This time it was by a moderator! Hodgman, intent aside, it was not necessary to mention.

I'm sorry, but faith is an essential part of any discussion about absolute truth. I'd rather everyone stopped bringing up absolute truth in the first place (given that it is an irrelevant philosophical construct), but given a discussion of theoretical physics, it's bound to happen.

What I meant is that he only needed to mention that there were no absolute truths. Regardless if I believe him or not, my beliefs do not pertain to the discussion. Again, this is about warp drive.

[quote name='Alpha_ProgDes' timestamp='1348241307' post='4982407']
[quote name='Hodgman' timestamp='1348239008' post='4982394']
Or if you think of positive mass as something that sucks space-time in towards it (like a vacuum cleaner's nozzle against a bed-sheet), then 'negative mass' would be something that pushes space-time outwards (like a leaf-blower).

So I guess Dark Matter has negative mass. Since in theory, it's pushing the universe outward.
[/quote]
That would be Dark Energy - Dark Matter - as the name implies - exerts the same gravitational effects on fabric of space time as ordinary matter. The only difference is that it seems to only interact with the rest of universe via gravitation.
[/quote]
I don't see how the name implies that. If anything, I would think that Dark Matter produces Dark Energy.

That aside, I believe that warp capable vehicles (assuming we don't have another World War) will made (at the earliest) by 2050. But I wonder if the future of space travel will look like Firefly or Star Trek. At the rate the world is going.... maybe Firefly.

But I wonder if the future of space travel will look like Firefly or Star Trek. At the rate the world is going.... maybe Firefly.

or fallout

There's no such thing as absolute fact (unless you're religious)

1. As a moderately religious catholic, I don't think there are very many facts in my faith. There are things I believe to be true, but I would not call them facts.
2. There are nobel prize winning scientists who are religious. I don't see why bringing up religion at all was necessary, but looking down on religious people by virtue of them being religious doesn't make you correct, it makes you an asshole; as it would with looking down on any group of people.[/quote]I have no idea why you're so offended by that to the point of having to call people assholes, and frankly I don't care -- getting offended so easy is what makes us look so damned crazy to atheists.

I'm religious -- I hold beliefs based on nothing but faith and spiritual intuition, so I in no way meant it to be derogatory to people who do the same. It was just a tongue-in-cheek comment reinforcing the meaning "theory" in response to Alpha_ProgDes -- that nothing in science is ever absolutely true, it can always be disproved and adjusted. My faith on the other hand exists outside of the scientific method, and can't be proved/disproved by experiment -- I take these beliefs to be true with no regard to how I can objectively validate them. As a Catholic, surely you take the existence of God as an unquestionable fact in the same way? "Truth" is a topic for religion and philosophy, and doesn't mean much to science.

Ok? Now quit flaming (a)theists on my behalf now I've explained my intent, and grow a sense of damned humour. Back to theories of mass/energy.

[quote name='darookie' timestamp='1348302083' post='4982607']
[quote name='Alpha_ProgDes' timestamp='1348241307' post='4982407']
[quote name='Hodgman' timestamp='1348239008' post='4982394']
Or if you think of positive mass as something that sucks space-time in towards it (like a vacuum cleaner's nozzle against a bed-sheet), then 'negative mass' would be something that pushes space-time outwards (like a leaf-blower).

So I guess Dark Matter has negative mass. Since in theory, it's pushing the universe outward.
[/quote]
That would be Dark Energy - Dark Matter - as the name implies - exerts the same gravitational effects on fabric of space time as ordinary matter. The only difference is that it seems to only interact with the rest of universe via gravitation.
[/quote]
I don't see how the name implies that. If anything, I would think that Dark Matter produces Dark Energy.
[/quote]

Dark matter/Energy only implies that we know very little about them, it's truly a bad naming convention, as it leads to mistakes like this.

also, doesn't gravity kindof prove that FTL is possible, i mean think about it, theoretically we have an influence on objects that are quite literally at the other end of the universe, even if the math makes that influence mind-boggling tiny, we still have some theoretical pull on it.

also, doesn't gravity kindof prove that FTL is possible, i mean think about it, theoretically we have an influence on objects that are quite literally at the other end of the universe, even if the math makes that influence mind-boggling tiny, we still have some theoretical pull on it.

Gravitational effects are not instantaneous but are also limited by the speed of light (you can think of it as ripples in space-time)

[quote name='slicer4ever' timestamp='1348388890' post='4982847']
also, doesn't gravity kindof prove that FTL is possible, i mean think about it, theoretically we have an influence on objects that are quite literally at the other end of the universe, even if the math makes that influence mind-boggling tiny, we still have some theoretical pull on it.

Gravitational effects are not instantaneous but are also limited by the speed of light (you can think of it as ripples in space-time)
[/quote]

hmm, i was not aware of this, i was always under the impression gravity was a constant effect everywhere, i rescind my previous statement then.

Yeah, AFAIK, the 'graviton' is to gravity as the 'photon' is to electromagnetism. When a particle with mass moves, it changes the shape of space-time, which affects everything ever so slightly, but this warping of space-time is communicated by the emission of gravitons, which move at the speed of light. And just as photons can be modelled as a particle or a electromagnetic wave, gravitons can also be modelled as a 'gravitational wave'.

Dark matter/Energy only implies that we know very little about them, it's truly a bad naming convention

Yeah IIRC one came after the other in unrelated studies, and borrowed the name "dark" to mean that it was not well understood and had never been observed.
My vague and possibly way-off understanding is that dark matter is something like particles with mass that aren't connected to anything else to form regular "solid" sub-atomic particles like protons/neutrons, and dark energy is the 'stuff' that vacuum is made out of.

Yup, the fact that the gravity has the speed limit and that it affects by distorting space-time (at least according to general relativity theory) led me to the thought that any space-time distortion is limited to the speed of light too. So no matter how we screw ST around the spaceship, the screwiness can travel with lightspeed at maximum anyway.

This whole theory is the kind of theory that non-scientists cannot really reason about and real scientist just dismiss and don't point out the flaws to us non-scientist. So again: we believe anything that is told to us because we are not scientists in the matter.

(that's why this thread is a bit pointless, scientists about the matter are either not replying in the thread or replying but no one understands them. Science is about facts, not opinions and feelings)