Notices
Results 1 to 44 of 44
Like Tree4Likes
  • 1 Post By AlexG
  • 1 Post By Strange
  • 1 Post By SpeedFreek
  • 1 Post By AlexG

Thread: enigma of motion and how to produce a mechanical wormhole

  1. #1 enigma of motion and how to produce a mechanical wormhole 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    I have an idea how to create a mechanical device that does what a worm hole does.The machine consists of 3 rows of four rectangular objects with a u shape piece tank tread on it.For the first row the top rectangular object underneath a u shaped piece of tank tread that is going 58 mph. goes 10 miles per hour backwards on the second rectangular object.The second rectangular object underneath the first one goes 10 miles per hour backwards on the third rectangular object.The third rectangular object underneath the second rectangular object goes 19 miles per hour backwards on the third rectangular object.The fourth rectangular object underneath the third one goes 10 miles per hour forwards.


    For the first row the top rectangular object underneath a u shaped piece of tank tread that is going 58 mph. goes 10 miles per hour backwards on the second rectangular object.The second rectangular object underneath the first one goes 10 miles per hour backwards on the third rectangular object.The third rectangular object underneath the second rectangular object goes 10 miles per hour backwards on the third rectangular object.The fourth rectangular object underneath the third one goes 1 miles per hour forwards.


    For the first row the top rectangular object underneath a u shaped piece of tank tread that is going 58 mph. goes 10 miles per hour backwards on the second rectangular object.The second rectangular object underneath the first one goes 10 miles per hour backwards on the third rectangular object.The third rectangular object underneath the second rectangular object goes 11 miles per hour backwards on the third rectangular object.The fourth rectangular object underneath the third one goes 2 miles per hour forwards.
    I found that going backwards on a object going forwards slows things down.So i then subtracted the least speed from the greatest speed of either forward or backwards rectangular ojects to get the speed of either side of the u shaped piece of tank tread.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    I think you need to provide a diagram. I'm afraid I can't follow your description at all. And I can't see how it relates to wormholes....


    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    spacebypasser.jpgspacebypasser2.jpgA wormhole makes faraway distant places in space closer.That is what is does because a tanks tread bottom and top goes away from each other like two objects backs facing each other going opposite directions to each other and i calculated the speed on both sides of the tank tread on top to be four times that distance.
    Last edited by lightspeed; November 5th, 2012 at 12:10 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    This really doesn't mean anything.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by lightspeed View Post
    spacebypasser.jpgspacebypasser2.jpgA wormhole makes faraway distant places in space closer.That is what is does because a tanks tread bottom and top goes away from each other like two objects backs facing each other going opposite directions to each other and i calculated the speed on both sides of the tank tread on top to be four times that distance.
    Maybe its me but I have no idea what those pictures are meant to represent. A simple drawing might be clearer.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    spacebypasser5.jpgspacebypasser6.jpgHere's another diagram of it.I know the rectangular blocks are spaced apart but they are supposed to be on
    each other.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    What are you trying to do, or show? I can't follow it either.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    Can you read the words in the pictures?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    As far as I can see, you're simply amazed by a loop.
    RedPanda likes this.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by lightspeed View Post
    Can you read the words in the pictures?
    No. Does it describe what all these coloured blobs are and what they are doing?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    spacebypasser7.jpgspacebypasser8.jpgMy device allows a object to be transported to another space without traveling the space in between.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    My device allows a object to be transported to another space without traveling the space in between.
    I doubt it. But it would help if you could produce a clear diagram and description.
    lightspeed likes this.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    Is it to small to see?Does anybody have the blender program?I could demonstrate it with that.Sense you can't understand what i am saying.
    Last edited by lightspeed; November 6th, 2012 at 06:45 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    It is too small to see. Your written description is also impossible to follow precisely. That said, from what I do follow it seems ot me that oyu have not taken account of the inherent strength (or more relevantly, weakness) of materials. Are you assuming that the "rectangular objects" do not suffer from distortion when stressed?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    The material should stand up for a while because the device is just platforms attach to wheels powered by electric motors on each other that are moving forwards and backwards on those wheels with a spinning tank tread on top of the top platforms.The tank tread is a small one.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    The other problem is, I can't even work out if the pictures are plan views, side elevations or whatever (they could even be some sort of flowchart).

    Can you do a simple line drawing? It would be clearer...
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    Why don't you get the blender program it is free.Then i will show you.I believe that is the best way.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    By increasing the screen magnification to 400, I can just make out the words. They add nothing to the understandability of the pictures.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    Did you look at the last two pictures on post 11?AlexG maybe you could understand it better if you had the blender program and i gave you a link to the blend file on pasteall.org.You understand programming.
    Last edited by lightspeed; November 6th, 2012 at 02:25 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    space closer.jpgspace closer3.jpg
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    The other problem is, I can't even work out if the pictures are plan views, side elevations or whatever (they could even be some sort of flowchart).

    Can you do a simple line drawing? It would be clearer...
    These pictures are of the motion that my machine does that allows objects to travel to another space without traveling the space in between.The first rectangles of both pictures is of the tank tread motion.The bottom
    and top of the tank tread goes 1 mile per hour and fives mile per hour for a total distance of five miles when you look at it from the ground.When you are on the second platform you see the tank tread is going 3 miles per hour for a total distance of six miles from the top tank tread and bottom tank tread.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by lightspeed View Post
    Is it to small to see?Does anybody have the blender program?I could demonstrate it with that.Sense you can't understand what i am saying.
    Download for free.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by lightspeed View Post
    Is it to small to see?Does anybody have the blender program?I could demonstrate it with that.Sense you can't understand what i am saying.
    Download for free.
    Yes you can on blender .org.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    Your point seems to be that from one perspective, the blocks are moving forward, and from another perspective they seem to be moving backward.

    So what?
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by AlexG View Post
    Your point seems to be that from one perspective, the blocks are moving forward, and from another perspective they seem to be moving backward.

    So what?
    Did you read everything on post 20 and look at the pictures.The first rectangular blocks on all four rows represent the tank tread motion in both pictures.The space between bottom and top tank treads is longer on rectangular box two than seeing it from the ground.
    Last edited by lightspeed; November 7th, 2012 at 04:41 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    Lightspeed, this is nonsense.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    Could you take one more look and find someone who could understand it better.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    I'm not the dumbest person on the planet and - as I said earlier - neither your diagram or your explanation make any sense. Could you find someone you know to explain it to and get them to post a better explanation?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Guys, here is a pictorial analogy for an Einstein-Rosen Bridge - a "wormhole".



    The "caterpillar track" represents conventional spacetime. If you want to travel between points using conventional means, you have to follow the "caterpillar track". If, however, you could exploit a "wormhole", you could travel between those two points in a much shorter time.

    Unforunately, any mechanical device that replicates this scenario would, by definition, already have an existing shorter path between the tracks. If a stone is on top of a caterpillar track, it takes longer to reach the bottom if it is embedded in the track and has to follow the path of the track, than if it falls straight through the holes in the track.

    I'm wondering if this is somehow what lightspeed is alluding to, although I cannot guess what he hopes to achieve with it.
    lightspeed likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    another example2.jpg
    Quote Originally Posted by SpeedFreek View Post
    Guys, here is a pictorial analogy for an Einstein-Rosen Bridge - a "wormhole".



    The "caterpillar track" represents conventional spacetime. If you want to travel between points using conventional means, you have to follow the "caterpillar track". If, however, you could exploit a "wormhole", you could travel between those two points in a much shorter time.

    Unforunately, any mechanical device that replicates this scenario would, by definition, already have an existing shorter path between the tracks. If a stone is on top of a caterpillar track, it takes longer to reach the bottom if it is embedded in the track and has to follow the path of the track, than if it falls straight through the holes in the track.

    I'm wondering if this is somehow what lightspeed is alluding to, although I cannot guess what he hopes to achieve with it.
    The device does use a caterpiller track on top.I made a mistake on the first post though.I have another
    picture of the device that is correct way to do it.It can be used like wormhole or to change the size of a object without squishing it, adding to it or taking away from it.Take a look at it.You might not understand still.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Quote Originally Posted by lightspeed View Post
    The device does use a caterpiller track on top.I made a mistake on the first post though.I have another picture of the device that is correct way to do it. It can be used like wormhole or to change the size of a object without squishing it, adding to it or taking away from it.Take a look at it.You might not understand still.
    Your posts make no sense at all. You cannot build a mechanical device that can be used like a wormhole, or to change the size of an object without "squishing" it. You seriously need to get educated on the laws of physics, otherwise you will continue to come across as someone with a less than adequate grip on reality.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    So none of my post and pictures make any sense to you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    No.

    If you build a mechanical device with a caterpillar track as shown, the longer path is indeed along the track, rather than between the tracks. This is trivial.

    What exactly are you trying to achieve here?

    You have to learn science before you can teach science. Which are you attempting?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    I am trying to show that making something that acts like a wormhole is simple to do.So that we don't have to
    wait thousands of years before they develop wormhole technology to go to the nearest star.Wouldn't you want that.I think i will go to another forum since no one here understand, maybe they will.I will stay a member here
    though.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    So how does your mechanical device bridge a gap between highly separated regions of space-time? By what mechanism? The typical mechanism behind an Einstein-Rosen Bridge is a rotating black hole. What is yours?

    We have no rotating black holes around here, or in the nearest star system. How do you propose we get there?

    A mechanism resembling a physical caterpillar track isn't going to do it. Tanks using caterpillar tracks do not bridge gaps in spacetime.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by SpeedFreek View Post
    So how does your mechanical device bridge a gap between highly separated regions of space-time? By what mechanism? The typical mechanism behind an Einstein-Rosen Bridge is a rotating black hole. What is yours?

    We have no rotating black holes around here, or in the nearest star system. How do you propose we get there?

    A mechanism resembling a physical caterpillar track isn't going to do it. Tanks using caterpillar tracks do not bridge gaps in spacetime.
    That is not the whole mechanism it has platforms moving backwards and forwards on each other if you looked at the pictures, plus the caterpillar track on top.Does an object moving backwards on a object moving forwards get slower it does.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Like walking the wrong way on a moving staircase? Well, of course an object moving backwards on an object moving forwards gets slower, yes. This is obvious and trivial.

    But what does that have to do with wormholes?

    I understand concepts like time-dilation and length contraction, gravity, and the expansion of the universe, but I cannot understand what you are trying to do here.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by SpeedFreek View Post
    Like walking the wrong way on a moving staircase? Well, of course an object moving backwards on an object moving forwards gets slower, yes. This is obvious and trivial.

    But what does that have to do with wormholes?

    I understand concepts like time-dilation and length contraction, gravity, and the expansion of the universe, but I cannot understand what you are trying to do here.
    Subtract a object going forwards 100 miles per hour which has on top of it six objects going backwards which
    are moving at a speed of 100 miles per hour each.Add the six objects speeds together that are going backwards and subtract the one that is going forwards 100 miles per hour from those.PLease give me the answer to that?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Quote Originally Posted by lightspeed View Post
    Subtract a object going forwards 100 miles per hour which has on top of it six objects going backwards which
    are moving at a speed of 100 miles per hour each.Add the six objects speeds together that are going backwards and subtract the one that is going forwards 100 miles per hour from those.PLease give me the answer to that?
    (my bold)

    The answer is zero.

    One object going forwards at 100 miles per hour. Six objects on top of it, each moving backwards at a speed of 100 miles per hour. The answer is zero.

    Why on Earth are you adding together the speeds of the six objects, when they are all in the same frame of reference? They are all in the frame of reference of the one object moving forwards.

    Like 6 people walking down a moving staircase at the same speed as the staircase is moving up. They remain stationary in relation to the background.

    Zero.

    I still have absolutely no idea how this is supposed to get us to our nearest neighbouring star system.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Oh, and in case you are thinking along the lines that you can simply add velocities on top of each other forever, well, you can't.

    However you add the velocities, you cannot reach a velocity greater than c.

    Velocity-addition formula - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by SpeedFreek View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by lightspeed View Post
    Subtract a object going forwards 100 miles per hour which has on top of it six objects going backwards which
    are moving at a speed of 100 miles per hour each.Add the six objects speeds together that are going backwards and subtract the one that is going forwards 100 miles per hour from those.PLease give me the answer to that?
    (my bold)

    The answer is zero.

    One object going forwards at 100 miles per hour. Six objects on top of it, each moving backwards at a speed of 100 miles per hour. The answer is zero.

    Why on Earth are you adding together the speeds of the six objects, when they are all in the same frame of reference? They are all in the frame of reference of the one object moving forwards.

    Like 6 people walking down a moving staircase at the same speed as the staircase is moving up. They remain stationary in relation to the background.

    Zero.

    I still have absolutely no idea how this is supposed to get us to our nearest neighbouring star system.
    The six objects moving at a speed of 100 mph. are stacked on top of each other and that stack is placed on a object moving forwards at 100mph.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Hence my reference to the relativistic velocity addition formula. You cannot beat the speed of light by stacking speeds on top of each other like that.

    And none of this has anything to do with wormholes either, now does it?

    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    58
    It has to do with my device.I am not trying to achieve the speed of light.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    So, please explain clearly, what IS your device supposed to do?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    Lightspeed, up until now nothing you've posted, either diagrams or explanations, has been at all intelligible.

    You've said at one point that your 'device' would allow you to move from one point to another without traversing the space between them.

    How?

    Failing a comprehensible explanation, I'd suggest this thread be moved.

    To where, I leave to the imagination of the reader.
    Halliday likes this.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Wormhole theories
    By Topalk in forum Physics
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: December 6th, 2013, 08:32 PM
  2. what is a WORMHOLE ?
    By nivesh in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: May 24th, 2012, 02:14 PM
  3. What would a wormhole look like?
    By PiMaster in forum Physics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: February 4th, 2012, 04:13 PM
  4. wormhole?
    By sumplayer in forum Physics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: October 17th, 2008, 11:54 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •