Rocket Man

i heard that a rotating super conductor was used to make a measured drop in gravity, (0.1% or something ridiculous) i wonder if something similar can be used to "create" gravity do they really need gravity? gravity often requires vast energy/mass and people can go months in orbit with only mild muscle degeneration i can also understand your dislike for a rotating vessel, vertical motion has horisontal consequences unless they inhabit outer extremities of a vast counter weighted tethered... thing. could they be in a decelleration/acceleration phase, i wouldnt mind looking kilometeres below my feet at something so far down depth perception fails.(then again, i dont get vertigo easily)

luciola, good idea to come here, i just had a thought, the gravity from the singularity would effect different parts of the ship with different intensities, the back end would feel intertia, and the front would feel the gravity, (going to need a high tensile ship) also, i reckon the ships should have a decent energy budget on even meagre acceleration. pushing the singularity relative to the surrounding space will require energy just as pulling a marble across a matress has a force toward the marble exerted onto your finger. the only problem i see here is that a marble with some device held infront to push down on the matress will exert a backward force against it. now it would make sense to have some force projected out front or behind to do the warping. energy will be required to accelerate/lift the marble/ship as for the grunge tech, i found in wikipedia, light has a small momentum, matter out the back at high velocities isnt as efficient as photons out the back unless you have ridiculous velocities in which case you use time dialation to increase the inertia of the particles. in space travel, the main problems involve the mass of the propelleant. if you can collapse matter into energy to power a lazer, you can have decent thrust. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_pressure this site mostly talks about reflection/absorption but it also works the other way. also, you could look at the ram scoop idea to accumulate propellant and perhaps for a braking system at velocities close to C

i dont know if it helps, but a healthy human can maintain around 150-250 watts for almost an hour, top athletes can hold it at 300 watts but are completely exhusted after an hour. (stats from tour de france) also, i've found that the type of breakfast you have is very important if you intend to maintian any wattage for a respectable time, 1 watt second=1joule check the back of cerial packets for rough estimates, look at the energy per serving. at any given time, my estimates about avaliable energy someone has would be in tens of MJ a small bottle of apple juice has over 200KJ, sugar is potent stuff.

i read somewhere that a bunch of uni students designed some weird ceramic that a particular audio signal could have portions of the harmonics accellerated FTL over a distance of 5 or so atoms, i think this was a theoretical model like a simulation, so either the maths need rewriting, or something weird is going on. i also read that quantum entaglement can be detected and an experiment was sucessfully performed using the collapse of entangled electrons to transmit enough information for a simple bank transaction instantly over any(?) distance.

sorry, the photons out the front are travelling at the same speed as the emmitter, so each osscilation is placed on top of the last. that would mean 0nm frequency and therefore infinite energy per photon (not so absurd when you think about the kinetic energy of the emmitter).

righto, so the effect with the lightbulb would see the photons travelling away from the lightbulb (relative to the lightbulb) at 2c, and the observer would have photons travelling past at c but with 0Hz frequency so no energy. very interesting. the photons out the front would be shifted to twice ther frequency then? in that case, wouldnt the momentum difference between the forward and backward photons cause a net backward force? (however negligible) just a thought, supposing someone managed to make a 90 terawatt lazer, (1gram mass energy per second), would that have the propulsive force of 1gram per second travelling at c (following newtonian dynamics)? one way of thinking of it is 1 gram moving away from a source, and momentum laws, the center of mass must keep in constant uniform motion. if that's the case, gamma rays from antimatter/matter combustion would be an ideal propellant.

i'm confused, how does doppler shifting work if light continues at c regardless of the velocity of the thing emitting it?

the "brain gate" system uses about 100 electrodes to make even minimal functionality. 5 fuctions tops. i reckon it wont catch on untill the system becomes more versatile, people wont want to go into surgery with a bone saw just to type faster.

my opinion if your interested; it's not "progressively more annoying", it's just plain painful. loiterers can be deterred by this, which is a good point, however the discrimination angle says that who ever walks past, (non-loiterers) and can hear it are treated differently to those who can. (probably not the best choice of words, but relates it to the definition of discrimination) causing pain to people who can hear it and leaving the others alone to shop at their leisure. as far as i can tell, it fits the definition of discrimination.

brilliant device of discrimination! that's so annoying, and painful! i can hear right up to 22 khz and intend to keep it that way. the article says it's harmless, i wouldnt trust it. loud HF can do serious damage, cramps the muscles dampening the noise in the inner ear, takes ages to hear straight again. if you cant hear it, you'll probably feel something like pressure on your eardrum, the ear responds to the HF and dampens the sound but the sound isnt heard by the ear drum so you probably wont hear much else while it's running either. you'll feel like something is loud but you wont be able to hear it. ear plugs/head phones wont do anything, the pitch is just too high, it's too far from the normal range to drown out with music and the majority of ear plugs dont respond well to those frequencies love the idea of the ultra-sonic ring tones though, must get one.

i thought of that, but the square root of a negative number is a multiple of i, i^2 is -1. so (x^.5)^2 = x

all very interesting, may i point out a similarity between pythagoras thoerum and time dialation, the two equations are almost identical apart from the conversions from speed and time the time dialation curve follows a circular path as does y^2 =c^2 - x^2 possbily a stupid idea, but it seems as though (taking a second to mean C meters as units of time) we are travelling at a constant velocity through four dimensional space and time takes up the slack when we are moving slower than C (i know, sounds pretty stupid) at 0 movement, time is at it's maximum rate. at .5c, time goes at .86 it's usual rate and at .86c, time goes .5 times it's usual rate it follows sine-cosine equivalents. (what i've noticed) the only problem with going faster than light is that it requires an infinite amount of energy. my interperetaion of the time dialation graph is that c is the upper limit, there is no place the time axis gives for >c velocity.

ok, this doesnt account for height above the water on release, but it works none the less. i went from the trajectory being s = sin(theta)*cos(theta)*v^2 *2*(1/g) where theta is the angle of release measured from vertical and v =( (sin(phi)-sin(theta)) * r * 2g)^.5 where phi is the starting angle from vertical and r is the rope length. i simplified it down to, s = sin(theta)*cos(theta)*(sin(phi)-sin(theta))*r*4*(1/a) (bit of a mess i know) when you start with a horisontal rope, 25.2 degrees is your best bet when you start at 45 degrees, 19 degrees is best

a little back ground... i was discussing simplification of (x^2)^.5 turning into the function |x| because the squared term causes all outcomes to be positive. a am aware that the square root term is a +/- answer, however, in a graph situation, |x| will return the same shape.

it'll depend on the initial height/starting angle. there will be a balance between the parabolic trajectory and the velocity at release. (should this go in the mathematics forum?) i'll give it some thought

i think it's because the sugar is more soluble than the carbon dioxide, silica will provide more surface area to form bubbles on, coffee might not be soluble enough to replace the co2 in solution. i've done a few home experiments with high pressure and air, i managed to dissolve air in water and create the same sort of thing as soda and beers. all it is, is the gas is dissolved into the liquid under high pressure. high pressure makes gasses more soluble, so when the pressure is released, the gas will slowly come out, and highly soluble materials act as catalysts to speed up the gas coming out of solution.

specify a negative number. it comes out positive. squaring any real number gives a positive result, the square root of a positive number gives a positive result. if you still think otherwise, start a thread in mathematics. however, taking the square root first will provide a negative number via i. i've done a lot of work on index laws, and "not just being the inverse of the other" is exactly my point. you cant simplify something unless there are EXACT inverse functions used ^2 is not the exact inverse of ^0.5 so it should not be simplified as such.

for what values of x can you get negative numbers from (x^2)^½ ? aside from (x.SQRT(-1)) note the qualifier for real numbers the squared term makes the answer positive. in solving for x you would use ±x, but im talking about simplifying the equation yet keeping continuity.

i said absolute value because (x^2)^.5 only give positive values. it does equal ±x, but |x| is more accurate.

yes, i see the problem in my argument now, there was a post back there which said that you can have momentum without mass, i must have gotten confused with the momentum side of things. i'll try to be less stubborn in the future.

reductionism... (x^2)^0.5 = x? i hate that kind of thing. (equals the absolute value of x if x begins as a real number)

america already has such a thing as a neutron bomb, it only kills life, although lasting radioactive fallout is the big issue preventing their use. basically rips dna to shreds. take a look at the immediate after effects of hiroshima, same thing occurs. your idea sounds interesting though, does it work through walls/kilometers of rock?

can someone please explain to me the problem with having an electron below the currently accepted ground-state? i took a look at the math behind it, perhaps i dont fully understand it, but it seems ok at first glance. cold-ish fusion has been proven using a deutirium gas and a peizo electric spark.

if mass is energy and energy is conserved, mass must therefore be conserved too. wikipedia has a lot on this topic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass-energy_equivalence light is mentioned among the energies which can be said to have mass so when measuring the mass of a photon, what you're really doing is measuring the energy contained in the photon and measuruing the energy as though it were converted to mass. supposing you have a kilo of matter in a closed system, convert it to energy, you now have 1 kilo of energy because the system cannot lose energy and mass is energy. a photon does not go with inertial dialition, that's why they dont have infinite momentum, but since they have momentum, they must also have mass which is related only with their speed and frequency, their rest mass is 0 because slowing it down to 0 speed is, in essence, doppler shifting it untill it has 0 energy. when you slow a photon, the mass in the form of energy transfers to whatever slowed it down so the object that slowed it down now has the photons mass in the form of heat because of the equivalence between mass and energy. conservation of energy demands that the energy in a photon is finite because it was created from a finite amount of energy. this finite amount of energy has a non 0 value of mass.