Jump to content

anti-gravitation drives.


Sennover
 Share

Recommended Posts

Now, everybody that has play BC3K nows that worm holls works as jumgates because of their strong gravitational field, they squich time and space to nothing, ich makes traveling faster. But of course, it also damages your ship on the way.

Now this is the principle of a anti-gravitation drive: it uses like a negative gravitationnal force, so if it's strong enough, it can reject the other gravitationnal force like the principle of "+ and -" magnets trying to touch each other. So techinacly, if someone had such a powerfull enough anit-gravitationnal drive, repulsing the strengh of the gravitationnal crush of the worm holl, it could pass trough it without being damaged.

So, what do you think of this theory ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At our current knowledge we understand gravity the same way men understand about women....not enough.

Nah your theory is quite sound but I just had to get that quote above

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*Puts on lab coat and scientist looking glasses.

(Speaking in Einstein-like voice):"Ze theory is quite zound, but vat eef zer waz a quantum influx and your gravitational ssstabilizers gave out and you ver crushed like ze egg...?"

What I'm saying is, what if there was like a reverse polarity effect that basically, if your engine failed it would actually increase the stress against your hull... Theoretically

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You also have to keep in mind that IF such a thing was possible, a craft would have to generate the exact anti-gravitational pull than the black hole in order to stay in one piece. That means something has to be powering the craft's anti-g drive. You'd have to have something that generates MORE energy than a singularity in order to power the drive (not to mention life support, engines, etc).

SC, we want a Holy Hand Grenade in BCM! Gotta blast all those insurgent jackrabbit! yaaaa!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are looking for something that will counteract the force of a black hole, then you must get a "SC drive"

From listening to all the stuff we keep posting over the years(the old guys) and us newbies; that is probably the only thing that can keep ongoing, and going and going, ...etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

as has been stated above, we do not yet understand what causes gravity (or how ito replicate it) except that the larger and denser an object, the stronger it's 'gravitational attraction', that would suggest that a wormhole is similar to a black hole. We would have to be able to measure gravity before experienceing it, and then be able to counteract it. a magical "anti grav device" would be nice, but I like the fact that travelling through a wormhole damages the ship. It makes travelling faster than light a statiscal and engineering analysis instead of "I'm goiung here..." and being there with nothing to do but look around in a half bored daze. To make something realistic, things have to break. I really like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heh, I love this type of thread. Here it goes:

The only problem is that for an object to exert negative gravity, it must have negative mass (or you would have to generate an extremely powerful "negative energy" field). Though negative mass is theoretically possible (read- allowed by the mathematics of relativity), it would be even harder to find or create than antimatter, which in itself is quite rare. It is, however, theorized that stable wormholes would exist only because of negative gravity holding them open anyway, so the idea is not without merit (indeed, it has been proposed before in this capacity). Wormholes would otherwise collapse shut before anything could traverse them. This is the main problem with wormholes- not the gravity of the component singularities.

[ 09-07-2001: Message edited by: Sunanta ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr:

What have you been smoking?....uhm, do you have any left?

Hmm, I've seen you replay this elswhere in the forum. Maybe after completing the game you should take a nice long well-earned hollyday in Amsterdam ?

Anyway, so anti-g wouldn't be the solution you say... How about (takes an other of his hach) using it for plain space travel. I mean, wasn't it Einsein that said something about that ? We could create our own flux field to travel from oe spot to an other, of course this would mean control of departure point A and arrival point B. But seence scientists have allready prooved (more or less) that when spliting an atom and sending one half millions of kilometers away, stimulating the one half would cause the other half to also be stimulted the same way. So, maybe it could be possible to create a flux field in both points A and B at the same time, making traveling that far(because of the space-time compression) possible.

If this doesn't work at all.... I'm going back to my philosophy...

But it must have a minimum of sence still?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing about this sort of discussion is that it can go on forever- games like BCM generally don't have to have a firm grounding in science to be enjoyable. Idle speculation is another thing, though, and there used to be a thread a while ago about the theoretical aspects of technologies depicted in the BC series. It seems to have been deleted, for reasons unknown up to this point (accident? hack? so ludicrous that it was beginning to annoy an admin?). I would have reposted it, since I have it saved, but since it may have been deleted for a very good reason, I've been keeping it to myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Commander Jamont:

what do you think about a tripe double buffer quatro dimension shifter compact size

Man, this tech is awsome! I mean the fact that you can do.... eehhh...

Okay, I get the picture, I'll keep my wild fantasies to my friends... Still, u must admit, you can't argu that te improbability drive is the best ship drive you can get... well, without counting the SMEF accidents.....

No really okay, I'll stop provoking this discussion if it may be bothering for the forum, it's okay, I understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:


as has been stated above, we do not yet understand what causes gravity (or how ito replicate it) except that the larger and denser an object, the stronger it's 'gravitational attraction', that would suggest that a wormhole is similar to a black hole.

We DO now how to replicate gravity, but we don't know why these processes work. We don't know why mass exerts a pull on other objects with mass.

quote:


We would have to be able to measure gravity before experienceing it, and then be able to counteract it.

