Xeroc

Doesn't negative energy generate anti-gravity which speeds up time, while positive energy generates gravity which slows down time?

In theory, it would, keep in mind - we don't really know if dark energy even exists - and if it does - we don't know what it is made of or what is causing it!

I may be completely wrong here but I read somewhere that our universe's expansion seems to be accelerating rather than slowing down which is what it was supposed to do. Doesn't this contradict the Big Bang theory?

No, not necessarily. The Big Bang theory really only states the universe started out extemely small, and has been expanding ever since. It says nothing about how the universe will end. The "oscillating universe" theory says it should contract into a "big crunch".

They believe it is accelerating due to "Dark Energy"

This "Dark Energy" creates an anti-grav effect accelerating the expanision of the universe.

Some theories say the dark energy will eventually accelerate and "tear" the universe apart in a "big rip":

http://MSNBC: Will the universe end in a 'big rip'?

None of this (even that dark energy exists) has been confirmed.

Another possibility some say is that the dark energy will turn negative sccelerating the universe into a "big crunch" after all.

No one's really quite sure what will happen!

Dr. Who, that's not quite correct. (about the size of the observable universe)

Actually, we have only managed to see as far away as 13.0 - 13.4 billion years into the past - so the size of the observable universe is about 13.0 to 13.4 billion light-years large.

Scientists have estimated the age (amount of time passed since the big bang) of the universe to be about 13.7 billion years.

About the absolute size of the universe it could be either finite or infinite - the big bang theory does not differentiate.

If it were infinite then the universe would be like (this is also advocated in a version of string theory) two giant planes (called branes in string theory) like this (the one on the left is our universe and the one on the right is another universe)

Note: The two planes actually extend out for infinity parallel to each other.

When they collide they produce a "big bang" where all matter and energy is "reset" in the universe.

Other branes could exist in the other dimentions or in lateral 5-d

Another idea is a more classic "big bang" approach with our universe as a 5-d sphere that exapnds like a ballon being blown up. All points move away from each other but there is no edge or center.

Hope that helps - feel free to ask any for any clarifications or ask any other questions.

3 Captains would be best :P

 

 

 

 

Why 3? Of course they would all be Admirals <_<

3 would be best because with an even number you could have a tie!

Three is the smallest number (besides one) you can have where there isn't a possibility of a tie on a critical descision.

If this ship were to have multiple captains it would likely be very large.

Should it be a universe class ship?

Yes, it is very real. Here is a link to a detailed explanation:

Cerenkov Radiation

By the way, Jeanway, we're pretty sure that the speed of light is a great cosmic speed limit.  Nothing moves faster.

what do you think happens when a particle moving at, say, 80% (0.8c) the speed of light in air enters water, in which the speed of light is only 75% the speed of light in air

(0.75c).  Is the particle moving faster than the speed of light?

I've read that tachyons travel faster than the speed of light and that they keep increasing speed as they lose mass. Is this true?

Tachyons are a theoretical particle derived from a mirror-image aspect of einstein's equations. They have never been detected so far.

They would operate in an oposite manner to normal matter so would gain mass as they slowed down to near the speed of light and would lose mass if they sped up. They would have to be created going faster than the speed of light and couldn't slow down below it.

Some additional info:

Light as propagating electromagnetic waves:

Note: This is a graph of field strength

Link to Maxwell's equations

By the way, Jeanway, we're pretty sure that the speed of light is a great cosmic speed limit.  Nothing moves faster.

what do you think happens when a particle moving at, say, 80% (0.8c) the speed of light in air enters water, in which the speed of light is only 75% the speed of light in air

(0.75c).  Is the particle moving faster than the speed of light?

Actually nik, in water or any other substance for that matter the light doesn't actually slow down. What happens is that the light (photons) are aborbed and consequently reemitted by the electrons in the atoms of the substance, giving the illusion of the light slowing down. So light travels the same speed everywhere:

c = 299 792 458 m / s

c = 186 282.397 miles per second

Warp 10 = infinite speed

Therefore, both quantum slipstream and transwarp are NOT faster than warp ten as they do not travel faster than infinte speed. They are both methods of travel that require a signifigantly less amount of energy to travel at higher speed rather than just plain warp.

