Instant travel?

Discussion of theories involving time as a dimension, time travel, relativity, branes, and so on, usually applying to the "real" universe which we live in.

Instant travel?

Postby 4thdeminsionists » Mon May 09, 2005 4:56 pm

Would it be possible to travel instantly in time by bending matter in the 4th dimension? like here's an example:

A B

whats the quickest distance between these to points? In the 3rd dimension it would be a straight line. However in the fourth dimenison couldn't you fold the paper (this isn't really a piece of paper but imagine that it is) to make the points touch, eliminating distance?
4thdeminsionists
Mononian
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 4:34 pm

Postby brasileiro » Mon May 09, 2005 7:15 pm

Well, I guess you would be asking "Is instant teleportation possible?" And for now, the answer is no. We will have to find a way to dissipate matter, then transport it and reassemble it without anything going wrong. We would have to work with wormholes. There was actually a thing on the Sci Fi Channel about 5 years ago telling us the way to make one, but, they aren't able to make it work... of course. We just don't have the science to do it yet.
"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."
~Albert Einstein

If you teach someone in the 2nd dimension, they will live in the 2nd dimension... if you teach them in the 3rd, they will live in the 3rd.
brasileiro
Dionian
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 12:46 am

Postby 4thdeminsionists » Wed May 11, 2005 4:32 pm

this has nothing to do with dissapating matter, rather bending it in the fourth dimension, and then reapering in another spot in the 3rd
4thdeminsionists
Mononian
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 4:34 pm

Postby wendy » Thu May 12, 2005 12:34 am

Here we end up with a really bizarre question.

Consider a peice of paper. Beings living in it (ie solid in 2-space) will never detect the proversions that happen in 3D. It is still graph-paper to them, with x-y axies etc, regardless of how much we scrunch it up.

A photo scrunched up does not transfer people across the room.

The real issue is not so much that two distant sides of the photo can be brought into apposition, but the effect of cutting a great slice of photo out and putting it somwehere else.

Most common bends of paper will induce a parity reversal. That is, even if the thing were possible, you would become a great lump of antimatter, which will tidy up some matter in quite a spectular way...

So, it is probably not possible, and the consequences are more dangerous than not.
The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.

\ ( \(\LaTeX\ \) \ ) [no spaces] at https://greasyfork.org/en/users/188714-wendy-krieger
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1984
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Postby Keiji » Thu May 12, 2005 3:27 pm

If you folded it round into a cylinder with an overlap, you wouldn't get a parity reversal. ;)
User avatar
Keiji
Administrator
 
Posts: 1968
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2003 6:33 pm
Location: Torquay, England

Postby jinydu » Thu May 12, 2005 4:01 pm

iNVERTED, how did you become a tetraspace native? I have more posts than you, but I'm just a tetraspace visitor.
jinydu
Tetronian
 
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 5:31 am

Postby Keiji » Thu May 12, 2005 6:13 pm

Because I'm an admin. Alkaline started as a tetraspace native, so why can't I? ;)
User avatar
Keiji
Administrator
 
Posts: 1968
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2003 6:33 pm
Location: Torquay, England

Postby wendy » Thu May 12, 2005 11:09 pm

But to roll it to a cylinder, you need an open edge. You don't have open edges on boundless space.
The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.

\ ( \(\LaTeX\ \) \ ) [no spaces] at https://greasyfork.org/en/users/188714-wendy-krieger
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1984
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Postby Keiji » Fri May 13, 2005 3:52 pm

True, but couldn't you make an S-shape, and then go through two layers?
User avatar
Keiji
Administrator
 
Posts: 1968
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2003 6:33 pm
Location: Torquay, England

Postby wendy » Sat May 14, 2005 8:11 am

All-space has no boundary. In order to connect remote corners, you need to do a wormhole thing.

On the other hand, the other assumption is because space is curved, it must be curved *in* something. This is not the case. *any space*, including the euclidean metric, is fundementally curved, without a medium for curvature.

W
The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.

\ ( \(\LaTeX\ \) \ ) [no spaces] at https://greasyfork.org/en/users/188714-wendy-krieger
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1984
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Instant travel?

Postby timespace » Thu May 19, 2005 12:02 am

4thdeminsionists wrote:Would it be possible to travel instantly in time by bending matter in the 4th dimension? like here's an example:

A B

whats the quickest distance between these to points? In the 3rd dimension it would be a straight line. However in the fourth dimenison couldn't you fold the paper (this isn't really a piece of paper but imagine that it is) to make the points touch, eliminating distance?


