NEXT

Thank you for the response Phi for all, in my response toward you previous comment I held the assumption that it would become clear that once the spacial debris collection system where to actually catch up with a man made orbiting body it would then follow the procedure of burning up with in our upper atmosphere. I am sorry that I did not fully elaborate upon this. Now in respect toward the spacial drone idea, to answer your first question, I was only stating that with common missions such as the collection of space junk that the amount of resources required to preform orbital spacial debris collection would be great, and that IF by any change something unintended were to happen such as the device losing all communications with where it were to be based, or it had any on board issues with a secondary orbital body effecting a mechanical component like a un-documented spacial debris hitting a key thrust-er, knocking it of ( A piece of the actual ship itself and not a radio ) then it would add to the already cluttered spacial debris field. Also thank you for the link it was amazing to have a visual and kinetic representation of the amount of spacial debris that is already out there. However if you where not to use something that is not already orbiting the earth, something that had a sustainable non-orbital trajectory ( Please correct if term used in correctly ) the it would not matter if secondary materials where to cause on board issues. It would would already have a non-orbital path directed straight at the earth. Finally, by me considering any and all problems at the point of actually producing a hypothesis upon spacial debris collection I am allowing myself to consider any and all possibilities that may occur. If you where to create a system that would seem at the time perfect and evolve with it from there then IF an issues comes later down the road with the design then it will become to late to fix it. Also even though all solutions are subject to failures that could cause issues, they each will have there own RESPECTIVE issues. It is from these respective issues that a designer must keep in mind so that he can " choose the better of the greater evils."

Yes, however the amount of time and precision it would take to match a man made space debris would would be respectively troublesome. Not to mention factoring in the amount of mass loss due to both launch and communication failures would could quite possibly cause the space debris satellite to in itself become space debris. This however would also occur with the solution I produced and your idea (Phi for All) would have a greater reduction in cost. The Only difference is that in order to collect multiple man made space junk from orbit using the drone collection suggestion would cause either a large demand in having multiple drones all have there own respective orbits in order to collect individual space debris, or having a single space collector have to constantly change its respective orbital pattern just to collect even more space junk which would require a large amount of fuel. Even though this idea is the most practical and reliable, it falters in respect to the large use of resources per space junk collection. In respect to the solution that I proposed, the system would only need to move along a singe axis plane for the collection of average orbits ( Described in image post above ) This would reduce the need for having multiple materials being sent out into space, and if there were a communication error then the system is already in a collision course with earth so after collection it can either burn up within the atmosphere or it could simply land and launch again using the same amount of respective resources. One of the main issues that I see which puts my idea at fault is that whenever a high velocity object impacts the space debris collection system, it would go from its current non-orbital velocity to on that is equivalent to that of the impact due to momentum conservation.

Not yet, this is why I have posted inside of the speculations page, however is not the point of creating a device that can collect space debris to actually get in the way of other orbiters. This would be the main methodology for collecting spacial debris, because it being in a sort of stationary no orbiting location then would not the actual orbiting debris run into it, making the devices job a lot more simplistic, all be it implausible at this current instance.

Please note that the image shows that the earth is rotating weirdly, I only wanted to show man made orbiting bodies in respect to the rotation of the earth along with the object that is not in a full earth orbit, again this is not an accurate interpretation of the earth rotation at all, it is merely a over simplified and obscured understanding looking only at the orbiting and sub orbiting bodies around the earth. A orbit around the sun could work as well, however it would require a lot more thrust and fuel.

All Alice in Bob know is the following - Alice has Entangled Particle A - Bob has Entangled Particle ~A - When Either Alice or Bob Measures there own respective particle it causes either particles wave function to collapse to a certain spin state ( spin up vs. spin down ) - When either Entangled Particle ( A or ~A) are observed the measured spin stated is completely Random ( Cannot be predicted ) So Alice and Bob come up with an experiment 1) Alice and Bob go to a location that has separate rooms room A and room B 2) In each room there are machines that allows Alice/Bob to "measure" each particles spin state (spin up and spin down ) Note: before the "experiment" 2 particles ( A and ~A ) are entangled and one is put into each room. Note: Before the experiment Alice and Bob decide that Alice will measure her/his particle first at t = 0, then Bob will measure her/his particle at t = 1; Note: Alice and Bob both have agreed that they would up hold the previous statement and if they do not then they will both lose the credential in the scientific community have have there PhD's Revoked ( Note: I am not sure this is how it works, I am only using this so that each party will trust each other) 3) At t = 0 Alice measures there particle (A), at t = 1 Bob measures there particle (~A) 4) At t = 0 Alice measures there particle (A) to be at a random spin state ( spin up/ spin down ) 5) At t = 1 Bob measures there particle (~A) to be at the opposite random spin state as Alice's particle (A) ( spin up/ spin down ) Now my question is this, because Alice has measured there particle first, causing both particles wave function to collapse. Would Bob's entangled particles (~A) spin state at t = 0 , after wavelength collapse, be the same as Bob's entangled particle (~A) spin state at t = 1? Thank you for your responses Scientifically NEXT

Planetary Cracker Miner I would build a planetary collapsing mechanism that would have the ability to encapsulate full planets and then by using a combination between LASERS!! and advanced drilling technologies I would then destroy the planet and then use awesomely efficient resource collection mechanisms to collect all the debris from the planet wide drilling process. This is how is works.. 1) Find Planet 2) Expand Planetary Cracker Miner ( P.C.M ) 3) Enclose P.C.M around entire planet 4) Start drilling process - During Drilling process start Resource Collection System - Turn on Resource Collection Bay 5) Continue drilling, destroying planet until there are no resources left.

