posted
If your going to come in here and judge me solely on my speech patterns and spelling mistakes, or going to feel all high and mighty by making others feel stupid, you may as well leave now. I was recently disscussing the thought of cloaking(i can remeber how to spell cloak right now...is that right?)devices on spacecraft and i came up with a semi-plausible(bad spelling also)theroy. if you exited all the atoms on the outer hull or even the entire ship to light speed without actually traveling at lightspeed wouldn't the ship become invisible, at least until light caught ip with it? or would you have to exite them to faster than light speed to make them invisable. now i feel like wang mu in Xenocide when jane is asking her for her take on all the complicated science that she can hardly grasp, you see i have yet to take a phyics class so i dont know all the complications of phyics(which i dont think is how you spell that either). that is my hypothosis on the matter of light speed cloaking. please comment but try not to ruin most of the book for me. (only just getting to the end of Xenocide)
i also opened this thread for basic disscussion of light speed properties so feel free to post you hypothosi(...i think...) on this subject.
posted
Problem 1 (of I don't know how many): Unless you can figure out something that Einstein couldn't, there is no way to accelerate an atom to light speed (let alone faster than). However, I encourage you to figure out a way to do so. Not only will you get the Nobel prize, but my undying admiration (which, I'm sure we can all agree, trumps anything you could get in Stockholm).
Posts: 92 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Descolada, part of Einsteins theory of relativity is that no object can accelerate to the speed of light without its mass becoming infinite. But as far as your theory goes, perhaps a stationary object such as a space station could create such a field and maintain it then it would bend the light around it and become invisable to the naked eye.
...I need to rest my fingers...
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
-smacks forehead- i totally for goet about the theroy of reletivity!!! ok so if youu could super heat the entire ship to the point that it becomes more than molten while still heating the crew also at the same rate as the ship without damaging them,(if thats possible) if you could do that it would then maybe just maybe there matter would become infinate, but would that mean you could warp to anywhere in space or time even instantly? more later my rides here -Descoloda
Posts: 110 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Descolada, you need to remember that speed only creates heat when matter is present, so in the vacuum of space perhaps the vessel would not become superheated as long as there is no other matter than the substance you are using to create the field.
Perhaps you could incase the vessel in some sort of protective barrier?
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
hmmm..maybe but the shell would go lightspeed and become invislble but it wouldnt cloak the ship just the shell
Posts: 110 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, as a physics buff, I can say that both your original hypothesis and the second one would both be impossible. According to the equation, m = m0 /((1 - v^2/c^2)^(1/2)), where c is the speed of light, m0 is the mass when the object is at rest, and v is the velocity of the object. As you can see, as the velocity increases, the fraction v^2/c^2 approaches one, and then the denominator approaches 0, meaning the mass approaches infinity.
Therefore, according to the equation F=ma, if the mass approaches infinity, so does the force required to accelerate that mass even the tiniest bit. And there is simply not infinite energy at anyone's disposal, no matter how big the universe.
As to the second theory about heat, you must first know that the temperature of an object is the average kinetic energy of all the molecules combined. Kinetic Energy is defined as E = 1/2 * mv^2, meaning that the total energy depends on both the mass and velocity. Therefore, as the average energy (or temperature) increases, so does the velocity. As showed above, as the velocity increases, so does the mass, meaning that for the subsequent increment in velocity, even more energy is required. As the velocity increases to approach that of the speed of light, the mass will approach infinity, just as shown previously. Therefore, as the mass approaches infinity, so does the energy required to increase the temperature, leading to the inability to heat that matter any further.
posted
About time with some1 with worser grammar then me on the 'rack.
Good job though, science gets to crummied up with half aborted attempted and "no doitisms" to actually get stuff done sometimes if you know what I mean.
Though i should note that this is generally a thread best meant for the other side of the wall, so generally make sure to keep OSC work related stuff in it somewhere (not that you didnt I noticed the Wang comment). Just sayin'
IP: Logged |
quote: Good job though, science gets to crummied up with half aborted attempted and "no doitisms" to actually get stuff done sometimes
Yeah, because acclerating a ship's hull to beyond the speed of light in order to cloak it is applied engineering. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Not quite what I meant, just that this is kinda a concept that would require more then 80 words to explain sadly.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: Not quite what I meant, just that this is kinda a concept that would require more then 80 words to explain sadly.
Hence my 251 word, 1212 character (w/o spaces), 19 line post, heh. I love Microsoft Word's word counter
BTW Descolada Survivor, you spelled both cloak and plausible right, the two words you questioned yourself about, but at the same time spelled theory wrong, an irony in that you spelled that wrong after just worrying about spelling a different word wrong. Posts: 48 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Descolada, you need to remember that speed only creates heat when matter is present, so in the vacuum of space perhaps the vessel would not become superheated as long as there is no other matter than the substance you are using to create the field.
Strictly speaking, this is false provided that the ship's hull is made of electrically charged matter. When a charge accelerates it radiates energy in the form of light waves. This is called synchrotron radiation. So in speeding up the ship's surface atoms you would cause them to give off a large amount of light. Not a very good cloaking device!
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by HectorVictor: Yes, as a physics buff, I can say that both your original hypothesis and the second one would both be impossible. According to the equation, m = m0 /((1 - v^2/c^2)^(1/2)), where c is the speed of light, m0 is the mass when the object is at rest, and v is the velocity of the object. As you can see, as the velocity increases, the fraction v^2/c^2 approaches one, and then the denominator approaches 0, meaning the mass approaches infinity.
Therefore, according to the equation F=ma, if the mass approaches infinity, so does the force required to accelerate that mass even the tiniest bit. And there is simply not infinite energy at anyone's disposal, no matter how big the universe.
As to the second theory about heat, you must first know that the temperature of an object is the average kinetic energy of all the molecules combined. Kinetic Energy is defined as E = 1/2 * mv^2, meaning that the total energy depends on both the mass and velocity. Therefore, as the average energy (or temperature) increases, so does the velocity. As showed above, as the velocity increases, so does the mass, meaning that for the subsequent increment in velocity, even more energy is required. As the velocity increases to approach that of the speed of light, the mass will approach infinity, just as shown previously. Therefore, as the mass approaches infinity, so does the energy required to increase the temperature, leading to the inability to heat that matter any further.
I dont even know what half of that ment, Stop making me feel like Wang-mu!!!!
Posts: 110 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Descolada, you need to remember that speed only creates heat when matter is present, so in the vacuum of space perhaps the vessel would not become superheated as long as there is no other matter than the substance you are using to create the field.
Strictly speaking, this is false provided that the ship's hull is made of electrically charged matter. When a charge accelerates it radiates energy in the form of light waves. This is called synchrotron radiation. So in speeding up the ship's surface atoms you would cause them to give off a large amount of light. Not a very good cloaking device!
Well see you could just totally blind the enemy Posts: 110 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok new theory! Dark matter should it really exist could be used in some way. Like say the ship projected a magnetic field that would draw the dark matter to it thus making the ship blend with the darkness of space, the only time this would not work, (if its plausible) is when the ship passed in front of a star that the obsever was looking at. Also the hull would have to be electricly charged....right? You know to keep the darkmatter from leaving the ships hull, and to turn off the cloak you would turn off the power that is electricly charging the hull, Oh and once the hull is covered the field would be switched off so your not constantly gathering dark matter. Ok feel free to bash this one to bits too.
Posts: 110 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Descolada Survivor: Ok new theory! Dark matter should it really exist could be used in some way. Like say the ship projected a magnetic field that would draw the dark matter to it thus making the ship blend with the darkness of space, the only time this would not work, (if its plausible) is when the ship passed in front of a star that the obsever was looking at. Also the hull would have to be electricly charged....right? You know to keep the darkmatter from leaving the ships hull, and to turn off the cloak you would turn off the power that is electricly charging the hull, Oh and once the hull is covered the field would be switched off so your not constantly gathering dark matter. Ok feel free to bash this one to bits too.
*Sigh*
OK, let's humor you and stipulate that:
1.) Dark matter is uniformly distributed throughout space & thus available for use.
2.) Dark matter comes in bits small enough to fit on the ship's hull.
3.) Dark matter is actually, literally dark.
4.) Dark matter is magnetic, in order to be affected by your proposed magnetic field.
Now, having made all of these assumptions, what stealthy advantage would a ship coated with dark matter have over a ship that is simply painted flat black?
Posts: 326 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Descolada, maybe we should just let Hector :winks: take over this topic and educate us about how stupid and ignorent we are. But then again maybe he is just angry that you thought to question the possability of such technology before he did. Posts: 1941 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Actually, I'ld think it would just be better to paint a ship black with DRADUS absorbing paint. Hiding heat would be harder depending on the propulsion.
IP: Logged |
quote:Dark matter should it really exist could be used in some way. Like say the ship projected a magnetic field that would draw the dark matter to it thus making the ship blend with the darkness of space
*laugh* You know, this is really cute. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:perhaps a stationary object such as a space station could create such a field and maintain it then it would bend the light around it and become invisable to the naked eye.
Hmmm...I kinda like this idea...perhaps something that has enough mass that its gravity bends the light behind it, much like a star bends the light passing it, enough that the light behind it curves all the way to the other side so that the original object isn't even seen. Of course, there are many problems with this idea that render it both impractical and unlikely, but I figured I'd mention it considering some of the other ideas posted here.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dark matter is considered "dark" because it doesn't seem to react with anything, which makes it nearly impossible (and currently definitely impossible) to view directly (we can only infer it due to gravitational effects).
Therefore, trying to attract it to a ship would fail, since it is highly resistant to forces of attraction/repulsion.
posted
so your saying.....its somewhat plausible and painting a ship flat black would be good but you'd have to find the exact tone of black that is "space" or you would still stick out like a sore thumb
Posts: 110 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I love the fact that i am so ingnorant but i keep comming up with heinous ideas that make all of you think so you can disprove my theories like i said before please post your own theories, id love to not be the one disproved for a change
Posts: 110 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
another idea could be a hull thats set up so its like a chamleion(spelling-cringe-). BTW does anyone know how chamleion does that, i think they take in their surrounding and there blood vessels change pressure to change colors to match the background
Posts: 110 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
a chameleon doestn't change color to blend in with its surroundings. It changes color when it is frightened or has some other strong emotion.
Posts: 16 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Descolada Survivor: -smacks forehead- i totally for goet about the theroy of reletivity!!! ok so if youu could super heat the entire ship to the point that it becomes more than molten while still heating the crew also at the same rate as the ship without damaging them,(if thats possible) if you could do that it would then maybe just maybe there matter would become infinate, but would that mean you could warp to anywhere in space or time even instantly? more later my rides here -Descoloda
Your "theory" has more holes than swiss cheese.
one example, traveling at the speed of light does NOT mean instantaneous travel, light moves at a finite speed.
and what the hell does heating matter have to do with vectors? Plasma has nothing to do with causing locomotion, even less to do with traveling at the speed of light.
I suggest you pic up some books on physics or atleast some really good sci-fi cause you could not be more off...
Posts: 42 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
also the speed of light is constant within any frame of reffernce. I don't know why you think light would have to "catch up" to a ship traveling at a relitivistic speed.
Posts: 484 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
the only way i could see a cloaking device is if the hull were made of a hyper conductive substance that could conduct light particles impacting one side directly to the other side. rendering the ship transparent.
Posts: 484 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Your "theory" has more holes than swiss cheese.
one example, traveling at the speed of light does NOT mean instantaneous travel, light moves at a finite speed.
and what the hell does heating matter have to do with vectors? Plasma has nothing to do with causing locomotion, even less to do with traveling at the speed of light.
I suggest you pic up some books on physics or atleast some really good sci-fi cause you could not be more off...
Well, that's one way to refute his theory.
...or you could politely suggest a good book or webpage that explains some of the basic principles of modern physics.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Descolada Survivor: -smacks forehead- i totally for goet about the theroy of reletivity!!! ok so if youu could super heat the entire ship to the point that it becomes more than molten while still heating the crew also at the same rate as the ship without damaging them,(if thats possible) if you could do that it would then maybe just maybe there matter would become infinate, but would that mean you could warp to anywhere in space or time even instantly? more later my rides here -Descoloda
Your "theory" has more holes than swiss cheese.
one example, traveling at the speed of light does NOT mean instantaneous travel, light moves at a finite speed.
and what the hell does heating matter have to do with vectors? Plasma has nothing to do with causing locomotion, even less to do with traveling at the speed of light.
I suggest you pic up some books on physics or atleast some really good sci-fi cause you could not be more off...
Im only a freshman in highschool, go away, just because i dont fully understand the theory of reletivity, or phyics dosent mean Im an idiot
Posts: 110 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
DS, it's good that you are using your brain and your curiosity to develop such theses. Some people are just overly arrogant and simply care about proving their superiority over their newly created "underlings." Let me just tell you that I am not one of those people. I am a junior in high school and have read many articles in Discover magazine and some short books about relativity, and thus I understand it to its peak. The reason I post here is to help advance the knowledge of aspiring young physicists like yourself who are eager for knowledge.
With that said, here is a theory of my own about string theory (assuming that it is true) that attempts to explain gravity:
There are two types of strings: space strings and matter strings. There is a force that attracts matter and space strings to each other. So, if matter exists in a certain spot, the space strings around it are attracted, so as they condense towards the matter, the area around the matter is less dense of strings, because the strings that were right next to the matter become part of the matter. Try to envision this kind of like when you might have a bedsheet spread taut on a flat bed and you start to ball up the sheet in the middle, causing the other sides to move. The only difference here is that in my theory, the corners of the "sheet" would be attatched to the corners of the bed, causing the sheet to stretch instead of simply move. As a result, space is less dense around matter, causing matter to seemingly accelerate as it moves through less space in the same amount of time. The distribution of the space strings has to do with the distance away from the object, in a direct proportion to the inverse of that distance squared (just like the equation for gravity).
I hope someone has the visual capabilities to picture that, otherwise I posted that for nothing Posts: 48 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
-Holds "physics for dummies" high above he head in triumph- Ha! Just picked this and a few other things up at the book store so I can stop feeling so stupid...I hope. anyway yeah I got that and the "How To Write Science Fiction & Fantasy" by OSC, and it was weird becuase I just picked up a random book off the shelf and it happened to be by OSC and it happened to be a book I could use, it was like some kind of Omen
Posts: 110 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are real world wrap around projection type cloaks in the works now. Basically the object cloaked shows a picture of whatever is behind it in all dirrections. Very simple really but probably detectable in several simple ways, such as sonar, infra-red and radio wave emission.
The hardest thing to understand from outside science is that it is not magic. You cannot just do anything you want, (like RA Salvatore writting a Star Wars Novel)
One idea you have not thrown out is to somehow coat a ship with the material from a neutron star, it is dense enough that local gravity might bend light around the hull, much would depend on the shape of course. I know of no reason why such matter should decay even if spread very thin.
It would be interesting to know what physical properties small quantities of it have, surely neutron stars have collided with such speed as to shatter each other and send pieces every which way...
Should be a way to figure how much of it is in our solar system and what impact it might have as a catalyst for fusion or as the core of planets... Hmmm
quote:Originally posted by Descolada Survivor: Im only a freshman in highschool, go away, just because i dont fully understand the theory of reletivity, or phyics dosent mean Im an idiot.
It is not physics that is causing people to treat you as though you were slightly retarded, but rather your language. You know how someone can look quite normal until they open their mouth and begin to talk baby language? On the Internet you cannot be judged by your looks. And you, comrade, talk like a four-year-old. If you want to be treated as an intellectual equal, the first step is to show enough respect to proofread your posts. Why should we bother to decode your highly idiosyncratic code when there are plenty of literate, informed posters on this board?
quote:One idea you have not thrown out is to somehow coat a ship with the material from a neutron star, it is dense enough that local gravity might bend light around the hull, much would depend on the shape of course. I know of no reason why such matter should decay even if spread very thin.
Um, no. The reason being, once you take it out of the neutron star, it does not retain its density. You are perhaps thinking of that oft-quoted statistic, 'a teaspoonful would weight X million tons'; well, it's wrong. A teaspoonful would not have sufficient gravity by itself to remain together; the degenerate particles would instantly fly apart to their more normal separation distance.
A neutron star is a balancing act between opposing pressures : Gravity inwards, and Pauli degeneracy pressure outwards. Remove the gravity, and boom - you have a very rapidly expanding cloud of gas.
quote:I hope someone has the visual capabilities to picture that, otherwise I posted that for nothing.
You posted it for nothing in any case, because you did not include any math. So it is totally meaningless in terms of describing string physics. Also, when you do develop the math, be careful not to contradict general relativity.
quote:ok so if youu could super heat the entire ship to the point that it becomes more than molten while still heating the crew also at the same rate as the ship without damaging them,(if thats possible) if you could do that it would then maybe just maybe there matter would become infinate
Well, ok, in principle you can punch energy into a ship until its energy density becomes arbitrarily high, which is what is usually meant by 'infinite'. At that point, you have created a black hole, which promptly collapses under its own weight. This is not the same as warping to anywhere you want to be.
Also, you have got the causation seriously backwards, here. Trying to accelerate up to lightspeed requires infinite energy. That is not the same as saying infinite energy accelerates you to lightspeed.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Once overcome why would the force return? or what stronger short range force might exist to help it retain cohesion and structure? after all the local gravitational force must be very high as well in any sample. How much more is it on the star itself? I think I need to see the forces modeled before I assume that it just flies apart into neutron particles if fractured.
quote:Originally posted by Descolada Survivor: Im only a freshman in highschool, go away, just because i dont fully understand the theory of reletivity, or phyics dosent mean Im an idiot.
It is not physics that is causing people to treat you as though you were slightly retarded, but rather your language. You know how someone can look quite normal until they open their mouth and begin to talk baby language? On the Internet you cannot be judged by your looks. And you, comrade, talk like a four-year-old.
Have you ever spoken to a four-year-old?Go talk to one and tell me a I speak in exactly the same speech and word patterns. Please do, because I'd love to know that I speak exactly the same way as my brother. Have you ever heard a four-year-old use the word "physics" or "Hypothosis"? I sure as hell haven't.
Posts: 110 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I used them when I was four, but hey... Maybe you just need one of those grammer and spelling checker thingamabobs, it is kind of a local standard here unlike most of the web where you have to decipher letters in place of words and such. Half the reason I stay is because most of the people here are at least literate. I have pretty poor spelling myself and can feel your pain, but it is an easy fix and will back the dogs off you so you can stay and maybe learn a thing or two. God knows most of the people here are as dull as mud despite being bright enough to spell and talk good.
quote:Originally posted by Descolada Survivor: Have you ever spoken to a four-year-old? Go talk to one and tell me a I speak in exactly the same speech and word patterns. Please do, because I'd love to know that I speak exactly the same way as my brother. Have you ever heard a four-year-old use the word "physics" or "Hypothosis"? I sure as hell haven't.
Now, that's much better already. Thank you.
It would perhaps have been more accurate to say 'you type like a four-year-old talks'. That is, fast, unceasingly, never stopping to think, and completely unconcerned with whether your listener understands your message, or has to concentrate to understand what you refer to.
I chose four years because that is the age when people develop a model of otherness; that is, when they first come to understand that others do not automatically have the same information as themselves. So a three-year old will go 'coo' in the expectation that her mother will understand 'cookie', and become frustrated when her mother asks for an explanation. Or, in your case, you typed almost completely without grammar or punctuation, because you assumed that others would decode the resulting garbage as easily as you do while composing it. (Or possibly you just didn't care whether others could understand you; that would be rude rather than ignorant, so I assume the latter.)
quote:Once overcome why would the force return?
Consider a spring. Compress it. You have 'overcome' the force that was holding it in the previous position, yes? Does it return when you let go? Pauli exclusion is exactly similar.
quote:Or what stronger short range force might exist to help it retain cohesion and structure?
If we are sticking to known forces, there is strong, weak, and electromagnetic. Of these the strong force is the strongest, hence the name. And the strong force is just not enough to hold together nuclei of more than 300 or so nucleons; it's been tried. You get elements with half-lives on the order of milliseconds, if that.
quote:after all the local gravitational force must be very high as well in any sample.
Indeed they must not. A ton of degenerate matter may only occupy a pinhead or so, but it still masses exactly a ton. You should note that only stars above a certain mass become neutron stars; that's because you require a certain critical amount before the Pauli pressure can be overcome.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The fact that I dont think out every single aspect of all my writing is dew in part to the fact that I am merely commenting on a subject that intrests me, not thinking that anyone would care that much to read every single part of my speech and figure out where I went wrong with spelling and grammar only to turn around and use it to make an assumtion about my intelligence. And the fact that most of my comments are quickly typed while the teacher is not looking, therefore I have almost no time to edit and think about every single part of my comment. So please continue ridaculing my writing style and how I type if it makes you feel more intelligent for doing so.
Posts: 110 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Relax, KOM calls me a Hoi2 playing newb all the time, he posts very interesting subject matter and I completely like your ideas for it shows a certain amount of thought, whether or not they're ocrrect is irrelevent its the thought and effort that counts.
Also I have generally bad spelling and grammar.
IP: Logged |
posted
The thing to remember about cloaking devices is that they are fooling sensors, not reality. Know the nature of the sensor and you know to fool it.
Basically, ever act of "stealth" is managing the size of the signature that the vessel presents to the things that detect it. If the sensors look for heat, you make the vessel look the same temperature as the background. If they detect visible light, you project the background to the front of the ship. If they detect magnetic disturbances, you create a field that cancels the distortion from the ship moving through the existing background field.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I got ticked at the petty attacks on a freshman high school student whom I happen to respect greatly after reading his theories, they are very insightful and extremely valid. A theory is there for the singular purpose of being disproven and as such, NO ONE should attach the one who provides the theory. I have to ask all of ye who stated that “I am better than you because I type better than you“, were you posturing the potential uses of dark matter and molecular acceleration in the field of visual and physical phenomena at that age? I didn’t think so. I am currently a Junior in High School and taking an AP Physics class and I believe that his initial theory is accurate to a degree. I think he is asking whether one could "coat" an object with a material that sensors using the visible spectrum as a base could not detect. And the answer is yes, you could. His dark matter theory is also insightful, with a connection. Due to the fact that we do not currently know the qualitative reaction of dark matter to physical manipulation I will assume it acts like latex paint. You paint on the dark matter and you have the perfectly cloaked object. You would be able to "see" it because it would only block out all stimuli, and not reproduce all of the light or heat behind it (think black speck on white shirt, the black does not reflect light, so you notice the void made by lack of contrast on the reflective shirt.) but it would be similar in concept to the stealth bomber. The stealth bomber works by not reflecting any of the radar waves back at the receiving station, and since dark matter does not reflect anything, it would be perfect for anti-tracking coating. So it is in fact logical. His initial theory that you could alter the molecules is also relatively accurate, in concept. If you could somehow alter the molecular particles so that they did not reflect the light, heat, whatever, back at the sensor you would have an effective cloaking device.
I will now attack and berate those who attacked and berated him.
King of Men- I don’t know your age or skill level but you are acting like an absolute child, his typing manner has nothing to do with his intelligence and if you don’t have the patience to analyze his work then why should anyone else listen to your inane bull hocky? You are a person who I would classify as having a high PDI level, as ascertained by strategist Geert Hofsteede. This would indicate that you feel you are “better” than others, and you have the “my way, or the highway” outlook. Your way is not the only way, your grammar is not perfect grammar, you are in deed as well as in fact, faulty. Ah yes, the neutron star hypothesis, you are assuming that the neutron star’s material will not retain density away from that gravity, its composition may cause it to retain that. Not to mention the light speed-infinite energy causal analysis. If you have infinite energy, all of the particles will be moving with infinite motion and thus, speed, I.e. atleast light speed. So don’t attack anyone else based on your own subjective views, it is pathetic. So should I act as if you are slightly retarded? Your understanding of Descolada’s overall message was.
Mr Mojo Driver- No need to attack him, and plasma does indeed cause locomotion. (seeing as its one of the most active high-energy things you will ever hear of.)
Here are some of my questions. (not attacks) HectorVictor- I indeed respect your views and actions and I do understand what you posted but that may be due to the fact that I am a High School Junior taking (probably) the same classes. I think you may want to simplify it however.
Irregardless- A ship coated with dark matter could not be tracked by any device on earth. The only way it could be tracked would be at light speed by tracking the disappearance of stars and other radiation behind the ship. (Note: I am using light speed due to the fact that light is the most easily detectable wavelength.)
And my theory in response to Hector, I think you theory is very accurate and I will think about it in depth, I herein offer my own theory. Dark energy, which theoretically exists every where is constantly active, with particles pushing every which way. When a mass exists, the particles hit it from all sides, and it does not move. When another mass is introduced, the number of particles between the two masses is less, because as the particles are bouncing off the masses the particles which would have continued through space and caused x mass to maintain stability are deflected by y mass, so x mass moves in the direction of y mass. I do not think I explained this well but feel free to email me at gecko_9999@yahoo.com if you would like further explanation. I think that this is similar to your theory, especially if you simply replace dark energy with the strings.
Posts: 883 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
Have you ever spoken to a four-year-old?Go talk to one and tell me a I speak in exactly the same speech and word patterns. Please do, because I'd love to know that I speak exactly the same way as my brother. Have you ever heard a four-year-old use the word "physics" or "Hypothosis"? I sure as hell haven't.