We CAN measure gravity, as well.

quote:


The only problem is that for an object to exert negative gravity, it must have negative mass (or you would have to generate an extremely powerful "negative energy" field). Though negative mass is theoretically possible (read- allowed by the mathematics of relativity), it would be even harder to find or create than antimatter, which in itself is quite rare.

Negative mass is merely a mathematical equation, and even then, it isn't possible. It doesn't seem possible that something can have too LITTLE mass that it is negative.

Antimatter is a totally different concept than negative mass, as antimatter is technically matter with mass, but with its components charges reversely (eg, positive electron).

Negative matter would simply be matter not only without mass, but less than without mass. Which is mathematically impossible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Negative matter would simply be matter not only without mass, but less than without mass. Which is mathematically impossible.

The point is that negative matter is mathematically possible. www.concentric.net/~Pvb/negmass.html Though it seems absurd, there is little more than common sense that denies its possibility. If we were to trust our common sense, we would still be in the stone age. If we can trust to any degree the proposition that time itself can slow as we approach light speed and that subatomic particles routinely appear and disappear in different locations without transversing the distance between, then 'negative' matter is not much of a stretch. It is in fact possible to sum up science as "anything not prohibited is compulsory." The concept of negative matter is not prohibited, and though I won't go so far as to say that it therefore must exist, I think it's fair to state that it can. Even basic causality of "this, this, therefore that" or "cause then effect" is not immutable. In the quantum world, effects can precede their cause. To me, that in itself is the most absurd thing of all, yet it happens.

quote:

We DO now how to replicate gravity, but we don't know why these processes work. We don't know why mass exerts a pull on other objects with mass.

Current (and not so current, such as those proposed by Einstein) theories say that mass and energy are/cause a geometric distortion in spacetime. I'm sure most of you are familiar with a picture of a star distorting a sheet. This is gravity. It is simply a geometric anomaly in five dimensional spacetime (4 for space, one for time).

[ 09-07-2001: Message edited by: Sunanta ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking as a physicist (at least almost a physicist, still a couple more years )

It saddens me to read this thread. I don't usually post, but i feel I must this time. By the way, aramike, you at least made some sense. Except that negative gravity isn't even a "mathematical equation," as I will attempt to show.

First start off with a "guassian equation of gravity." (for those of you who haven't taken electro-magnetics, this is an equation that can be used for any vector field basically, though it is most useful with electric fields)

1/(4Gpi)[gravitational flux] = -m

where G is the gravitational constant

Using this basic equation we can derive the more familiar newton's law of gravitation, that will show us that -gravity is impossible.

first we imagine a point mass and calculate the gravitational flux through a concentric sphere a distance r away from it.

gravitational flux = integral[ g * dA ]

where g is the gravitational field.

because g is constant it can be taken outside the integral and integral[dA] is simply the surface area of the sphere, thus:

gravitational flux = g * 4 * pi * r^2

plug this into the original equation:

-m = (g * 4 * pi * r^2)/(4 * G * pi)

simplify

-m = g * r^2 * 1/G

rearrange and we get the gravitational field

g = G * -m/r^2

now we know the force associated with a gravitiational field is:

g = F/m0

F = g * m0

where m0 is some point test mass

plug this in and:

F = G (-m * m0)/r^2

or Newton's Law of Gravitation. That negative sign (-m) shows that the force F must ALWAYS be attractive in nature. But SHOOT i just realized that this doesn't prove what i wanted it to prove because you could sub in a negative m, sh*t. Well it took to long to write for me to erase it now. Another neat thing to look at though is G, or the gravitational constant. THis is the physicists fudge factor. Basically we don't know what in the hell gravity is at the very heart of it, but this equation is a representation of observed phenomenon, G just makes the numbers come out right. As far as anti-matter having negative mass,, uh-uh. It has the same mass except in very infrequent examples of c/p violation which is where an anti-particle doesn't match exactly with its counterpart in areas including mass. Still they are never negative masses, just slightly different masses. I guess i did a bad job of expressing myself here, but hey, i'm a physicist, i didn't even have to TAKE english in college.

-have a nice one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Negative gravity is indeed mathematically possible. Despite salisbury's impressive attempt to refute the idea, it nonetheless is at the very least a mathematical curiosity. It may be nothing more than that, but other ideas brushed off as such are now pretty much accepted. When you get right down to it, it's a simple matter of geometry. Space is flexible, therefore there is no reason why it cannot bend in a manner opposite to that caused by gravity. The possibility of negative matter has been put forth previously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Hellbinder[CE]

Great Scott!!!!!!!!!

Do you people know what you are saying!!!????

We cant be using a Gravity Drive of any kind!!! It would open up a gateway through HELL and we would all peel each others faces off!!!!

Dont any of you watch Movies???

Sheesh,,, crazy suicidal people.... What is the world comming to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen "Event Horizon"... hehehe... gravity grive and POP! the ship go in hell (or the chaos dimension), come back and is possessed by an evil force. (The scene where the guy is locked in the depressurizing chamber and launched in Neptune's atmosphere is ugly... eek...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now I remember why I'd rather be an egineer. You physiscists can do all the hard work in explaining things and when all your theories are sound guess who gets all the credit and profits from your ideas.

Keep the theories coming guys........I'm lurking

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...