Inventors Forum, Forum that allows for user to create write down and discuss invention ideas.

As for the naming of the my profile the key terms that were used to create my profile username is by using ( Alt-240 ) in combination. However if it were to cause the issues noq brought up by both sensei and timo then I can see that it will create a problem later in the future as well. Therefore I will change my UserName to something more database friendly. Thank You Scientifically Next :3

Thank you for all of your responses, it has allowed me to obtain more clarity toward my designing. Have a wonderful day Scientifically N≡XT

So if they both know that they will measure opposite spins, then when Bob makes the final measurement to be say (spin up) then they would know that Alice must have gotten say (spin down) ? Also thank you for the response Strange

I believe that this thread should belong inside of the speculation page and I am sorry for adding inside of the physics forum page. This is supposed to be a question that leads toward an invention idea using speculative ideas. That being said to answer Organisms 2 questions: 1) By looking at 2 locations and pre-informing both Alice and Bob while by removing relativistic properties it becomes easier to go into moving along with the design stages of the idea. Taking a bottom up approach if you will. I am not dis-counting there importance, the opposite in fact. I am maintaining relativistic properties in there extremes and uses them as a comparison check, however again I am currently designing upward so I need to consider the most perfect conditions. 2) I am assuming that both inertial frames S' are moving at the same velocity in respect to an observer S( Please correct me if I am incorrect ). To answer swansont I am assuming that both Alice and Bob are pre-informed that a measurement is going to occur at a certain period of time. When this time is reached first Alice will measure there entangled particle,and Bob will measure there's. Under these circumstances I believe that once Alice measures the entangled particle, the wave function will collapse for each pair, therefore causing Bob's particles wave function to already be collapsed before even being measured. ( Please Correct if Wrong ) That way they would not need to compare with one another because they know when they are measuring and what they are looking for. So if Alice measures the first entangled particle to be say (spin up) then the particle will have collapsed and the entangled particle with Bob will be (spin down) even before Bob measures it. So there is no need to check for a comparison because they both know that Alice will measure first causing the entangled pair to decay and that Bob will measure second. So whatever Bob measures they will know that it is the opposite spin value as the Alice's.

Again the object would not be in a orbit, it would just be traveling at a certain distance from the earth needing to CONSTANTLY refueled.

A few years ago I came up with a hypothesis for a format of a certain orbit I called geocentrically-stationary orbit. Please note that this name does not mean anything to me back in my pure pseudo science make anything work days. However this "pseudo orbit" did however come with a fun little invention that I also came up with ( hopefully no one has already came up with it :3 ). Any who the idea went like this. If it where possible to have a satellite maintained at a certain position in space, meaning that in respect to secondary orbiting spacial bodies and in respect to the earths own orbit it would appear stationary, then you could hypothetically have it remain at remain at the certain ( "non-orbiting") distance away from the earth and have it follow a path moving up and down catching man made orbiting bodies. This however would cost a heck of a lot due to the constant refueling necessary because again this would be in a non-orbital system. Please message me if you have any further questions and please correct any miss information that I have stated so that we can get this idea rolling I am sorry for my previous remark,only message me for specific information or if you would like to talk about stuff.

Are you referring to having a consciousness transferred into an "empty" body, or have a just a non-conscious state transferred to an "empty body." If you are referring to the latter than this is already possible. It is simply transferring A.I. bot from one computer system to another. However if you are referring to the first one stated then currently it is not plausible until enough information is known about human/animal consciousness.

Yes, however what if both Alice and Bob have previously confirmed with one another that they would measure there own particle respectively ( Alice has particle A Bob has particle anti-A, anti just meaning the entangled particle and not meaning the actual anti-particle ) at the "same time." Meaning that at any distance, whether it be defined or undefined, both Alice and Bob would have measured these two entangled particles at the same instance in time regardless of relativistic properties.

I sounds to me like you are attempting to create something.

Thank you all for the insight, I was unsure in which direction to go with this. It is nice to be given advice from both an expert and a senior member.

Just a random hypothesis that I had in how a curved shaded area could be equal to a rectangular shaded area. Not even sure it works in 2D Space let alone 3D Space. If you need a further explanation just message me

Ok I have a question, If you have 2 quantum entangled particles at a distance N away from each other and at each location you have 2 different measurement systems. One is named Alice and the other Bob. If Alice measures one of these 2 quantum entangled particles, causing a wave function collapse, will Bob measure that the particle has collapsed on an defined state or will he just see observe nothing but a random state.