How gravity regulation works?

POSTED BY: CrevanReaver
UPDATED: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 23:48
VIEWED: 10797
PAGE 5 of 6

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE

DOCTROID

Wednesday, February 7, 2007 5:51 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
The Radion scalar field first appeared in the KK-Theory published in the 1920s, though it wasn't called Radion then I think.

Hmm, did Kaluza and Klein actually make use of that concept? (I know their names but not a whole lot more than that...)

Anyway... search of Spires turns up a use of the term "radion" in 1998, that's the earliest I see and looks like it may be the original use: hep-th/9809124. Which predates Firefly, so this conceivably is what "radion accelerator core" refers to. And here I thought it was just a suitably tech-y sounding phrase.

CITIZEN

Wednesday, February 7, 2007 5:06 PM

Yes, the scalar field was a part of their model, but wasn't called Radion until later (maybe 1998, maybe earlier, I don't know).

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

ZOID

Thursday, February 8, 2007 12:48 AM

CrevanReaver:

Here, I'll have a go...

I'm a physics/cosmology fanboy, so be forewarned...

Some have postulated that the universe that we see and exist in is -- in actuality -- a holographic projection. But don't think in terms of laser-generated holograms you may have seen, it goes much deeper than that; so deep in fact, that we not only do not know how it works, but we can never know how deep it goes because we are part of the system (holographic projection) and cannot get outside of it to study what actually creates the projection.

It is also postulated -- by no means without controversy -- that the universe is made up of more than the four dimensions we normally perceive as the 'spacetime continuum'. We do not 'see' these other dimensions -- between 6 and 22 additional dimensions, depending on the theoretical flavor you choose -- because they are 'wound up' very tight, say +/- the distance between an atomic nucleus and its first electron shell.

The point is, that every discrete point in the macroscopic, visible universe (not quite infinite in size, but pretty darned close) has a corresponding reference point in each of these 'rolled up' dimensions.

One last piece of the technology required to alter gravity would be a computer capable of interacting with the hologram at its most basic level, something being worked toward at this very moment in computer laboratories all over the world. With a computer sufficiently miniaturized in its mechanisms to actually use the fabric of the universe (hologram) for both storage and limitless power source, it might also be possible to 'remap' gravitic information from one massive body to another -- say, on the other side of the universe -- by means of manipulation of one or more of the microscopic 'rolled up' dimensions (since everything is made up of what boils down to Information).

Therefore, your answer is: A computer, housed on each body/ship one wanted to control the gravity of, capable of manipulating the fabric of the universe. Probably Linux-based...

Speculatively,

zoid

P.S.
We already know the trash dispensers are handled by Windows-based computers, and can presume that the advertising kiosks run on Macs...
_________________________________________________

"I aim to misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDBOF'

STINKINGROSE

Monday, February 19, 2007 4:35 PM

So each little universe has it's own red hat?

(sorry..)

ASARIAN

Tuesday, February 20, 2007 1:09 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by zoid:

It is also postulated -- by no means without controversy -- that the universe is made up of more than the four dimensions we normally perceive as the 'spacetime continuum'. We do not 'see' these other dimensions -- between 6 and 22 additional dimensions, depending on the theoretical flavor you choose -- because they are 'wound up' very tight, say +/- the distance between an atomic nucleus and its first electron shell.

The point is, that every discrete point in the macroscopic, visible universe (not quite infinite in size, but pretty darned close) has a corresponding reference point in each of these 'rolled up' dimensions.

Ah, welcome to the wonderful universe of "brane worlds". :)

Though most of the math really goes way over my head (and it should, lol, I studied Law,) I'm still fascinated by such stuff. For instance, there was this article I read where the radion plays a major part in strong gravity, and it was postulated that positive density causes branes to deflect apart. However, also, in cases of "negative density", that the opposite would occur: namely, that the distance between two branes would decrease. I dunno, perhaps one could build build a standard radion accelerator core out of this principle of pulling two branes closer together? :)

Whatever the case may be (I really oughta ask our resident genius, Citizen), seems to me Joss weren't just bs-ing with this Radion stuff. And why doesn't that surprise me? :)

--
"Mei-mei, everything I have is right here." -- Simon Tam

DROSTIE

Tuesday, February 20, 2007 2:05 AM

As a person who has completed most of a Bachelor's degree in Applied Physics at an ivy-league school, I wanted to note that I find this whole discussion, er, regrettable.

The physics in Firefly wasn't meant to be all that realistic. Even in the pilot, you see a host of weird things -- like when the gravity suddenly "turns on" when air is added to the airlock. Not to mention the whole "nuclear explosion" idea that they kicked around in the commentary is a Bad Idea -- the crew needs to get accelerated forward with the ship, and if you accelerate them too hard, they're going to react like anything else that's been accelerated.

And gravitons are like photons, not electrons.

Meh.

ZOID

Wednesday, February 21, 2007 3:18 AM

Drostie, et al:

...That's why I made the elaborate joke about OSes. Firefly is speculative fiction. Getting wrapped up in the science is ultimately unproductive; but, that is part of the allure of science fiction. What will our future be like? How will science make our lives different, for better or worse. If you can't accept that, then stay away from sci-fi. Alternatively, you could just let your hair down and engage in a little speculative daydreaming with everyone else. (NB: Don't worry, we won't tell any of your colleagues that you are a less than perfectly serious scientist.)

Fact is, if anybody knew how to manipulate gravity, we'd be doing it. ...Other than at Area 51, of course.

Second fact is, in order to even have a chance to manipulate gravity (not a given), we must first have concrete evidence that we understand how gravitic information is transmitted. Right now, that is not the case. All we have are theories that fit the math, but no empirical evidence that any of the numerous models describe reality.

Gravity is the separator between QM and Relativity, and a righteous pain in the ass. It extends from the quantum realm into (and throughout) the macroscopic universe. That's a real sticking point, isn't it? It is the weakest force, and yet it binds the galaxies together, because it also has the broadest (infinite?) range of effect.

Until these paradoxes can be reconciled in a Unified Theory, then no quantum, relativistic or hybrid theory can be considered complete.

When we do get a grip on the actual mechanics of the universe, manipulating gravity by artificial means may be allowed by the rules -- or by bending or breaking them -- and then we may be able to power starships and create planetary fields.

Once upon a time, manned flight was considered an impossible dream. "If God had intended us to fly", went the conventional wisdom, "He'd have given us wings." Now we take it for granted.

We've got 500 hundred years or so to work it out in time for a Firefly-like future tech. I'd bet on a hundred years or less...

Speculatively,

zoid

P.S.
Ponder awhile on the technology of 1507 A.D. What do you suppose the people of that time would do to you if they saw you talking into a cell phone? Using a microwave oven? Flying a Cessna Skyhawk?
_________________________________________________

"I aim to misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDBOF'

"Burn the witch!" -Man in the mob
...
"It's a fair cop." -Witch
-From "Monty Python and the Holy Grail"

DROSTIE

Wednesday, February 21, 2007 4:23 AM

Quote:
Alternatively, you could just let your hair down and engage in a little speculative daydreaming with everyone else. (NB: Don't worry, we won't tell any of your colleagues that you are a less than perfectly serious scientist.)

Hey, I never said that I'm always so serious. I just think that the whole idea of speculating on the physics of a show that was *made* to be unrealistic is... well, like I said. Regrettable.

Just to indulge your speculative fantasies, though:

There are only two convenient ways I see to manage a "gravity drive:"

(1) Find a way to generate dark matter. If you've been watching Phil Plait's recent blogs, you know that the evidence for WIMPs -- Weakly-Interacting Massive Particles -- is stronger than the dark matter theory of MaCHOs. (Briefly: The MaCHO theory supposes that "dark matter" is the same stuff the earth is made of -- massive matter that doesn't, by itself, emit light. The WIMP theory states that "dark matter" is made of something else, which doesn't have a net charge, and so only acts according to gravitational forces and maybe some nuclear forces.)

If you can create a large, dense field of WIMPs beneath your ship, you might be able to maintain a gravitational field. (Why did the gravity drive unsettle Kaylee in the atmospheric entry? It might operate by a feedback system that overcompensates a tad.)

(2) Fill the peoples with a couple extra electrons, then use a plate at the top of the ship, and another at the bottom of the ship, to create a strong E-field therein.

This won't actually work. To keep the air from ionizing (which happens with an E-field of around 30 kV/cm (3 MN/C)), you want to keep the E-field below ~1MN/C. Otherwise, you'll have lightning.

People have a mass on the order of 100kg, or a weight on the order of 1 kN, so, you need a charge of about 1 mC on each person to keep lightning from striking.

But two 1 mC point charges at 1 m away from each other will repel by ~ 9 kN, or about the weight of 10 people. None of the Firefly hugging scenes would have ever worked out.

Quote:
That's a real sticking point, isn't it? It is the weakest force, and yet it binds the galaxies together, because it also has the broadest (infinite?) range of effect.

The force of an electron has a similarly infinite range of effect. The reason you don't see much in galactic electrodynamics is that the world is remarkably charge-neutral on average, because electrons and protons are unimaginably good at attracting each other.

Don't get me wrong; I think your speculations about the progress of science are sweet. Nonetheless, particle physics has been moving slowly as of late, and a big part of the problem is that we've run into a wall where science can no longer be done quite so descriptively. Our present understanding of gravity does not include anything other than mass creating the curvatures that affect everything else in the world.

On a plus note, I'd be optimistic and identify the two side engines of Serenity as ion drives. In 500 years, we might manage to make them practical. Probably, the engine involves a contained fusion reaction -- and "core containment" refers to the inevitably large amount of radiation that needs to be kept away from the crew manning the ship.

Again, the "nuclear explosion" tail-end drive is highly unrealistic, because people are on a scale where Newtonian mechanics holds very well, and human bodies don't take kindly to being accelerated at rates greater than a couple g's. Possibly, genetic engineering will improve those accelerations in the intervening years, but not to the level that they're talking about. In any case, we see people habitually stand when the acceleration is done (e.g. Jayne's "Let's moon 'em" comment), when the accelerations involved would probably toss them off of their feet.

(To be fair, someone should probably use the videos to estimate how fast Serenity accelerates with that drive--but it seems like it should probably be less than 1 g, since people habitually stand during the proces

IMPERATODD

Wednesday, February 21, 2007 5:16 AM

Maybe this will help:

The RPG (cannon or not) was rather realistic in terms of the technology. The production of gravity has been achieved through the unification of the fundamental forces. To be honest we can't determine how realistic the gravity regulation issue is until we crack this problem. We know how gravity behaves on galactic scales but at subatomic levels we have no clue. Quantum mechanics can't describe it, and M-theory also called string theory makes a lot of sense mathematically however it can't be tested with our current technology, and even with it there are still holes with the behavior of gravity at the sub-atomic scale. What we know is any force needs to be conducted in some way, light is a photon, electricity the electron, gravity as we understand it is likely a graviton. The gravity regulation is with graviton streams may be workable for producing a localized effect. The issue with it seeming feasible is with our understanding of the topic, we know gravity on the big scale but to know how this works, or if it can we need to know it on the small scale, and today we don't. This is the simple of it, we know it does work the universe exists we see it work, we don't know how, why, or what it looks like.

The thing about FF is it follows science pretty well as we understand it. Everything we know and see says FTL is likely not possible, and every other series messes with that observation with explanations that are half crap, half old physics text, but we love them so let it go. Firefly sees it may not happen but we still can go faster and leave our system. In addition alien life is sci-fi is portrayed in such an unrealistic way. There at best, according to the Drake equation 10,000 communicating sentient cultures in the galaxy, the chance of finding one among the 100,000,000,000 stars is slim, and them being humanoid with bilateral symmetry is so slim a telescope couldn't find it. That is one of the things I hate about star wars. IN addition the writers don't try and cover stuff we don't know with gibberish(I love trek but it at times is trying, the forehead stuff is too.) Simply put there are times when we need to be smart enough to admit how ignorant we are and look for an answer, while accepting that not everything will conform to our preconceived notions. That I learned myself and saw on Farscape.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Were I an Alliance citizen during the War of Unification I would have been an Alliance Patriot, but I would have run guns for the Browncoats. No I am not a greedy baby eating monster! Gunrunning would have been the patriotic thing to do.

Governments have a way of warping ideals.

ZOID

Wednesday, February 21, 2007 11:26 AM

Drostie:

From all us science fanboys and girls: Thank you for coming out to play. I appreciate how hard it must be, I really do. My bete noire is trying to explain computers (and I don't consider myself anything more than 'knowledgeable') to associates and loved ones who seem unable to grasp that the devices are, in essence, highly utile utter morons. (The computers, not the people.)

Folks just don't understand that computers have serious limitations that simply cannot be overlooked, and that no amount of wishing otherwise can overcome. The same, I suppose, is true of scientific endeavors.

Still, it is fun to think about what computers may some day be capable of, and how humanity will utilize that expanded capability. The same is true of other fields of scientific endeavor, for me.

Quote:
...But two 1 mC point charges at 1 m away from each other will repel by ~ 9 kN, or about the weight of 10 people. None of the Firefly hugging scenes would have ever worked out...

Maybe this is why Mal and Inara can never seem to work it out. They want to, but they literally just can't get together...

Quote:
...The force of an electron has a similarly infinite range of effect. The reason you don't see much in galactic electrodynamics is that the world is remarkably charge-neutral on average, because electrons and protons are unimaginably good at attracting each other...

Yeah, I was going to add that unlike other forces, which tend to cancel out, gravity is cumulative. But then I figured I'd just be belaboring the point, which I tend to do too much of as it is. You explained it much more concisely than I would have.

Quote:
...Don't get me wrong; I think your speculations about the progress of science are sweet. Nonetheless, particle physics has been moving slowly as of late, and a big part of the problem is that we've run into a wall where science can no longer be done quite so descriptively. Our present understanding of gravity does not include anything other than mass creating the curvatures that affect everything else in the world...

As I said, Gravity's a righteous pain. Why's it gotta be so difficult, so untractable? QM's the most deliriously successful theory in scientific history, yet it chokes to death on something as obvious as Gravity. Relativity, based on antiquated Newtonian physics, is the most complete theory of gravitation imaginable; but it falls into little scraps at the subatomic level. It describes how gravitation works, but it fails to explain the mechanism of why it works.

As to the "wall" y'all have run into: Don't worry. All y'all need is ever more powerful colliders, as y'all discover ever more varieties (and whole families) of sub-sub-particles. I understand miniature black holes are on the possible menu for the CERN, so, bon appetit.

There used to be a poster 'round FFFn who worked at one of the two gravity wave detectors here in the U.S. He said they hadn't found any waves, but that since the laser positioning of the detectors was so precise, they did manage to get a macroscopic superposition of up to five visible possible locations for the detector when the laser was activated. So, no gravity waves, but a possible starting point for teleportation.

Science is a funny old game...

I've got to get myself to work; but I'd like to briefly add that an ion drive currently powers a probe at record speeds. Also, a nuclear mini-explosion pulse drive, rather than the all-at-once 30 megaton nuclear explosion kick in the pants wouldn't necessarily smear the ships occupants around its interior. Say, small matter-antimatter annihilations? Maybe we'll even see one at the CERN or some next-gen SSC...

Very Respectfully,

zoid
_________________________________________________

"I aim to misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDBOF'

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." -Sir Arthur Charles Clarke, science fiction writer, conceptual inventor of the g

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE