I see now. Fair enough.

QM???
SR???
GR???
BH's???
DM???
DE???

All at one time were unrealistic...
My question stands....
What has reality got to do with the laws of physics

for such high energy levels but at the moment we have no idea on how to do that.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::


Read the opening post....

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So, can we do it?


Not until we get the required breakthroughs in physics.


Right now we don’t even know if practical interstellar travel is possible. Just because we don’t know how to do something today, however, doesn’t mean that it is impossible.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>




:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::
You very well know his 'thinking' behind this, and it requires the removal of reality to achieve it.
I choose to not encourage the posting of waffling rubbish here.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::



Again, answer my questions.....
And thankfully, I take little notice of what you class as waffle from your self appointed tower of knowledge.
I will appeal to higher authorities and expertise when needed.

You can make a craft that passes through a magnetic field without being affected by it...

They were unthought of, not unrealistic. The laws of physics DEFINE what is reality.

Of course, someone more reasonable would have explained further or said that's not really what they meant, but the fact that you argue the point makes it even more amusing. Sig worthy, even. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...es/biggrin.png

It may be possible to fine ways to get past the requirement for such high energy levels but at the moment we have no idea on how to do that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>


Now we have some imaginative, innovative thinking!
Again, that's all the article is saying. Read it?
Does having such optimism about one day achieving these results really get up your nose that much?
If all scientists now and in the past thought like you, then you would probably be right in your opinion, and we would still be swinging in the trees, but the "reality" of the situation is that when real scientists are confronted with a seemingly impossible situation, they work at it and try and solve the problems.
That's how it has always been, and how it will always be.

Do you see that as "controlling the magnetic field" though?

I wouldn't have thought so...

If you think this thread is trolling why don't you just stay out of it?

Your deliberate provocations don't help anything.

So I'm not sure I see the relevance of your comment then.

and passing a metal object throuygh a mag field results in some effects does it not? coulomb force? maybe?

They were unthought of, not unrealistic The laws of physics DEFINE what is reality.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

That's right...We didn't know the extent of the Laws of physics and in pre SR/GR epochs, space and time were fixed.
SR/GR changed all that.

I was just saying...

BC - I'd genuinly like to know where NASA have suggested that manipulation of gravitational fields is a possible technology for space travel.

I'd genuinly like to know where NASA have suggested that manipulation of gravitational fields is a possible technology for space travel. it is speculation atm. if we can do it then it will help in space travel. they have no more idea of how to do it than anyone else.

What has reality got to do with the laws of physics? The laws of physics are our description of reality.



And which laws of physics says gravity cannot be manipulated? The law of conservation of momentum is probably the most obvious one.

Well the article is from NASA firstly, and secondly there is no physical law that says gravity cannot be manipulated.

I have also read of NASA scientists conveying the same idea in the past, but I do not have a particular reference at my finger tips.

With my remark about reality and the laws of physics, perhaps it should be more our knowledge of the laws of physics and its application to reality.

Conjecture>>>Speculation>>>Science>>>Technology>>> Application.
If you could control gravity or inertial forces, you would have a propulsion breakthrough (thrusting without rockets), a means to create synthetic gravity environments for space crews, a means to create zero-gravity environment on Earth - hey that could be fun - and a whole host of other things. Like "Warp Drives", this subject is also at the level of speculation, with some facets edging into the realm of science. We are at the point where we know what we do know and know what we don’t ... new theories from quantum mechanics that link gravity and inertia to something called "vacuum fluctuations."

Is this subject being studied?

The grand visions of yesterday’s science fiction inspired today’s reality. Maybe the same will happen with today’s science fiction.

A long time ago, Jules Verne wrote a story about sending people to the moon by blasting them out of a giant cannon. That story inspired a whole host of rocketry pioneers who pondered how to make such a journey a reality. Based on the science of their day, they were eventually able to create visions of how to achieve such a feat As an old-school scientist, I like to rate my impossibilities in the following way:

• Level 1. Politically impossible - eg. powering rockets using whale oil, using a nuclear explosion to launch a satellite.
• Level 2. Financially impossible - eg. sending a living human colony to the stars.
• Level 3. Technically impossible - eg. Bussard ramscoop, travel at high relativistic speeds, antimatter drive.
• Level 4. Physically impossible - eg. artificial gravity, nullification of inertia, faster than light humans, wormhole travel, teleport.

I prefer to stick to Levels 1 and 2, though I do occasionally check the feasibility of a Level 3. Level 4 is worth avoiding entirely.

Also, level 4 is unnecessary. Anything that can be done with Level 4 can also be done with Level 3, it just takes a bit longer.

Jules Verne's story from the Earth to the Moon, even at the time it was written, was merely financially impossible. Even then it was technically possible. H.G. Wells story of the Invisible Man, on the other hand, was then as now physically impossible.

OK, but if NASA have speculated that it's an area worth investigating, I'd like to read their reasoning for speculating that.

The law of conservation of momentum is probably the most obvious one.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>


I really cannot see how that would affect the manipulation of gravity.
Let's correct that somewhat....
More to the point is that there is no physical law that says we cannot manipulate the warpage of space/time.......but technically manipulating the warpage of space/time is manipulating gravity, is it not?