Generation Terrorists » Forum
Sign up   |   Start new thread   |   Lost password?   |   Edit profile   |   Member List   |   myGT   |   Blog
Keyword
From
To
 

Any more info on this?
FN Posted: Sat Jan 28 10:28:08 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  http://news.scotsman.com/scitech.cfm?id=16902006

Interesting, but I'd like to read some more about it and verify if it is true.


 
jennemmer Posted: Sat Jan 28 10:50:50 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Christophe said:
>http://news.scotsman.com/scitech.cfm?id=16902006
>
>Interesting, but I'd like to read some more about it and verify if it is true.

I haven't heard anything about it but this line I think is the most telling:

""But this thing is not around the corner; we first have to prove the basic science is correct and there are quite a few physicists who have a different opinion."

Granted that if this information is somehow classified then I wouldn't know anything about it. On the other hand word about crazy new (proven) physics travels pretty fast. There was a discovery about neutrios having mass, something that was thought to be impossible previously, and all of the physics and science publications were talking about it. All of the professors were mentionning it is their classes, etc.

I am guessing the theory this is based on is still not able to be proven experimentaly. There are a lot of really cool and interesting theories that can result in things like this type of travel, but there effects are usually so small that we haven't been able to detect them yet.


 
addi Posted: Sat Jan 28 10:52:56 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  that is really interesting. That's way out of my realm of expertise though. Maybe physicist Jenn could shed some knowledge on the plausibilty of the magnetic theory.
She's really smart...for a Canadian : )


 
addi Posted: Sat Jan 28 10:53:25 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  she beat me to the punch
: (


 
Mouse Posted: Sat Jan 28 10:54:36 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Interesting. I wonder how they plan to handle relativity.
*sigh* I wish I were more of a nerd.

Argh! There are no other solar systems you ninnies! *STAR* systems people, star systems.

I'm fine, really.


 
jennemmer Posted: Sat Jan 28 11:00:40 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  After a bit of digging (Google Scholar) I came across this:

http://scholar.google.com/url?sa=U&q=http://www.hpcc-space.de/publications/documents/AIAA2005-4321Letter.pdf

It is a paper from a propulsions publication explaining the thoery and principles behind it. (There lots of jargon and I didn't bother reading most of it) Essentially the thoery relys on there being 2 or 3 particles that we can't prove exist and can only be tested once we have magnets of a strenghth of 30 Torr or more. My experiment has a 5 torr magnet which was about as high as you could get about 5 years ago. We want to use the highest magnetic field we can for our measurements so if there is a safe, higher field magnet we would likely be looking into buying one.

The supposed reference to the basic theory:
Heim, B., Vorschlag eines Weges einer einheitlichen Beschreibung der Elementarteilchen, Z. für Naturforschung, 32a, 1977, pp. 233-243.

I can't read it but maybe you can.


 
jennemmer Posted: Sat Jan 28 11:01:58 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Mouse said:
>Argh! There are no other solar systems you ninnies! *STAR* systems people, star systems.
>
>I'm fine, really.

Lol, thanks, that was awesome ;)


 
addi Posted: Sat Jan 28 11:04:39 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I knew Jenn would be able to add something intelligent to this discussion.
She gets my vote for poster of the month


 
FN Posted: Sat Jan 28 11:21:45 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  When it comes to physics I'm rather ignorant once we go beyond the basics, so my question is: why can't a bigger magnet be built? Isn't like if you take the strongest magnet you have and make it bigger, the pull or push it exerts gets bigger too?



No idea


 
jennemmer Posted: Sat Jan 28 14:10:34 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Christophe said:
> so my question is: why can't a bigger magnet be built?

The making a magnetic field depends on a few things. You need a current and you need a many loops of wire for it to pass through.

Essentially the more loops you have the more of a magnetic field can be built up and the more current you have the more of a magnetic field each loop contributes.

The problem is mostly that of getting enough current. The really basic relationship is that the current in a circuit is going to be equal to the voltage you apply to it divided by the resistance in the circuit. Where the problem begins is that any resistance in the wires will create some heat. The heat generated in the wires depends on the current so the more current the more heat, but the heat increases the resistance so at some point no matter how high you increase the voltage you can't increase the current because the resistance also goes up.

The first solution was to create superconducting magnets. The loops are made out of superconducting materials so they have (almost) no resistance. They do however have to be cooled with liquid Helium to about 4 degrees Kelvin (-269 degrees C) even to work. This makes everything more complicated because as the magnet gets bigger you need more cooling and it is expensive and hard to get and hard to work with.

