Re: Getting out of this world?

Nuny@xxxxxxx <Alien8752@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Tina_H...@xxxxxxxxxxx (Tina Hall) wrote:
N...@xxxxxxx <Alien8...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The model _my_ backbrain first came up with is this; we can
assume there's a force that would always push people from this
world to that one, but there's some sort of natural
'insulation' in the way, and we have to find a way to
accidentally poke a (hopefully temporary) hole in that
insulation.

It's an interesting idea, but it sounds like something made up,
not something based on a real theory.

It is, and it isn't.

What phyics is it based on, then?

There are all sorts of hypothetical (don't 'rise to the level' of
theory) other worlds/Universes/strange places theoretical
physicists talk about, but since we don't observe them we _assume_
there are barriers. Some we can associate with other known
barriers like the speed-of-light or trying to move through a
dimension one's body has no extension into. Others we can't and
just have to take the word of the mathematically inclined...

Well, assuming there's elseplace is part of the idea. Since it isn't
here, there's naturally something in between, but I very much assume
that's nothing, or at least nothing 3D+time like. Might as well say
there's a barrier between reality and dreams, that doesn't make much
sense either, because the other isn't part of this, our, reality.

What kinds of places?

No, how to get there.

Well, earlier I mentioned the Anthropic Principle. In short, it is
an extension of what I consider to be a religion-influenced
subspecies of Quantum Mechanics; it says the Universe is the way
it is because if it were some other way, we couldn't exist in it
in order to observe it, and Universes must have conscious
observers in order to exist.

That makes no sense. The tree doesn't wait for someone to come round
to watch it fall in a storm. And there were billions of years where
no folks were around to watch stars and planets shape. So, idea
disproven.

And this is really digressing rather a lot from how to get there.

Anyway, some theoretical physicists think that it is possible
for other Universes to form with just barely different constants;
just different enough that say elements heavier than iron can't
form, meaning life could exist but it and its environment would
be radically different from ours.

There's two problems with this:

1. It's trying to put the destination into a theory, not the way to
get there. Which doesn't work with a destination that's put into
theory 'magic makes it the way I want, and my backbrain works out
how it actually makes sense'. In other words, the destination is a
place you can't put into real theories. The thing that needs a
theory is how to leave the real world, to then end up there.

2. Why do you assume the other universe is lacking something
(something heavier than iron), instead of ours (we have nothing
heavier than <insert whichever is the right thing - hey, how about
magic>)?

Where would these other Universes form? In the fifth-dimensional
matrix that this Universe expanded into after the Big Bang.

That's tied to the real world, though. Whether there's such a thing
or made up.

This, Cosmogony (the study of the creation of Universes), is
the only theory (as far as I know) that gives any hope at all
that your request can be fulfilled.

But it talks about the destination, not something funny happening
here and now due to an experiment or a construct. While the
destination isn't to be squeezed into here and now rules or
theories.

Actually it isn't even theory; we have only one Universe to
observe, but some abstruse mathematics predicts that our
Universe's Big Bang was a much larger version of the sort of QM
'fuzziness' going on in this Universe at very small scales. You
know about 'virtual' particles and how they pop into and out of
existence very quickly, too quickly to be observed individually)?

No. (I can imagine it, but haven't heard about it.)

About how they form as particle-antiparticle pairs so all their
quantum numbers (spin,charge, and so on) balance to zero, and how
they follow brief, eventually intersecting paths then annihilate
so that their brief existence doesn't _really_ cost any energy?

No. (I can imagine it, but haven't heard about it.)

So visualize a more-than-four dimensional space. That space is,
like ours, not a smooth continuum at 'very small scales' but
rather is 'foamy'- particle-antiparticle pairs pop into and out
of existence constantly, but unlike our piddly little
three-dimensional spacetime, this larger continuum also hosts
entire Universe-AntiUniverse pairs that Big Bang into existence,
evolve into star- and galaxy- and eventually life-filled
spacetimes in their own rights, then eventually collapse back
toward each other and annihilate back into the background 'foam'
of the higher-dimensional space.

That would tie it to the real world and fill it with planets and
stuff.

But, you object, Universes last a _loooong_ time,

No, I wouldn't.

I object that it doesn't talk about getting people somewhere else
entirely. It tries to define the other place by here and now
theories, which automatically has it not apply as the destination.

I said I don't want to speculate about that, and I don't want it
defined, either. That would just get in the way of writing about it
and finding things out that way, because it puts constraints on it.
External constraints (something someone else decided).

Others will have other values...

The thing is that it may be possible that there are no values
because there are no equivalent constants, but something else
entirely.

That's pretty much where standard Cosmology ends; there's an
assumption that we can _never_ access any of the other Universes
because we're separated by literally incomprehensibly large
distances measured across dimensions we cannot hope to access.

The thing is that I don't imagine any distance across any known
dimension. With the ME (the already written story, not the planned
one), getting there or from there to here is impossible because of
the difference in the makeup; their atoms (or subatomic stuff) have
magic, ours haven't, so they can't exist in the other place. Even
though folks from there can watch our place (linking to the spots in
atoms that on our world don't have the magic bit, sort of sitting in
the 'hole').

With the to be written story[*], that naturally has to drop out
because the idea is to get people to the destination. And a place
where you can't even rely on things falling to the ground must
realistically be too different to sustain people from here.
Therefore, you can forget anything assumed here; it's somewhere else
entirely that doesn't fit into our physics laws at all. But as it's
Fantasyland, I've got magic to explain anything. Just not the way to
get there, because we don't have magic here.

Without a real theory, I'll have to resort to alien space bat magic.

[*] Let's call it Nodeworld. Some idea I had yesterday or so
suggested that it may be a weird spot where not only people from our
world sometimes end up in - an idea based on being resigned to
having to use alien space bat magic instead of something that's
actually possible.

How does that help? We need a method of accessing those
in-between- the-Universes dimensions.

No, we need a method of accessing a way to leave this universe and
all its rules.

I've maybe got one but it involves a rather large chunk of unknown
physics. How do you feel about faster-than- light travel?

So far no one has come up with an explanation for why it shouldn't
be possible.

Standard physics says it's flat impossible for several reasons
involving frinst the fact that it can equal traveling back in time

That's the bit that doesn't make sense.

making it possible to kill your own grandfather (the Grandfather
Paradox,

It is my opinion that if time travel were real, you wouldn't be able
to do anything to alter history; you'd either cause it to be the way
it did already happen, or make no change at all. Simply because it
already happened. You could of course try to kill your grandfather,
but as he wasn't killed, all your attempts would just result in
something else. (I think the movie with the Twelve Monkeys red
herring is based on that, can't recall whether it was called that or
something else.)

you'd need infinite energy just to reach the speed of light, never
mind exceed it.

I don't really know what's so special about the speed of light.

Suppose somebody working for a large aerospace company has been
fooling with a method of rotating objects partially out of this
spacetime in hopes it will allow them to sidestep the infinite
energy constraint on FTL travel.

That's an option. For what the character wants to do, only what he
believes matters, after all. And I expect some scientist does
believe in what you mention above.

What they don't know is that it also realigns large stretches of
the volume of the higher-dimensional space I described above,

Why not realign stretches of the real world?

forming temporary bridges from this Universe to others.

That's a nice idea. :)

I don't understand the 'rotating objects out of this spacetime',
though. Mainly the 'rotating'; it's obviously not just turning them
around, so on what axis are they rotated? (I can imagine the
process, but lack the axis.)

The bridges can only form between fairly similar Universes though;
they have to have the same number of space and time dimensions
frinst, but the constant's values only have to ballpark equate to
each other.

I don't want the other place defined, though. (Not that I can
imagine something solid in a fourth space dimension - I wouldn't
know where to put it, but I want to kick the real existing physics
out.)

That means your unwilling travelers can't find themselves in a
<splat> situation, but they might not be able to use a compass
because the iron in their blood is all there is in that entire
Universe.

I'd prefer elsewhere's <unknown matter> to be all there is in _this_
entire universe, if something came the other way.

How to get working magic in that other Universe is your
problem; I just found you a way there.

Magic isn't a problem. It's physical laws trying to restrict it, if
they were to apply, that is a problem.

If you don't like the dimension-twisting thingy there's always
wormholes that don't quite go where their builders think they do.

I like dimension-twisting. With an idea about the axis (and how the
experiment is done - what would be built to do it), and what effect
would then displace the actual people, I could start writing.

Wormholes don't sound like something someone could build here.

See, for wormholes to work they have to reach outside the
four-dimensional spacetime continuum into at least one higher
dimension through which to reach their destination. But, when we
say "fifth dimension", what we mean is "one dimension higher than
those our Universe takes up", and how do we know there aren't
more, or that the higher dimension our wormhole reaches through
isn't the one separating our Universe from another one?

I don't know where to put those dimensions. 'Higher', and 'fifth'
(or other number) as in 'more than three plus time'.

However wormhole technology will very likely be very bulky and
energy-hungry, more so than some dimension-twisting proof of
concept device. Wormhole tech will also likely first be tried at
the very least in high Earth orbit if not farther away from
Earth; somebody trying to open a wormhole from downtown Manhattan
to say Mars strikes me as less realistic than just the concept of
wormholes. ;>)

:)

Thanks. There are some useful sounding ideas up there, if we could
cut out the real phyics from having anything to do with the
destination.

--
Tina
WISuspension: Seasons & Elements trilogy | Magic Earth series
Excerpts at: <http://home.htp-tel.de/fkoerper/ath/athintro.htm>

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: HUBBLE Observations - The Age of the Universe - Continued:
    ... universe that I suggest is more true ... The 5th dimension provides us with the space-time source for the ... a reflection space which is on a variably ... It is best understood as branching causalities, ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: expansion
    ... Therefore if you subscribe to 'expanding universe', ... This is not true of a balloon. ... Take the balloon analogy into another dimension. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Fractal formula of ALPHA
    ... science- science of change and growth. ... Topological / mathematical argument that the universe has Integer ... the universe by definition is a space filling manifold. ... so it has to be a space filling theory and thus, have Integer dimension. ...
    (sci.fractals)
  • Re: IS TIME REAL?
    ... >>| place to place in the universe. ... >>physics is very much concerned with such things, ... Because it's not a true spacial dimension. ... > arbitrary scale that we have universally accepted. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Getting out of this world?
    ... dimension/reality/some other world in some other universe. ... here (not at the destination). ... So, no aliens interfering, and ...
    (rec.arts.sf.composition)
Loading