Faster than infinte? You'd have to time travel - arriving before you left.

Also, that VOY episode where they went warp 10 was bull crap. Honestly, that episode went against all sorts of the laws of physics, not to mention practically all other ST canon and the entire section on warp speed travel in the ST Techincal Manual.

Sounds pretty cool - provided it's secure.

I'd definitely have to say teleportation - quickest there is!

I would need to know a few more specifics to answer that particular question, but I think cybernetic impants are amazing - kust a few possibilitites:

Calculator chip - complex math in a fraction of a second!

Memory chip - memorize the entire dictionary - no problem!

Strenth enhancing implants - Lift your car up with one hand while removing the flat tire with the other - no tools required!

A mind-machine interface - type, play games, research on the internet without a keyboard or mouse!

And many other exiting possibilities!

Check out this thread on time travel:

http://www.startrekfans.net/index.php?showtopic=758

My thoughts are summarized here:

What is time?  Here are a few thories on what type of time-travel exists!

1. Nonexistent Time - "Time" does not exist as an actual substance - it is an entirely man-made concept, therefore, time travel is impossible - there is nowhere to travel to!

2. Static Time - Time exists, however, due to physical laws - time tavel is impossible

3. Editiable Time - Time is sort of "set in place" - changes don't affect many things and you can go back in time and change little. When you go back in time you edit the already existing time. This is the type of time favored in most time travel scenarios - For Example: "Back to the future"

4. Resetable Time - When you travel back in time, you "reset" the future - all the decisions and chance events reset. So, for instance, you travel back to World War II to historically observe it, right? To you great amazement Germany Wins! This could happen because the decisions of the pilots and troops and commanders are reset and perhaps this time Germany fights better! This is obviousy really bad! Time travel is very dangerous!

 

What is also interesting is that there are really some subsets of 3/4.

Subset A: Sequential time travel - Time travel happens in sequence - You can't tell yourself to leave you some money! The future hasn't happened yet!

Subset B: Simultaneous time travel - All time travel happens at the same time - you can tell yourself to leave some money for you (supposing you aren't broke in the future!)

Subset C: Quantum realities - every chance even creates a new parrellel universes where in each one a different outcome occurred.

 

Supposing the "time scenario" is 3 or 4 (really doesn't matter), then the paradoxes are solved differently...

I'm using the "Grandfather Paradox"

 

Subset A:

1. You travel back in time and kill yourself

2. Since you killed yourself no one grows up to travel back and kill you

3. So ... You don't exist in the future to go back in time and kill yourself

4. Your younger version therfore grows up

5. You then go back and kill yourself

6. Since you killed yourself no one grows up to travel back and kill you

7. etc.

It just keeps repeating until...

(big #). You go back in time to kill yourself but a capacitor blows on your time machine and you can't go back in time and kill yourself - the timeline is stable!

All you would remember is a freak accident kept you from going back in time to kill yourself! (you don't remember any "looping") You would notice every time you tried to make a paradox a freak accident would stop you!!!

 

This phenomenon is called a "temporal loop" and the conclusion is called "chance compensation"

 

I don't really know how it would work in Subset B where all time travel is simultaneous - you would both be dead and alive at the same time??? It doesn't make sense!

 

There is also the theory of Quantum Realities (Subset C)

 

In this theory, each time you time-travel you create an alternate time line. In this case, if you traveled back in time to kill yourself, you would succeed and you would still exist but your younger version would not. You would have, in effect, "jumped" realities. If you went back to your time no one would know who you were because in their reality, you don't exist!

Happy birthday!!!

:)

I believe what vold is talking about is something I read in either Discover or Scientific American about what the potential speed of antimatter, fusion and fission rockets could be.

A principle states that on average, for the fuel weight and capacity of a rocket, it can only generally get up to about twice the velocity of its exhaust (of course for something like a ramscoop with a theoretically infinite fuel supply should be able to acccellerate to almost the speed of light)

I'm pretty sure anti-matter reactions produce particles moving off with a velocity of 1/3 the speed of light (3.33 sublight) and so the average antimatter rocket should be able to accelerate to 2/3 the speed of light (6.66 sublight) effeciently.

Anti-matter engines show some promise as a short term quick acceleration engine or one for a long journey where the hydrogen fuel might take up too much space. I think for any thing else like solar-system travel especially, fission or fusion rockets would be more effecient.

We'll all miss you! Try to stop by every once in a while if possible!

I've gotten some complaints about this thread being spam and I really think this sounds like something more appropriate to PM's or the Chat Room.

The "10th planet" is called Quaoar.

The main reason planet status is debated as if Sedna came close enough to the sun and earth, we would call it a comet.

Also, it has a highly elliptical orbit, unlike the nearly sperical orbits of the nine planets (pluto is the most elliptical).

Starships and subs are little similar, but often work in vastly different manners:

- In a sub the pressure is trying to crush it, in a starship there is no outside pressure and everything wants to push outward.

- A sub has lots to move through and so would need constant propeller power to move bt a starship in space (at sub-light) needs only to fire the rockets once and coast the rest of the way with near-zero drag.

etc...

Interesting, trek really has spawned a lot of new technology.

Also, this topic is going nowhere fast, I think we should move on.

The largest number I have heard of other than from here:

100 grillion to the googolplexed power

 

This article says that the universe is at least the above in radius. It's a very long article about dimensions and stuff so I'll post an excerpt to show you.

"Grillion"??? I've never heard of that and it isn't even in my dictionary.

How about the Iconian Transporter Gate?

 

Yes we know that Gate was destroyed by Picard but what if they found another one? Or better yet, we know Picard must have filed a report on those incidents, what if a brilliant young Federation scientist saw the report and started thinking of ways to build a new prototype by combining transporter technology with, oh, I don’t know, something? (little help?) Artificial black hole? Sceince must have made some progress in that area by then but even if not who cares, it's sci-fi!

There was a book series (without phenomenal reviews) written very similar, I don't think it was the iconians, but sounds very similar. It was called Gateways and I think it was 7-books but I'm not 100% sure.

Gateways #1: One Small Step (Star Trek)

Description:

"Scattered throughout the galaxy are Gateways capable of transporting matter and energy across unfathomable distances. Left behind by a long-vanished civilization, these mysterious portals offer a means of exploration -- or conquest -- many times faster than warp travel. The technology responsible for the Gateways has been lost for at least ten millennia, but that doesn't mean it can't be found again....

Having defeated the hostile computer program guarding an abandoned Kalandan outpost, Kirk and his crew are exploring the artificial planetoid in hopes of discovering the secret of an ancient apparatus that has hurled the Starship Enterprise™ over nearly a thousand light-years. Unfortunately, the reactivated Gateway has attracted the attention -- and avarice -- of various alien explorers, including a mysterious race who claim to be none other than the enigmatic Kalandans themselves! "

Do you mean like fluidic space with the species 8472?

They never really tell us, but aparenly the fludic space realm is very close to ours in the 5th dimention (a freedom of movement like up-down, right-left, or forward-backward just outside our universe) and the borg use some sort of simple transdimentional drive to move in this 5th dimention of movement to create a transwarp conduit (similar to a temporary wormhole connecting the two universes) to fluidic space. This would be similar to the way the sphere builders might reach our galaxy.

No offence but.....

 

HUH?

Maybe I can help, The main proof for why it doesn't violate the second law is that when for example, a computer is made, complaxity is gained, but energy is used up in the process (by breaking down sugars in the computer technician's body) into simpler and more random and uniform states - increasing the overall enropy (or randomness) of the universe.