Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#41 |
|
Well the article is from NASA firstly, and secondly there is no physical law that says gravity cannot be manipulated. Thanks, I missed the link at the bottom of the OP and didn't realise it was from NASA.
At the moment I disagree that control of gravity (in the sense they are talking about) would not contravene any of the "laws of physics". It would mean scrapping the law of conservation of momentum, which would have huge implications. In fact it would really mean going back to the start with everything. |
![]() |
![]() |
#43 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#45 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#47 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#48 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#49 |
|
It would mean scrapping the law of conservation of momentum, which would have huge implications.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not real sure how that would invalidate space/time warping manipulation.... Theoretically we need large amounts of energy [matter, anti-matter anhialation maybe ] to warp and/or manipulate space/time/gravity, to give a perception of FTL |
![]() |
![]() |
#50 |
|
There's a double negative somewhere or are you disagreeing with me? ![]() The Higgs Boson work, if it is correct, shows that the "standard model" is consistent with these particular observations, as well as all the preceding observations, but it does not, and cannot, prove that the standard model is a complete correct description of reality in all respects. |
![]() |
![]() |
#51 |
|
It would mean scrapping the law of conservation of momentum, which would have huge implications. |
![]() |
![]() |
#52 |
|
e.g. they talk about accellerating without applying a reactive force.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The energy [at least according to Star Trek] is obtained via anti matter, matter anhialtion. But we also have other means possible including ZPE, and or an as yet undiscovered "new physics" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Originally Posted by B.C. JPL has been working on the manipulation of space/time as a means of propulsion for a couple of decades Ref? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I actually thought the work JPL did was well known.... From the article... Historically, gravity has been studied in the general sense, but not very much from the point of view of seeking propulsion breakthroughs. With the newly formed NASA Breakthrough Propulsion Physics program, that situation is changing. Your's truly was at the JPL Lab and work site outside LA just recently |
![]() |
![]() |
#54 |
|
The energy [at least according to Star Trek] is obtained via anti matter, matter anhialtion.
But we also have other means possible including ZPE, and or an as yet undiscovered "new physics" It's not the source of the energy that concerns me. It's getting an action without an equal and opposite reaction. |
![]() |
![]() |
#55 |
|
It may well be, but not by me. http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/ http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/work/index.cfm |
![]() |
![]() |
#56 |
|
It's not the source of the energy that concerns me. The other method is creating a "bubble" of space/time around the ship, which is driven [the ship and space/time bubble] through the large scale space/time....Being sspace/time it isn't governed by the law of 'c" Not sure if that explains it. Anyway I need to be off... Will return in an hour or so and see what's happening. |
![]() |
![]() |
#57 |
|
That's OK...Not everyone is a fanatic like me. -) |
![]() |
![]() |
#58 |
|
Got a link? instead of jpl you need the glenn research centre. has a bit but not much
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/te.../ipspaper.html http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/te...warp/warp.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakth...hysics_Program |
![]() |
![]() |
#59 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#60 |
|
|
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 5 (0 members and 5 guests) | |
|