I recently read a book that has this explanation in it about the fourth dimension called A Wrinkle In Time Very sci-fi, but its not bad.
timespace
Mononian
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 2:28 am
Location: Alberta, Canada

Postby bsaucer » Mon Nov 28, 2005 8:43 pm

Sounds like a "wormhole effect"...
bsaucer
Dionian
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 6:30 pm
Location: Mobile, AL

Postby Sliver » Thu Dec 08, 2005 3:59 pm

Think of it this way: 3D person B picks up 2D person A from a point on his 2D world and places him down three feet away from that point. To person A, he has just teleported three feet, because he cannot view or comprehend 3-dimensional travel. Now think of it the same way with the 3rd and 4th dimensions. 4D person C picks up person B from Chicago and places him down in Miami. To person B, he has just teleported.
Sliver
Nullonian
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 3:50 pm

Teleportation

Postby bsaucer » Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:34 am

If an object "instantly" teleports from point A to point B, then according to special relativity, the transport is only "instant" in a particular frame of reference. In other (moving) frames, the object may be in both places at once, or it may be in neither place, for a finite interval of time.

Doesn't this mean that it's total mass is double (or missing) during that brief interval of time? Doesn't that violate the conservation of mass/energy?
bsaucer
Dionian
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 6:30 pm
Location: Mobile, AL

Postby PWrong » Fri Dec 09, 2005 4:07 pm

Think of it this way: 3D person B picks up 2D person A from a point on his 2D world and places him down three feet away from that point. To person A, he has just teleported three feet, because he cannot view or comprehend 3-dimensional travel.


Imagine this scenario. Person A gets on an aeroplane and immediately falls asleep. The plane flies to another country, and person A wakes up. To person A, he has just teleported to another country because he can't comprehend anything while he's asleep.

The flaw in your argument is that you're considering an intelligent observer, when all you really need is a clock. In your scenario, A's clock will continue to tick even if A can't comprehend what's going on around him.

Furthermore, assuming space is approximately flat, the total distance travelled by A is more than 3 feet, and it will actually take longer for him to teleport.
User avatar
PWrong
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1599
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2004 8:21 am
Location: Perth, Australia

Postby miseleigh » Wed Dec 28, 2005 6:02 am

That all depends. Is the shortest distance between two points in tetraspace still a line? :P

If so, teleportation is a moot point. And as far as I know, it would be.
I do my best to say what I mean, mean what I say, and have it be true in both cases.
miseleigh
Mononian
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 8:01 pm

Postby jinydu » Wed Dec 28, 2005 8:12 am

miseleigh wrote:That all depends. Is the shortest distance between two points in tetraspace still a line? :P


It is in R^4
jinydu
Tetronian
 
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 5:31 am

Postby wendy » Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:21 am

One should not confuse R4 (an array of four reals), with E4 (euclidean 4-space). R4 applies with equal meaning to say, the projective 4-space, where E4 is only the horoterix.

None the same, a straight line is the shortest way of getting between two points in E4, H4, S4, etc. For all of these spaces, there exists a shorter line outside of space, but one has to severely make the curvature go to -oo to make points side-by-side adjacent.

In terms of the hyperbolic curvature as 1, one can have a euclidean 3-space (horochorix), as a horosphere, and then use a ruler measured in euclidean distances, but the scale running to the time-honoured series like

1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, 377, 610, ....

Suppose the curvature term is taken at 4000 miles. In order to travel something like 610 * 4000 miles, one would travel a distance of 15 * 4000 miles of hyperbolic space.

It's kind of like the chord through the earth is shorter than the trip overland, but on a grander scale.

Wendy
The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.

\ ( \(\LaTeX\ \) \ ) [no spaces] at https://greasyfork.org/en/users/188714-wendy-krieger
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1984
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Postby jinydu » Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:56 pm

So what is the difference between R4 and E4?
jinydu
Tetronian
 
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 5:31 am

Postby houserichichi » Thu Dec 29, 2005 3:56 pm

It depends on who you talk to - I had one prof who used the two interchangeably (wrong) while the rest used E^n to represent the affine/metric/topological space (depending on the context) and R^n its vector space.
houserichichi
Tetronian
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 1:03 am
Location: Canada

Postby wendy » Fri Dec 30, 2005 8:32 am

Some euclidean geometries (like inversive-geometry), don't nicely map onto R4.

In any case, one can make R4 any four quantities that map onto reals, eg (money, time, length, weight) forms an R4, but never an E4.

E4 also implies a relation between the axies of the R4, that is, one can with some lee-way swap the axies about without distorting things, eg length = height, but money <> time.

W
The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.

\ ( \(\LaTeX\ \) \ ) [no spaces] at https://greasyfork.org/en/users/188714-wendy-krieger
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 1984
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Postby TeamFarrell » Mon Jan 16, 2006 5:26 am

I may have no place to make this comeent, but this theory sounds like it's straight out of the novel "A Wrinkle in Time" in which they actually do bend the third dimension for that one instant to bring two points together. After they get to their destination everything returns to normal.

As far as I know though that is impossible.
-Kevin
TeamFarrell
Nullonian
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 4:58 am
Location: Canada

Postby faranya » Wed Jan 18, 2006 9:12 pm

OK, just abuot the instantanious travel...wouldn't it always take time? Even folding space over and transposing yourself at the other end, there would be time spent in transition, right? Now, if it was dealing with matter, you would have to cease to exist at your starting point, and assemble at the end point at the same time...not instantaniously or else there would be 2 of you existing at the same time...or am I WAY off base with my thoughts?
faranya
Dionian
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:58 pm

Postby Kahlar » Fri Mar 10, 2006 4:46 am

Of course you could teleport if it were somehow possible to go into the 4d world and and bend everything for your disposal. It would be like walking through a doorway, except the doorway represents 100s of miles or maybe even a little thing like the other end of your house. I don't see why it would take a long time though.
Kahlar
Mononian
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 8:20 am

Postby bo198214 » Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:29 am

Kahlar wrote:Of course you could teleport if it were somehow possible to go into the 4d world and and bend everything for your disposal.

I really ask myself, what my 4d neighbour would say if always somebody comes along and bends his world at will. Same for 3d.
bo198214
Tetronian
 
Posts: 690
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 11:03 pm
Location: Berlin - Germany

Postby moonlord » Sun Mar 12, 2006 2:12 pm

Spin seems to remain a problem... How about spin-0 particles? What would happen to them if they pass through? Would they just 'teleport'? That's what seems logical to me. Seems.

If this is the case, then almost-instant teleportation is possible. Encode some mass into photons, bend space, move photons through contact point, decode the photons into mass.
moonlord
Tetronian
 
Posts: 605
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:01 pm
Location: CT, RO, CE EU

Postby houserichichi » Mon Apr 24, 2006 11:21 pm

I'm not sure I see where the problem is with spin-0 particles...care to elaborate?
houserichichi
Tetronian
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 1:03 am
Location: Canada

Re: Instant travel?

Postby Nick » Tue Apr 25, 2006 12:46 am

4thdeminsionists wrote:Would it be possible to travel instantly in time by bending matter in the 4th dimension? like here's an example:

A B

whats the quickest distance between these to points? In the 3rd dimension it would be a straight line. However in the fourth dimenison couldn't you fold the paper (this isn't really a piece of paper but imagine that it is) to make the points touch, eliminating distance?

Imagine a 2d senario:
Yes, I think you could. If the two points on the paper were connected so that they were the same point, and someone moved across the point, then they would still be on the same point, except now they have a choice: continue on the plane they were on or move the the other side of the plane. Because he remains on the same point, it would be instantaneous, because *technically* he isn't moving.
I am the Nick formerly known as irockyou.
postcount++;
"All evidence of truth comes only from the senses" - Friedrich Nietzsche

Image
Nick
Tetronian
 
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 8:47 pm
Location: New Jersey, USA

Postby moonlord » Tue Apr 25, 2006 7:15 am

@house: Well, you get a parity reversal when you pass a contact point. What if the spin is 0? 0 = -0 so the particle should remain unchanged.

@irockyou: This has been discussed earlier. It gives birth to parity reversal problems (aka, you will be antimatter).
"God does not play dice." -- Albert Einstein, early 1900's.
"Not only does God play dice, but... he sometimes throws them where we cannot see them." -- Stephen Hawking, late 1900's.
moonlord
Tetronian
 
Posts: 605
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:01 pm
Location: CT, RO, CE EU

Postby Zweistein » Tue Apr 25, 2006 7:41 am

Hello!

I don't think you CAN bend 4D space. Ok, us humans can easily bend a small piece of paper - almost 2D space. But to bend a piece of paper that's as big as a city, we would need to push it all the way through. For that, don't we need the same amount of energy, or more, than for simply moving from one place to another?
Zweistein
Nullonian
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2006 7:32 am

Next

Return to Non-Spatial Dimensions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron