The Hyperspace Equation: Could it work?

Updated on July 20, 2014

Hyperspace: What is it?

Hyperspace, a theory that one can travel to another place without interacting negatively with Albert Einstein's theory of relativity, whereas he said nothing can go faster than the speed of light. What if you knew that NASA and a couple privatized experimentation is currently underway to figure out just how one can bend time and space to get from place to place? Imagine wishing to meet up for an interview at a work location, you need directions right? The potential employer asks you to meet at the corners of red and green street (2d), and travel up the building the employer works in to the 14th floor (3d). In this case, our visualizations are based on a 3d world, but if you wanted to get their on time, but stuck ten blocks away, you need a way correct? A Taxi Maybe?

Now, calling for a cab instead of walking, as your interview per say is 12 noon, but the taxi gets you their sooner in time, or 11:30am, you would be slowing time down to get to your location faster. This in reality is a vague example of four dimensions, or space-time. Try another example, a supernova in the galaxy has occurred, but the light you've noticed in space is already an insurmountable amount of time has already passed, therefore your watching a past event in a "Present", yet futuristic event. That same star, the one that exploded, at its time before the explosion occurred, has a "Alien" civilization that has been watching the stars for millions of years, yet they haven't even seen our planet Earth exist in any means whatsoever. Wouldn't this be an example of time-travel, or at least a time-space bend in matter. In Hyperspace, imagine this large example:

-Gavin Giobran's Logic-

• 1 + -1 = 0
• 2 + -2 = 0
• 3 + -3 = 0

In this example, the absolute value of 0 is the largest number, or the hole, in which both numbers cancel the value back to an equal order. In the function of the universe, +1 is the expansion of the big bang, whereas -1 is the big contraction. Therefore, 0 is the balance, or the occurrence of truly infinite values that give rise to a split in space-time, theoretically creating a wormhole to account for getting from one place to another fairly quickly. In an observer view, a 2d species crossing over a newspaper, such as an ant, doesn't understand the 3d principles of the words and photos that we see as we hold the paper in our hands. If we proceed to attach opposite sides of the newspaper together, then the 2d ant crossing now has a potential "0" Infinite absolute value that becomes the link of all infinite numbers to allow the ant to cross. This does not interfere with Einstein's theory of relativity, as the ant does not need to go faster than the speed of light, but simply bends time-space to cross it.

The Concept of Hyperspace and Early Scientists

In all it's rare form of distorting time and space to get to one place to another, one fact is true: We are still in it's infancy. A scientist, Albert Einstein, had an idea that no planet, star, organism, or anything else for that matter, cannot and will not exceed the speed of light. He had however, a "Special" form of relativity that helped fuse the physical rarities that act on objects outside of gravity's control. This is where the notion of his laws of gravity along with Issac Newton's concrete evidence for it, becomes quite rocky. How then, can we as a species, see the light of stars that have burned out millions of years ago?

Steven Hawking, a man born in 1942 during the darkest times of the second World war, decided to attempt the fusing of Einstein's theory of relativity with the quantum mechanic principles of adding a fourth dimension. It was found that as an object that flew through space bends and curves, condenses and expands, all while traveling through the dark matter of space. Now if you can, imagine a star that burns out, collapsing in on itself, creating a continual density of massive energy in the center. After closer inspection through mathematical equations, Hawking found that a black hole must have a plug-hole, or in scientific terms, a Singularity. A man in 1965, Roger Pinrose said that if a star collapsed within a certain grid temperate, it would implode, and within this process, cause the black hole that was the end result to be void of time.

Modern Scientific Analysis of the Concept

To explain the concept of hyperspace in various functions, we must look at the "effect" theories that encompass the surrealism of possible hyperspace. Hendrick Casimir, a scientist with a love for superconductors and the elusive aspects of Physics in general, proposed a theory that a force could potentially cause a vacuum between two objects. Werner Heisenberg proposed that waves can be brought into a close proximity with one another, creating an environment that the Casimir effect could potentially take place to cause Quantum Tunneling. Below are both theories stated above, all offering an entangled difference in what could and indefinitely work with future technological advancements:

Casimir-Polder Effect

The Casimir-Polder Force/Effect: A Concept in physics that defines the physical force that is exerted in between two separate objects that act as a vacuum within a resonance. The static fields that work as virtual particles within the slightest distance between the two objects is the force that could create such a vacuum like effect. This in theory could potentially allow for a creation of a wormhole that with hyperspace tendencies and the mass negative reaction happening within the zone of outward pressures, create space travel much easier.

The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle

This Principle is a uncertainty found in the quantum arena of observer law, whereas almost all wave-like systems have been shown to have this function Through quantum mechanics an interaction between waves and functions seems to find a link, regardless of whether an observer is present or not. In the Wave Mechanics Interpretation, super-positions of multiple plane waves form a tight cluster, within the middle we find a ripple effect. Once again, the correlation between close vacuum effects and gavin's logic of 1+-1=0 or an infinite number of solutions within the density of the ripples and waves.

The Alcubierre Drive: Hyperspace in Theoretical Action

A Mexican Theoretician, Miguel Alcubierre is beginning to show the world that Einstein's laws of Relativity do not contradict the non-locality of Quantum Mechanics. In his work, Alcubierre explains that general relativity does in fact, through a recession velocity, proceed faster than the speed of light. He also believes, as do many theorists around the world following the Quantum field, that stars and planets more than 14 billion years away also have a recession velocity due to distance that is faster than light. In his work, Alcubierre announced the theory of creating a drafting of a hyperspace drive, or the "Alcubierre Drive". In theoretical concept, this would create a "Warp Bubble" around a spacecraft, where space at the front is in extreme contracting, all the while space in the back expands rapidly. In effect, this would cause the bubble to move faster than the speed of light while light outside the bubble would remain in normal constant.

What is the Modern Conclusion on Hyperspace?

Hyperspace, in all it's glory and paradoxical figures, is still in it's infancy, and a working drive nor a ship have yet to be built to sustain from the normal laws of relativity. Members at NASA have said they are working on the theories to gain a much more detailed data-driven conclusion to the beginning aspects of Hyperspace, but leaps are small. They have said on the NASA Government website that Hyperspace is still in a speculatory stage, but using Alcubierre's Equations and Wormhole Research one could potentially be on the right track for eventually making hyperspace and advanced space travel a concrete a fact in the not so near future. As the Federation would say, Live long and Prosper.

Works Cited List

Wikipedia: Faster than Light

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light

Alcubierre Warp Drive:

http://www.andersoninstitute.com/alcubierre-warp-drive.html\

Casimir Effect:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Quantum/casimir.html

Heisenberg Principle of Uncertainty:

http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/21st_century_science/lectures/lec14.html

Quantum Physics (Stanford Definition and Philosophy)

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm/

Einstein History (Special Relativity Paper Org. Document Pub)

http://www.bartleby.com/173/

NASA Status on Hyperspace:

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/technology/warp/warpstat_prt.htm

Popular

17

5

• Lever and Screw Simple Machines Lesson

37

0 of 8192 characters used
• monkeyminds

6 years ago from My Tree House

There is no alternative to hyperspace drives. One simply can not bend space, or travel through time. Space is a where, not a what. A concept not an object. Time is what clocks do. A concept not an object. What other context can there possibly be? The hypothesis is irrational...end of story!

Please! Stay out of the Hubs. It is not be good for you. If the idea of space and time gets you this riled up, then the rest of the subjects in our Hubs just may push you over the edge.

Holy crap, man! Get it together. Now you are talking about AIDS. I am very sorry that you the the government gave you AIDS, but what does that have to do with a hyperspace drive?

• syzygyastro aka WYZIWYG

6 years ago

Both of you still have not addressed the issue of this hub with effective counter arguments. What can be said is this is a hypothesis at best and so far, no one has proven the existence of wormholes and the like that would bend space-time. Besides, so called time travel is impossible except through watching old historical videos. Time is as you do correctly state, not what we think it is..

It seems all you can do is criticize out of context, but offer no alternative explanations. I'm going to check both of your pages to see what's going on. This has drifted off topic as you both say, but you have contributed to that drift.

You do not know me and are not qualified to be my judge jury and executioner. Nor are you entitled to dictate to me how I should conduct my affairs. You spin your own invented stories about who I am and what my alleged history is all about. I have seen what doctors do and many of them would qualify to work in a place like Guantanamo Bay. I have seen and heard sheer horror stories that would make who they call quakes seem their betters in practice. I have had to legally intervene in some situations for the benefit of the patients. Here is an example. Are you aware for instance that AIDS is a bioweapon invention with a US patent number and that there is also a cure, also with a patent number. This research and development was headed by Dr, Gallo. Don't take my world for it as I know you won't. Instead, Google out the patent number for yourself and do some honest research.

But, alas, I'm sure you won't be doing that, because you have better things to do in you own minds.

• billgaede

6 years ago

"Ayn Rand has had profound impact on all issues economic. ... Einsteinian, Tesla, et al have left their marks!... M. Friedman won the Nobel prize for economics"

.

Looks like this fellow WYSIWYG just asks for autographs. He's looking for authoritative figures, celebrities, baseball cards for his album. Perhaps his priest raped him inside the confession box and he liked it. Maybe that's all he will ever seek.

In Science, we don't care about big names. Especially, we clean out holes with Nobel Medals. It is idiots who worship Nobel Medals and big names. In Science, we care not what impact this demented looney Ayn or deranged moron Albert or bean brain Nikola had on the Mathemagical World. They had no bearing whatsoever on Science. In Science, we must explain rationally. None of these three idiots did.

• monkeyminds

6 years ago from My Tree House

You're the only one confused here WYSIWYG. The topic is The Hyperspace Equation: Could it work? Arguments have been made for why it clearly can not.

Instead of addressing that, you want to talk about religion, and politics and economics, and now climate change. Who knows what is next. It's why the doctor has you on medication. To help you focus. They won't do you any good if you don't take them.

Now that you are starting to ramble on about other folks being state paid trolls hired to confuse you, you are obviously becoming a danger to yourself. Please pick up the phone and call your doctor, so he can help you before you hurt yourself or someone else. Tell him that you are imagining people from medieval times conspiring against you. He'll know what to do.

• William J. Prest

6 years ago from Vancouver, Canada

• monkeyminds

6 years ago from My Tree House

@WYSIWYG What a scattered brain, convoluted bunch of nonsense. Are you on meds? You better take them. Go back to the top and read the subject material over again. Then if you can focus long enough, address...IDK... at least one of the arguments put forth here.

This was supposed to be about science, and now you bring up religion and politics...what's next operating systems? Geesh, if there was some'thing' called space you'd be a waste of it!

• William J. Prest

6 years ago from Vancouver, Canada

Ayn Rand may be bad religion and science, but consider the impact that this political-economic philosopher has had on society in America; of late through her follower, Milton Friedman. Now I would be among the first to say that this is the voodoo economics of austerity that has lately plagued and robbed the world for the enrichment of the few. As a "scientist", Ayn Rand has had profound impact on all issues economic. As scientists also rely on economics, they are affected by such speculations regardless of who they are. Canada has recently seen the sacking of a large number of scientists and research specialists and it all relates to political economics.

I have yet to see any hint of a strong argument against Einstein, Tesla, et al, nor have I see anything much in the way of metrics. I do not consider a video of scenery in Vienna where the so called conference on physics was held. The only thing I heard was lovely music by Mozart. This is not a valid argument! I have heard better from quacks and religious speculators. Einsteinian, Tesla, et al have left their marks! Where are yours? Stop wasting everyone's time; oops there's that dirty word again. I think something very strange is afoot here.

• monkeyminds

6 years ago from My Tree House

Christ on a stick, man, Ayn Rand isn't even good religion, but she damn sure isn't objective or science!

Typical religionists, dodgier than a wack-a-mole, jumping from one hole to another.

• billgaede

6 years ago

Followers of Ayn Rand, Nikola Tesla, Walter Russell, Ed Leedskalnin, the Electric Universe, and the like are people who have no clue about Science, let alone about Physics.

• William J. Prest

6 years ago from Vancouver, Canada

If we are going to now argue about objective versus subjective, perhaps we should consider Ayn Rand who philosophised about objectivist epistemology. There is plenty to chew on in her book by that name as ehe gets deep into the topic of objectivism. But here is a link to an outline of here thinking.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_(Ayn_Rand...

• monkeyminds

6 years ago from My Tree House

@ WYSIWYG: "objective observation" is an Oxymoron. If the opposite of objective is subjective then one must remove the observer from the Scientific Method. Herein lies the problem with mainstream scientist's approach. Observation, testing, and experimentation are all extra-scientific.

The results of this method are WHY science is in the mess it is in. We end up with truth, proof, evidence, and opinion; Authority, Nobel Beauty Pageants and Peer Review.

But, carry on!

• William J. Prest

6 years ago from Vancouver, Canada

@ billgaede: You're right! Science is supposed to be rational and based on objective observation and experimentation. What we have today is far too much hypothesizing and speculation, That video has a glaring fault within its internal "logic". If indeed we see the past when we look across the breadth of the expanding cosmos, then moving in the opposite direction does not mean that you suddenly can see into the future. I would say that this particular video contains serious misinformation even within the framework of GR. As for misinformation, it is rife in all fields and the object is to create doubt.

• AUTHOR

BakerRambles

6 years ago from Baltimore, MD

Space and time you decided to give a definition of, your explanation is of a realist nature. A Video would be as follows:

:)

• monkeyminds

6 years ago from My Tree House

That Archimedes invented a screw is a non-sequiter. Screws are possible.

Space as an object is not. Time as some 'thing' is not. This is a conceptual matter, and can be solved right here and now.

Define:

Space)______________?

Time_______________?

Illustrate a screw and make a mock up or sculpture of a screw. Simple. This can not be done with space and time. After you have defined space and time, please illustrate them and link us to them. Or, link us to a photograph or mock-up of 'a' time and 'a' space.

• AUTHOR

BakerRambles

6 years ago from Baltimore, MD

@ Monkeyminds2

Let me say this, you think of anything rational or nothing, but did the Egyptians have light? How did it take 4,000 years to reinvent the idea, with Thomas Jefferson doing so. In that 4,000 year period, would you of been the realist to call someone crazy for trying to do the impossible once again, as a realist would have though?

What about the Syracusia, and Archimedes and his innovative primative screw with a revolving blade turned upward, pulling water from the bottom of the hull? Would you have been the realist to say that it never could have happened 2,000 years later, reinvented through industrial and agricultural revolutions in and around the 18th century on?

I ask of you, would you not approve of this as well, that varients of a future drive that you see in a quasar, or a supermassive black-hole, did exist in times before 15,000 b.c.e? These objects in space existed well before us, so can it not be invented under a future prospect, or are you saying it never will?

A quote by a great man:

“If the genius of invention were to reveal to-morrow the secret of immortality, of eternal beauty and youth, for which all humanity is aching, the same inexorable agents which prevent a mass from changing suddenly its velocity would likewise resist the force of the new knowledge until time gradually modifies human thought.”

-Nikola Tesla

-Ps. I do however enjoy your wise words of wisdom good sir.

• monkeyminds

6 years ago from My Tree House

Whether one agrees or criticizes is not important. What matters is the explanation.

When one describes but does not explain they have no argument.

If one presents an irrational proposal they have no argument.

Neither Relativity or Quantum Mechanics have a rational argument for Alcubiere's warp drive. The idea is what is warped as has already been pointed out. Space is clearly NOT some'thing' which can be warped and time is not something which can be dilated.

If you (Baker) claim to see hyperspace drives in the future then you have been blinded by your own supposed brilliance.

• AUTHOR

BakerRambles

6 years ago from Baltimore, MD

It seems some are for and some are against the idea of a quantum mechanic approach to hyperspace, rather than an Eisenstein approach. This article is meant to derive a large debate, as it has succeeded in doing so. Science is mean't to draw criticism, as we could not exceed in any field without first doing so.

May I add this quote to the argument between everyone here, as I am a futurist myself, and can see these types of future advancements becoming a reality:

“Much like walking through a dark forest with a flashlight, the future only comes into focus a short distance in front of us. So how do we create a brighter flashlight?”

-Futurist Thomas Grey

• billgaede

6 years ago

"your videos... have inspired an article"

.

Well, I'm glad they did some damage.

• monkeyminds

6 years ago from My Tree House

Who cares? You haven't addressed a single issue presented in the Hub article or comments. If you have something to say, say it.

BTW, it's bad HP etiquette to use someone's Hub Page to promote your agenda.

• William J. Prest

6 years ago from Vancouver, Canada

I saw two of your videos and they have inspired an article that will later be posted. You can take it from there on the day that it is posted.

• billgaede

6 years ago

“Much of what we take for granted today, would have been seen as and was called impossible and fantasy in the past.”

.

.

This is one of the biggest errors in logic that people make today. The idiot at the asylum says: “Well, Jules Verne talked about going to the Moon and traveling around the world in 80 days. 100 years later we did them both.”

.

The looney is the person who can’t distinguish between reality and fantasy. Only a stupid piece of garbage like Einstein could have proposed that there are 4 dimensions and that we can travel through the dimension of time.

.

In Physics, in the real world, there are only 3 dimensions. And we certainly can’t travel through a CONCEPT such as time or through a dimension such as height. Since when is height a tunnel we can squeeze THROUGH?

.

What Jules Verne proposed was within the purview of Physics whether he knew it or not. What the morons of Relativity propose is clearly NOT! Therefore, it doesn’t follow that because someone dreamed of what seemed impossible at the time, e.g., flying an airplane, and this finally became a reality that we can also talk about traveling through wormholes to another universe and expect this nonsense to materialize. ALL the poppycock proposed by Relativity and Quantum has no chance of materializing because it is entirely irrational. Flying an airplane seemed impossible in its early days. Traveling through time, whether to the past or to the future, is IRRATIONAL. There is not ONE theory of Mathemagical ‘fizzix’ that is rational…

.

1. It is irrational to propose that we can travel through a dimension even if time were a dimension.

.

2. It is irrational to say that there is something called a ‘Higgs’ boson that is a particle of a CONCEPT! Since when do we have particles of love? Since when do we have particles of justice?

.

3. It is irrational to propose that we can be sucked in by a CONCEPT known in the religion of Math as a ‘black hole’. The infamous black hole has two components, both CONCEPTS: singularity and event horizon. There is no physical object before us.

.

.

Therefore, whatever Einstein (Relativity) and Bohr (Quantum) proposed is pure poppycock. None of it has a chance of making the grade in Science. The mathemagicians have not been doing Physics for over a hundred years. And humans certainly won’t travel to the past, to the future, or even out of the Solar System… alive!

.

.

.

• monkeyminds

6 years ago from My Tree House

Relativity combines the three directions of "space" with time (NOTE: when they say space they mean objects. One can not measure space). GR says that the curvature of SPACE is gravity. This is turning a where into a what. Space into matter.

ALL phenomena is the result of contact between objects, without exception! Yes, the photoeelctric effect is a phenomena, but what are the objects involved? AND what has this to do with hyperspace, or relativity?

No, I have no contempt for you at all. I am merely sad. I have contempt for the Father of Lies not the children. Or, as I call them, The Rock Starz of Physics and their bobbleheads.

However, I ridicule ideas not people. "Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions." -- Thomas Jefferson

"Nothing should be above ridicule because it gets people to think." -- Lawrence Krauss

• syzygyastro

6 years ago

When you address WYSIWYG, I presume you are addressing me based on the following content. As far as I know, Einstein never said that space and matter were the same thing. As for the photoelectric effect, it is a real phenomenon as this is the principle behind solar cells and photosynthesis. As for your obvious contempt for myself and what I have to say in regard to anything, I will leave it to you to research things our for yourself. I do salute you in pointing out that science done by human beings is subject to corruption and financial-political influences. Do not be so quick to dismiss Tesla! I won't waste any more words here.

• monkeyminds

6 years ago from My Tree House

Now, less we stray too far from the subjects of this HUB, Hyperspace, Quantum Tunneling, Casimir Effect, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle and The Alcubierre Drive, care to explain how space (void) can expand?

Understand what Space 'is' is key to discussing the rest.

• monkeyminds

6 years ago from My Tree House

Sorry WYSIWYG:

It's great to invoke the name of Einstein and all, but relativity is nonsense on many levels, and Einstein is the Father of lies if anything.

One simply can not add the concept 'time' to length, width and height to derive space time. Physics is first and foremost the study of physical objects and their phenomena. Until people come to grips with the reality that all phenomena is the result of surface to surface contact between two or more objects, that space can not become matter, and matter can not become space, and that technology is empirical but science is conceptual they will never recognize the difference between reality and fantasy.

Theoretical (mathematical) physics only describes, it never explains. Even Einstein recognized this when he said:

“As far as the propositions of mathematics refer to reality they are not certain, and so far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.”

As for electrons and so forth, these are merely description of behavior, not objects. Pick any hypothesis based on an atom, and then tell me which model is being used; Thompson's, Bhor's?, Rutherford, Somerfield's, Debroglies, Shroedinger's, Lewis'? Then we can talk electron beads, or electron clouds, or orbitals or probability distributions.

The only Teslian technology in use today is the AC motor, and that was his greatest accomplishment to which we should be forever grateful. The rest is myth. No conspiracy to keep Tesla down. No secret technologies, and if you claim to have one, then upload the video and explain to us how it works.

Westinghouse and J.P. Morgan were more convinced that DC was the way, and then later (since Tesla was a strange bird with many phobias) his other ideas were not considered viable. It was simply impossible to work with the man in his later years. He even drew diagrams on paper one inch square, showed them to his engineers and then destroyed them. Did he ever come up with anything useful after AC? Very doubtful!

Wireless transmission of power and so-called scalar energy devices are doomed to the circle file at the USPTO.

• billgaede

6 years ago

.

.

• William J. Prest

6 years ago from Vancouver, Canada

Recall that Einstein wrote his seminal work in 1905 for which he won the Nobel prize. It is call "the Photoelectric Effect" and in one dissertation lays the foundation for what we know as quantum mechanics. He even coined the term quanta to describe the process of how photons of very specific types interact with and are "absorbed" by electrons and how they can be emitted later. Einstein never could bring himself to accept quantum mechanics, though he is the actual father of it.

I agree that too many people see "sci-fi" as real science, but the sci-fi of the past has become the sci-fact of today. Much of what we take for granted today, would have been seen as and was called impossible and fantasy in the past. We are far from the final answers and we may well be surprised as soon as tomorrow morning.

There is another branch of science and technology that has by and large gone ignored and that is the research, findings and inventions of Nikola Tesla. This is a field of research that has allowed us for one thing, to use wireless cell phone technology, wi-fi and a whole lot else. Who knows what secrets lay hidden in his sequestered fount of knowledge. One thing is certain and that is, he believed in resonance, that it was the key to spectacular results and that the wholecosmos, including the earth was a dynamic sea of electromagnetic energy.

So why don't we have sustainable Teslian technology today? Big corporations, bankers and resource interests got in the way and sequestered his research. Be sure of one thing! There are those among us who are using it, but it is not meant for the general public.

• monkeyminds

6 years ago from My Tree House

Gaede definitely could elucidate us, and does indeed have a "better" idea.

He has a rational one. BUT before one can understand a rational proposal they must first be made aware of what is irrational and being passed off as science.

However, it is not necessary to produce an alternative in order to see the irrationality in concepts being passed off as objects, and fantasy as reality.

In grade school I recall that we were taught energy was the ability to do work. Mass was a quantity of matter, and time was "What clocks do." Today energy is a magical word used in many different ways, there are several types of mass, and one can travel 'in' time. Somehow, along the way, verbs became nouns.

Abstract concepts such as ability, quantity and time became the nouns of reality. It is time for science to do an about face and head back towards utilizing the underlying physical mechanisms of Father Universe; where object to object contact explains phenomena.

It takes brave persons such as Bill Gaede to confront the madness wherever he sees it. Science in general, and physics in particular, is a brutal field, and Gaede did not draw first blood.

A slap in the face or cold water poured over the heads of individuals of the Star Trek generation is what is called for today.

• William J. Prest

6 years ago from Vancouver, Canada

@ billgaede: Why don't you elucidate us with your profound understanding on such matters if you have a better idea instead of just posting a rant against others. You've evidently uncovered some problems; now present your solutions, first in descriptive terms followed by your metrics.

• billgaede

6 years ago

"the expansion of space"

Please draw a picture of space before you expand 'it'. It is in religion where the idiots have converted space and time into physical objects that they dilate and expand.

.

.

"driven by dark energy "

Please draw a picture of this 'energy' stuff that drives and moves and transfers BEFORE you move 'it'. Energy is what the priests shove up the holes of tender choirboys.

The language of the deranged lunatics of Relativity and Quantum are: energy, mass, time, force, field charge, black hole, Big Bang, dark matter... They will never leave the asylum. All the morons who use such terms to explain physical phenomena should be locked up in padded walls... beginning with idiots Einstein and Bohr.

• William J. Prest

6 years ago from Vancouver, Canada

You know of course that GR places no limit on the velocity of the expansion of space itself according to Einstein. This is the key then and the natural form of it is in the accelerating expansion of space driven by dark energy as now postulated and is backed up by some observations. When we can learn to expand and shrink space instantaneously, then we will have the key to faster than light travel.

• monkeyminds

6 years ago from My Tree House

I assumed above you were measuring, since time is a metric humans invented to quantify motion.

Scientific Definitions:

length: the continuous matter between two surfaces

DISTANCE: A static concept relating to the separation between two surfaces

motion: two or more locations of an object

Location: the set of static distances to all other objects

Object: that which has shape

space: that which lacks shape

concept: relation between two or more objects

• monkeyminds

6 years ago from My Tree House

"There would be no height, width, or length without a distance between it, even if minuscule, so would that not be considered a time derived distance of "space-time"."

You are confusing length (a measurement along continuous substance) and distance (measurement of separation between two surfaces).

Time is motion plus memory, so it requires a minimum of three objects, such as the earth, the moon and an observer or recording device. Father Universe could not care less about whether we are there to watch a clock or remember where the moon was at midnight.

Space-time is what Einey invented when he combined the 3 Dimensions of L, W & H with time. Impossible! There are no other orthogonal (90 degrees) directions in which to place this concept time.

Not to mention one can not place a concept next to anything.

• AUTHOR

BakerRambles

6 years ago from Baltimore, MD

I do appreciate all the positive and negative comments, even if they seem to be highly critical.

@ Billgade - Ants even though they may not think on a scale as such as humans, this does not make them any less intelligent. I'd like to see humans build the massive and extensive air circulated tunnels as an ant colony, which shows culture and cognitive features, diaplays.

@ Monkeyminds - There would be no height, width, or length without a distance between it, even if minuscule, so would that not be considered a time derived distance of "space-time".

:) Have a wonderful day.

• billgaede

6 years ago

What is amusing is that we dilate time even though time is what clocks DO (hint: verb). How do you warp, bend. slow down or dilate a verb?

• monkeyminds

6 years ago from My Tree House

BTW, Einstein, in one of his more lucid moments said:

"Time is what clocks do."

• monkeyminds

6 years ago from My Tree House

Thanx for sharing the laughingly ridiculous proposals of the mainstream phiz whiz!

This underscores the problem:

"Through quantum mechanics an interaction between waves and functions seems to find a link, regardless of whether an observer is present or not."

Only objects can interact (link) with objects, and that results in all phenomena... yes whether or not an observer is there to observe it. Concepts such as waves and functions can not interact. I wave my hand or the amber grains wave in the wind. Wave is not some'thing', it is what something does.

Space and time are also concepts and as such can not interact with length, width and height!

• billgaede

6 years ago

"bend time... slowing time... "

So much poppycock in one page... The folks at Rational Science will love it!

"an ant, doesn't understand"

Yes, Physics is not for ants. It's for rational folk. However, there are tiny brained ants that talk about warped space and time travel and other nonsense. It has to do with their tiny brains. They simply don't have a capacity for rational thought.

That's why physicists try to prevent ants from participating in Rational Physics...

http://www.rationalphysics.info/

Of course, the only recourse a relativist has is censorship. Therefore, this comment has been copied and will be published where there is no censorship.

• Mahaveer Sanglikar

6 years ago from Pune, India

Well explained, thank you for the insights...

working