Stargate Theory

[LV1]

I have done some research into traveling across space and it seems the answer is right in front of us. I will attach a diagram to explain the theory more clearly. I did get my information from two different ideas which I will post links to both sites so others may google it and agree or disagree.

 

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v502/n7469/full/nature12512.html This link talks about photons combining.

 

http://www.isciencetimes.com/articles/6986/20140324/scientists-demonstrate-three-way-quantum-communication-light-speed.htm This article talks about photons communicating with each other.

 

Picture of idea attached

 

As you combine theses photons you do essentially give your teleportation device an address. For example add an additional photon to each side of the new type of matter and that creates a new address. Now considering you would have to combine about a qui trillion photons each side 1x10^18 to make an area large enough to enter but I do believe it is possible to travel across the universe using the two ideas listed above.

[Strange]

http://www.isciencet...light-speed.htm This article talks about photons communicating with each other.

Despite popular science articles, there is no communication.

 

As you combine theses photons you do essentially give your teleportation device an address.

 

Why would photons in a bound state constitute an address?

 

For example add an additional photon to each side of the new type of matter and that creates a new address.

 

What is this new form of matter?

Edited April 28, 2016 by Strange

[LV1]

You have question, I have questions also, I can't explain it all I know is two photons that are twins that spin in opposite directions communicate. http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080813/full/news.2008.1038.html There is another article, About the photons.

 

New form of matter I don't what it is, that's why it is all theory. Combing photons, it's an out of this universe theory but it's an idea, and ideas is what moves us to the unknown. If I had answer, I would tell you but maybe someone else has an answer.

[Strange]

You have question, I have questions also, I can't explain it all I know is two photons that are twins that spin in opposite directions communicate. http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080813/full/news.2008.1038.html

 

Again, despite popular science articles, there is no communication.

I am a bit disappointed that Nature should publish such a poorly written story.

[Mordred]

You really have to watch out for pop media descriptions. In particular when it comes to entangled particles.

 

The two particles don't communicate, nor is faster than c communication possible via entangled particles.

 

Despite what these pop media articles state.

 

DrChinese has a decent and accurate coverage. (Without the math)

 

http://www.drchinese.com/Bells_Theorem.htm#Overview_3

[LV1]

I don't know what believe. Well I know not to believe in God. Lol. Though you both make very valid points, and reading on bells theorem shows the theory to be wrong because it doesn't apply to the rules. So do you think mordred that the rules can never be broken.

[Mordred]

New research can always bring new insights. However particle entanglement is getting to be a rather well studied field. QM isn't my strongest area of study, however the faster than c misnomer is a common misconception on numerous physics forums.

 

I've had the occasion to even discuss some of these aspects in the past with DrChinese. From those discussions with him and other professors specialized in QM. DrChinese is considered extremely well versed in this particular arena.

 

PS if you look through the QM forum the subject has come up numerous times in recent threads

[LV1]

however the faster than c misnomer is a common misconception on numerous physics forums

 

I believe it is possible that something can travel faster then c. Now we could argue about this all day but that's what quantum theory is about, trying to find the hidden variables. That's why Einstein and few others came up with EPR paradox, not to disprove quantum physics but that it could not be a complete theory of nature. Now I know DrChinese has done research on Photon entanglement but his theorems are on paper, he is not the guy trying to break the rules.

[Mordred]

Neither is you and I the speed limit of c is well proven and well tested reality. It even applies to the maximum rate of interactions. So good luck.

 

The only known viable method is possibly the Alcubierre drive which manipulates spacetime (theoretically)

PS GR is one of the most tested theories in physics. Thus far its incredibly accurate. QM isn't likely to change that.

 

 

Let's play a suspension of reality and hypothesize that two entangled particles allow faster than light communication.

 

So lets create two entangled particles using spontaneous down metric conversion.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_parametric_down-conversion

 

How did you plan on getting the entangled particle to the new location ?

 

How do you plan on keeping the entangled pair stable enough for the journey?

 

How would this help if you cannot know the state of either particle (once you measure the state the entanglement collapses)

 

You can't choose which state to entangle the particles nor can you know which of the state's either particle is in.

Edited April 29, 2016 by Mordred

[LV1]

http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9806043.pdf Nicolas Gisin and his team explain it best in the article link but after finding and reading his article, it does not mention anything about traveling faster then the speed of light which you are correct but it violates bells inequalities with of course the exception of loop holes though it does open the possibility of teleportation.

 

Also not impressed you sent a Wikipedia article Mordred, you are better then that.

Edited April 29, 2016 by LV1

[Mordred]

The wiki link is just on how to create an entangled pair. It's basic enough not to need further detail.

 

The point being the process is local. Ie at the same location so your still stuck with how to get one half the entangled pair to the new location.

 

By the way +1 on your last post. Not many are so easily willing to drop a pet theory right or wrong.

 

PS I read that article before it's handy to keep around

Edited April 29, 2016 by Mordred

[BiotechFusion]

I don't know what believe. Well I know not to believe in God. Lol. Though you both make very valid points, and reading on bells theorem shows the theory to be wrong because it doesn't apply to the rules. So do you think mordred that the rules can never be broken.

You don't need to believe anything, you just need an understanding and logic. When two particles become entangled, they become the same particle, indistinguishable. So, if you try to "communicate" between entangled particles by altering one particle to affect the other, you're just sending information about one particle to itself so the net information sent is zero, it's like calling yourself on your own phone.

The second thing is, even if you separate particles at vasts distances, you can only do so at the speed of light. Thirdly, even though supposedly you could destroy a photon at one end the entangled pair (which isn't anything strange) and have a similar photon be re-emitted at the other end, in order to measure that anyone received that one-way piece of information and observe that they knew to send something back to you, you would have do so at a maximum of the speed of light. There's always some loop hole where even if something supposedly occurs faster than light, it can't be measured as doing so, because as soon as you say something is measured as traveling faster than light there's violations in basic causality and relativity.

 

Now, the trick with interstellar travel isn't traveling faster than the speed of light, it's increasing the speed of light itself so that you have a higher speed limit, thus no one actually observes you traveling "faster" than a photon in your local space. As long as nothing mass-bearing or energy-bearing travels faster than a photon. you're okay. A photon travels at about 300,000,000m/s which is invariant regardless of the frame of reference, so if you make a photon travel at 400,000,000m/s instead, the matter in that local space where that speed limit is increased could theoretically travel anywhere between 300,000,000m/s and 400,000,000m/s. In order to do that, you would have to change the metric for a Planck length and Planck time in a way that increases the amount of Planck length that you can travel in a smaller Planck time, sort of like the opposite of standard time dilation and length contraction. Supposedly this can be done with negative energy if it exists as that would cause a negative warping of space, giving the opposite of the effects that we see with positive warping due to gravity.

Edited April 29, 2016 by BiotechFusion

[ajb]

Now, the trick with interstellar travel isn't traveling faster than the speed of light, it's increasing the speed of light itself so that you have a higher speed limit, thus no one actually observes you traveling "faster" than a photon in your local space.

This basically correct. It is possible to have situations where you can globally travel faster than a light beam sent between two points, but locally you never travel faster than the speed of light. Exotic things like warp drives and worm holes are such examples. However these objects require some exotic conditions and may not actually be realised in nature.

 

As for the rest of your post I am not so sure.

Edited April 29, 2016 by ajb

[BiotechFusion]

As for the rest of your post I am not so sure.

What are you not sure about? If I start with particle A and I send something from particle A to particle A, am I sending something from particle A to particle B? No, I'm sending something from particle A to particle A, or in other words, I'm not sending anything anywhere. Entangled particles are just like the regular, every-day particles you know and teleporting photons is actually just a basic phenomena in even introductory chemistry: an electron must emit a photon when entering a lower quantum state.

So, imagine at atom with electrons around it, and imagine you shoot a photon at an electron to excite it temporarily. When the electron is recaptured by the charge of the atom and enters a lower quantum state, it emits a photon in a seemingly random direction.

Now, with entanglement, imagine I take that same electron and split it between different locations of space. When one end absorbs a photon, it has a 50/50 chance of emitting a similar photon on the other end if it enters a lower quantum state because both "ends" are the same electron, so its not actually teleporting a photon, but rather it is destroying a photon and remitting the corresponding energy it absorbed, it's no different than how an electron is prior to entanglement. The only real interesting thing that happens in entanglement is that two or more particles become indistinguishable from each other, thus in a sense becoming the same particle.

Edited April 29, 2016 by BiotechFusion

[ajb]

What are you not sure about?

Changing the speed of a photon.

 

 

It depends what you mean by speed. Any inertial observer will measure the local speed of light to be c. So locally all observers can considered as inertial. If we do not have an inertial observer then we can have different speeds, it does depend explcitly on the coordinates chosen.

[BiotechFusion]

Changing the speed of a photon.

 

 

It depends what you mean by speed. Any inertial observer will measure the local speed of light to be c. So locally all observers can considered as inertial. If we do not have an inertial observer then we can have different speeds, it does depend explcitly on the coordinates chosen.

Well essentially it comes down to a metric. As long as light travels one light second per second, as long as that ratio stays the same, a light second and a second can mathematically be any length, so all we're doing with negative energy is changing the metric of local space so that as you put it, globally we can travel faster than light but locally we cannot. In other words, to space, it doesn't matter how much distance a light second is, it just matters that a photon always only travels one of them in a second.

Edited April 29, 2016 by BiotechFusion

[ajb]

You have picked a unit for time, and this worries me with your argument. Really you now need to show me something mathematical.

[BiotechFusion]

You have picked a unit for time, and this worries me with your argument. Really you now need to show me something mathematical.

If you want to use your own time to look at the numerous papers published, I'm not stopping you.

In fact, here, I'll even give you a head start

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20110015936.pdf

http://www.sfu.ca/~adebened/funstuff/warpdrive.html

I also didn't "pick" a unit for time but instead generalized it to any unit, I said explicitly "mathematically, it doesn't matter how long a light-second is...as long as a photon travels one of them in a second" which is true to the extent that maxwell's equations can still be upheld. We still have a standard speed of light from which the metric deviates from in different transformations of the coordinate system. You should also note that just negative energy (which is what I was talking about) on its own will not propel an object to past the speed of light.

As long as the speed of a photon remains invariant, special relativity isn't violated.

Edited April 30, 2016 by BiotechFusion

[ajb]

I also didn't "pick" a unit for time but instead generalized it to any unit,

Well you did say seconds. In order for you to make any sense of the distance light travels in a unit of time, you need, well a unit of time.

 

 

I said explicitly "mathematically, it doesn't matter how long a light-second is...

But a light second has a specific meaning, and one tied to the local speed of light.

 

 

We still have a standard speed of light from which the metric deviates from in different transformations of the coordinate system.

This sounds simply like using a non-inertial coordinate system. In such systems the speed of a photon is almost never c. If that is what you are saying then I agree.

 

 

As long as the speed of a photon remains invariant, special relativity isn't violated.

Provided we use inertial coordinates only, sure.

Edited May 1, 2016 by ajb