
mass of the planet is not entirely important but the size of the core and
electromagnetic field are what gives a planet it's electromagnetic field
or gravity. The electromagnetic field of a planet or other planetary body
will only be as great as the core. The EM field will also diminish the
farther you get away from the planetary body. This can be seen in a
variety of expierements that you can do yourself. The one I like the
best is the matchstick. For this expierement YOU MUST take extreme
caution ensuring that you are in a well ventilated area, there are not
any flamable materials around and you have an extinguisher near by in
case of emergency. The footlong wooden matchsticks work the best.
have a friend hold the match out at arms length from her/him, next
light the match with a lighter or another match. You will notice that the
heat or gravity is mush more intense the closer you are to the match or
planet. The farther you get away from the match or planet as the match
is being referenced to the less heat or gravity there is. This medium is
key to producing a warp drive unit that doesn't warp the space the uses
energy to escape the gravity pull and push of the planets within a solar
system. Once outside of a solar system however the gravity will
diminish rapidly until the next solar system is encountered.

2. The second medium to be encountered is space dust or particles that
are excelerating at velocities greater then the speed of sound and also
slower.

Warp drive isn't about warping space but creating an energy potential capable of once outside the gravitated extremes of a solar system to propel a ship at or near the speed of light. The main factor limiting faster
then light speed travel is gravity. The less gravity you encounter the faster your ship would be able to go.

dryson · 2008-05-24 21:42:52

what about this for a theory?

We know that gravitional fields both push and pull objects away from this planet based on the objects mass and metalic composition. If a way could be found to use and Ion engine to exert a force of the same EM field as that of a planet the ship would be propelled into space at a rate of velocity determined by the mass of the vessel, the exerted force placed upon the EM field of the planet and the planets own EM field strength exerted back upon the force exerted by the ION engine.

Rune · 2008-05-25 00:05:17

O my god! Another solution that allows for stable wormholes!. Only this time it doesn't involve negative mass! Just negative energy!

Get real, guys... it would be great, but this is not it. Nor will it be, in the foreseable future.

Rune. When someone tell me "it's simple, you just get a..." I usually stop listening and start running.

Gregori · 2008-05-25 05:31:23

If Burkhard Heim's 'theory of everything' is correct, we could slipping through space fairly quickly!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heim_theory

Apparently, We could get to Mars in three hours, and travel 11 lightyears in 80 days!!!

Terraformer · 2008-05-25 08:11:23

I heard about it first in NewScientist.

Why it [gravity effect] can't be tested on a smaller scale I don't know.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-02-21 15:46:23

Quantum Entanglement Isn’t All That Spooky After All
https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti … fter-all1/

A wormhole (Einstein-Rosen bridge) is a hypothetical structure connecting disparate points in spacetime, and is based on a special solution of the Einstein field equations. A wormhole can be visualized as a tunnel with two ends at separate points in spacetime (i.e., different locations, different points in time, or both).
Wormholes are consistent with the general theory of relativity, but whether wormholes actually exist remains to be seen. Many scientists postulate that wormholes are merely projections of a fourth spatial dimension, analogous to how a two-dimensional (2D) being could experience only part of a three-dimensional (3D) object
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/10/scie … ogram.html
,
http://www.nbcnews.com/science/science- … 2D11690659
Wormhole Passage
https://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/mult … 76634.html
This hypothetical spacecraft with a "negative energy" induction ring was inspired by recent theories describing how space could be warped with negative energy to produce hyperfast transport to reach distant star systems. In the 1990s, NASA Glenn lead the Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Project, NASA’s primary effort to produce near-term, credible, and measurable progress toward the technology breakthroughs needed to revolutionize space travel and enable interstellar voyages.

What is wormhole theory?
https://www.space.com/20881-wormholes.html
Maths has predicted wormholes, but for now these bridges through space-time remain hypothetical

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2008-02-03 17:30:16

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#27 2008-02-03 19:51:35

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#28 2008-02-03 20:20:04

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#29 2008-02-04 22:16:23

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#30 2008-02-06 07:25:17

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#31 2008-02-06 15:03:41

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#32 2008-02-07 17:19:03

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#33 2008-02-07 17:21:40

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#34 2008-03-13 13:51:04

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#35 2008-03-14 12:37:09

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#36 2008-03-15 09:14:20

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#37 2008-03-15 10:56:59

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#38 2008-03-17 09:47:19

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#39 2008-03-20 11:19:24

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#40 2008-03-21 09:08:37

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#41 2008-03-21 10:16:50

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#42 2008-03-22 19:18:28

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#43 2008-05-24 21:42:52

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#44 2008-05-25 00:05:17

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#45 2008-05-25 05:31:23

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#46 2008-05-25 08:11:23

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

#47 2023-02-21 15:46:23

Re: Spacewarp: Relaxing the distances; Breaking the frontiers

Board footer