Wormhole question

 Posts: 889
 Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:51 pm
 Contact:
Wormhole question
Assuming the negatove mass produced by exotic matter in something like a mach effect device produces a sort of negative gravity, how many Gs wouod it take to produce a wormhole/warp field, and do we have materials tuat cam hold up to it?
Evil is evil, no matter how small
Re: Wormhole question
Are you referring to the theoretical production of negative mass in an accelerating capacitor (Woodward effect) to be applied to the (also theoretical) Alcumbierre drive?kunkmiester wrote: ↑Fri Jul 03, 2020 1:42 pmAssuming the negatove mass produced by exotic matter in something like a mach effect device produces a sort of negative gravity, how many Gs wouod it take to produce a wormhole/warp field, and do we have materials tuat cam hold up to it?
If yes, than there is no answer to your questions for now as both effects are just mathematical framework construct at the moment and no reproducible experiment has been announced so far, hence there is no real data from which extrapolate a meaningful reply to your questions.
Also, for clarity of understanding, the negative mass that "should" be produced by such a device is in general used to reduce the "apparent mass" of the "spacecraft+negative mass generator" assembly, or , in other words, reduce the apparent density of the space that contains the craft.
The idea of the Alcumbierre drive, in fact, is that the "apparent reduction" in mass generated by the lower density acquired by that area of "space" will allow for a speed boost of the craft inside the bubble in relation to the surrounding universe.
I don't know if you had already this point clear, but is worth mentioning it.
A society of dogmas is a dead society.

 Posts: 889
 Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:51 pm
 Contact:
Re: Wormhole question
To expand, for a wormhole, Woodward's book suggests a sphere with Mach effect "resonators(for lack of a better word)" on it. Each one is deiven so the capacitors inside undergo Mach effect fluctuations to produce nagative mass in the capacitors.
Right?
So the capacitors are now repelling the regular mass inside the resonator, the mass of the generator structure, and interacting with each other. A warp drive would be a ring structure.
I'm remembering some of the math involved Jovian equivalents to produce a benign wormhole, meaning each resonator is driving to thousands of gravities perhaps? This is in the math somewhere, assuming someone has done that little bit.
So can a resonator be built that will handle the stresses of holding together under that load?
Right?
So the capacitors are now repelling the regular mass inside the resonator, the mass of the generator structure, and interacting with each other. A warp drive would be a ring structure.
I'm remembering some of the math involved Jovian equivalents to produce a benign wormhole, meaning each resonator is driving to thousands of gravities perhaps? This is in the math somewhere, assuming someone has done that little bit.
So can a resonator be built that will handle the stresses of holding together under that load?
Evil is evil, no matter how small
Re: Wormhole question
kunkmiester wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 10:58 pmTo expand, for a wormhole, Woodward's book suggests a sphere with Mach effect "resonators(for lack of a better word)" on it. Each one is deiven so the capacitors inside undergo Mach effect fluctuations to produce nagative mass in the capacitors.
Right?
So the capacitors are now repelling the regular mass inside the resonator, the mass of the generator structure, and interacting with each other. A warp drive would be a ring structure.
I'm remembering some of the math involved Jovian equivalents to produce a benign wormhole, meaning each resonator is driving to thousands of gravities perhaps? This is in the math somewhere, assuming someone has done that little bit.
So can a resonator be built that will handle the stresses of holding together under that load?
Woodward' suggests that acceleration of an object that is charging and discharging energy can create a transient negative mass in the object.
No "negative gravity" or gravitational forces of any type are involved or generated by the Woodward generator (as you can see from the equations used to build the theory).
What should happen is that the charge/discharge of energy should instead create a localized reduction of the density of the volume of space containing the spaceship/generator assembly, thus allowing the engine of the spacecraft to accelerate the ship faster (because the "apparent mass" is now lower due to the lower "apparent density" inside the field).
The first derivation of the equations was done considering a spherical bubble around the ship and the resulting need of negative mass was in the order of the equivalent of the mass of Jupiter (10^24 Tons).
A second work theorized the change of the shape of the field from a sphere to a torus, and the requirement of negative mass dropped from 10^24 Tons to about 1 Ton.
Obtaining a 1 Ton negative mass effect by swinging energy back and forth into this torus, would still mean (in the best case) that the machine should handle energy values in the range of 10^20 J (equal to 20 PetaWh or the total consumption of world energy for 4 months, or the energy content of 1 million Hiroshima bombs).
We don't have the technology at the moment to safely handle even only 10^14 J of energy (20GWh electric power or the energy content of 1 Hiroshima bomb), so you can imagine how far we are from even considering the possibility of testing such a technology and what insane values of mechanical stress would be involved.
Than again, this is ALL just theoretical for now, and until now nothing has been shown to work the way it was theorized, so there is very high chances that the effect will not be real (which I believe is the case).
A society of dogmas is a dead society.