Finally there are still limits to superconducting materials. As that science moves forward so will our magnet technology but until somebody figures out something new this is about the level we are stuck at.

Hope that wasn't too long winded a reply...


 
jennemmer Posted: Sat Jan 28 14:13:44 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Gah, I reviewed that a couple of times and I still have mucked up my grammar.

(That's why I'm a scientist not an English major :p )


 
Mouse Posted: Sat Jan 28 14:38:20 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  jennemmer said:
>Lol, thanks, that was awesome ;)
*bows* You're too kind.
That just bugs me, especially when people who should know better do it.

jennemmer said:
>Gah, I reviewed that a couple of times and I still have mucked up my grammar.
>(That's why I'm a scientist not an English major :p )
It was perfectly coherant to me, even if the grammar wasn't perfect. It's interesting, if we could actually develop these things in space, with fewer stresses and preexisting low temperatures and all of that, I bet we could get a lot farther a lot faster with experiments like this.


 
Asswipe Posted: Sat Jan 28 18:15:53 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  jennemmer said:

>It is a paper from a propulsions publication explaining the thoery and principles behind it. (There lots of jargon and I didn't bother reading most of it) Essentially the thoery relys on there being 2 or 3 particles that we can't prove exist and can only be tested once we have magnets of a strenghth of 30 Torr or more. My experiment has a 5 torr magnet which was about as high as you could get about 5 years ago. We want to use the highest magnetic field we can for our measurements so if there is a safe, higher field magnet we would likely be looking into buying one.

damn. I just sold a 30 torr magnet at my garage sale last week. if i had known you were looking for one i'd have put it aside. it went for about 75 cents so i'd have listened to your offer.


 
FN Posted: Sat Jan 28 18:27:02 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Thx for the info


 
kurohyou Posted: Mon Jan 30 22:23:19 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Quoted from Article:

>Also, if a large enough magnetic field was created, the craft would slip into a different dimension, where the speed of light is faster, allowing incredible speeds to be reached.

Ummm....question...maybe this is the science fiction fan in me coming out, or some inbred star trekkie nerdism...but...

Lets say for a minute that they actually can build this thing and it can actually do what they say it will do, how can you be sure that the dimension you "slip" into is the "right" dimesion for what you are trying to do? If there is a dimension where the speed of light is faster, then doesn't that mean that there could be a dimension where the speed of light is slower? And what would that do to our little experiement?

I mean even if you can create a craft to slip through dimensions how can you be sure of what dimension you are going to be slipping into? How can you be sure of the laws of that dimension or even its consistancy?

Don't get me wrong, sign me up for the beta test of that damn thing but I'd just like a little assurance that I won't end up in some dimension where I'm going to get inadverantly fused into the one of Neptunes moons because they misjudged the speed of light in the dimension they sent me to. And in some cases "Oops" is not an apology.

P.S. I know next to nothing about physics. I am reading Stephen Hawkin's "A breif History of time." Until I started reading that I felt like a realitively intelligent person. Now I feel like I need to get a job emptying porto-lets for a living...and I'm only on chapter 5.

Not that it matters...


 
addi Posted: Tue Jan 31 07:39:27 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  kurohyou said:

>P.S. I know next to nothing about physics. I am reading Stephen Hawkin's "A breif History of time." Until I started reading that I felt like a realitively intelligent person. Now I feel like I need to get a job emptying porto-lets for a living...and I'm only on chapter 5.

Good for you getting to that point. I tried reading it because I'm facinated with the subject, but, god help me, I just don't have the correct brain wiring to grasp the depth of his concepts. So I gave up very frustrated, and went back to cleaning the toilet..and, I must say, I did one hell of a good job on it too! I bet Hawkins wouldn't have gotten it so sparkling clean and mildew free.


 
mat_j Posted: Tue Jan 31 15:36:02 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Being of a literary background i prefer it when this kind of stuff works as a plot device and not an actual theory but surely if you're travelling very fast and hit the speed of light then you're going to end up in the dimension intend for travelling really fast?? I don't know, i don't know what i'm even doing getting involved in a science thread........ doo daa dee la la lah


 
jennemmer Posted: Wed Feb 1 20:29:05 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I just came across this article about it. I think it does a good job of balancing the interesting idea, not yet feasible or testable fact.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/06/hyperdrive/


 
Ed Posted: Wed Feb 1 23:12:00 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  If I understand any of this, which I thought I did until I read more than that first article, since it essentially uses gravity as a propellant, we don't have to worry about getting a concussion from the acceleration?


 



[ Reply to this thread ] [ Start new thread ]