wormholes

[JF060392]

It is said that if you can find out a way to hold a wormhole open it will warp you into a demintion of which wou could travel vast distances in space instantly. nasa says that they are trying to devolop this kind of technology. Would it be possible if they did devolop this technolgy to create wormholes and navigate through time and space (like gps but for the universe)?

 

[Matthias99]

Theoretically, if you had an existing wormhole between points A and B, you could send matter/energy through it and have it come out at the other side in less time than it would take for light to travel directly from A to B through 'normal' space. This doesn't violate relativity, because the wormhole actually warps space to the point that there is less physical distance for you to cover.

However, nobody knows definitively if there are any wormholes actually in existence, let alone how to create one on-demand.

 

[Molondo]

Nasa said that? Not saying you are wrong or anything, but do you have a viable source?

 

[f95toli]

NASA has a small group of people studying things like wormholes, various novel propulsion systems, artificial gravity etc (meaning huge rotating space stations). I.e technology that might one day become usefull. In the case of worm holes "one day" means in a few hundred years or so.
The thing is, traveling via wormholes might actually work but as far as we know it would require an enourmous amount of energy (a few suns or something like that) to create a wormhole.
There are also issues with stability, from what I understand you need what is known as "exotic matter" to stabilize a wormhole. Such matter should exist according to string theory but it has never been found in nature so it might not exist at all (on the other hand: We DO know that dark matter exists, but we don't know what it made up of, so in comparison exotic matter is not very strange).
From time to time I do see papers on wormholes (not that they call it that) appearing in Physical Review Letters and other journals, so it seems to be a "respectable" field of study today.

 

[the splat in the hat]

It is not possible, we dont even know if wormholes are real yet, so right now ITS IMPOSSIBLE.
If wormholes can be proven or even just one exsample of something similar to bring it from a hypothisis to a general theory, in real world science , then its debateable , until then what are you on about , hypatheticly speaking we have never breached light speed , so theorising that, travelling at 2000 times the speed of light is just a plawsable as wormholes right now, and theres no evidence to proove otherwise. Maths isnt factual proof , it just gives us a good idea / direction. Its not proof.

****** looking at it like that.........star trekin across the universe................who's to say.......

 

[Xyo II]

Originally posted by: the splat in the hat
It is not possible, we dont even know if wormholes are real yet, so right now ITS IMPOSSIBLE.
If wormholes can be proven or even just one exsample of something similar to bring it from a hypothisis to a general theory, in real world science , then its debateable , until then what are you on about , hypatheticly speaking we have never breached light speed , so theorising that, travelling at 2000 times the speed of light is just a plawsable as wormholes right now, and theres no evidence to proove otherwise. Maths isnt factual proof , it just gives us a good idea / direction. Its not proof.

****** looking at it like that.........star trekin across the universe................who's to say.......

Please, for the love of God and all that is on this green Earth, learn to spell. Albeit this was 3:19 a.m., but a monkey with a ruptured spinal cord could type better. It's just dispikeble. Here's some spelling lessons to start you out.

 

[the splat in the hat]

lm sucking xxxx qlds best beer down, go fuk yourself, all you soooooking spelling jokers . Look at what you have done to English, its been bastardised , jail/gaol, wtf , so it makes a little difference as long as you understand it, and ld say everyone here can understand it, ffs its just an opinion.

GET OVER IT UBER NOOB>.....and all you other spelling sooks get over it too.

You are no longer welcome here.

AnandTech Moderator

 

[Zap Brannigan]

Originally posted by: Einstein Element

Originally posted by: the splat in the hat
It is not possible, we dont even know if wormholes are real yet, so right now ITS IMPOSSIBLE.
If wormholes can be proven or even just one exsample of something similar to bring it from a hypothisis to a general theory, in real world science , then its debateable , until then what are you on about , hypatheticly speaking we have never breached light speed , so theorising that, travelling at 2000 times the speed of light is just a plawsable as wormholes right now, and theres no evidence to proove otherwise. Maths isnt factual proof , it just gives us a good idea / direction. Its not proof.

****** looking at it like that.........star trekin across the universe................who's to say.......

Please, for the love of God and all that is on this green Earth, learn to spell. Albeit this was 3:19 a.m., but a monkey with a ruptured spinal cord could type better. It's just dispikeble. Here's some spelling lessons to start you out.

Do you feel all superior now?

Have you seen your own sig and the word "noodly" in it?

 

[Jeff240sx]

Originally posted by: Einstein Element
It's just dispikeble. .

Seriously? It's DESPICABLE. You should probably learn to spell for yourself before getting on others.

 

[Jpark]

Originally posted by: Jeff240sx

Originally posted by: Einstein Element
It's just dispikeble. .

Seriously? It's DESPICABLE. You should probably learn to spell for yourself before getting on others.

nice first post

 

[Soccerman06]

Originally posted by: the splat in the hat
It is not possible, we dont even know if wormholes are real yet, so right now ITS IMPOSSIBLE.
If wormholes can be proven or even just one exsample of something similar to bring it from a hypothisis to a general theory, in real world science , then its debateable , until then what are you on about , hypatheticly speaking we have never breached light speed , so theorising that, travelling at 2000 times the speed of light is just a plawsable as wormholes right now, and theres no evidence to proove otherwise. Maths isnt factual proof , it just gives us a good idea / direction. Its not proof.

****** looking at it like that.........star trekin across the universe................who's to say.......

Poor splat always forgets about quantum entaglement. We have discovered faster than light travel through quantum entaglement. If you recall what everyone thought about passing the speed of sound, it being impossible and whatnot. Well the same thing is going to be with the speed of light, once we figure out the mechanics of speed of that magnitude, we'll be able to do it with relative ease. Well thats my prediction anyways.

 

[RaphaelVinceti]

Anything is possible, in theory. Math holds the key to just about every problem in science. Once we can figure out every single equation we would need to create a wormwhole, and sustain one, someone will figure out how to do it. It wont be easy, and it wont be a short period of time. Most likely a couple hundred years from now.

 

[f95toli]

For the nth time:
NO, you can not use quantum entanglement to travel FTL
and NO you can not use quantum entanglement to transfer information FTL

 

[Soccerman06]

Why cant you use it to transmit data? Do you even know the basis of what it does? If you can instantly change the way a particle is spinning, and are able to change the direction its spinning at high speeds, you can transmit data faster than light.

And how do you know we cant use quantum entaglement to move faster than light? Are you from the future?

 

[f95toli]

I think I know a thing or two about entanglement.
I work as a physicist at an NMI. At the moment I working on cavity-QED using solid state qubits. In the experiment a qubit, which in this case is simply used as a two-level system, is entangled with an external cavity. The entangled state can then be probed using microwave spectroscopy.

I have explained the reason why you can't use entanglement to transfer information FTL in an old thread. Try searching. Or, even better, try google.

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: Soccerman06
Why cant you use it to transmit data? Do you even know the basis of what it does? If you can instantly change the way a particle is spinning, and are able to change the direction its spinning at high speeds, you can transmit data faster than light.

And how do you know we cant use quantum entaglement to move faster than light? Are you from the future?

f95toli is a physics grad student IIRC... practically has his Ph.D and I think his area of research has something to do with quantum information (storing information in the spins of what cesium? rubidium? atoms... something like that). So yeah, I'm sure he knows his stuff about quantum entanglement

I'm not quite as well versed, but I'm an astrophysics major myself and basically entanglement is a curiosity, but it can't be used for FTL information transmission. Entanglement basically works like this:

You have two chips (think poker style, but simpler). Each has 1 white side and 1 black side. You can toss both chips onto the table and you'll have a 1/4 chance of 2 white, 1/2 chance 1 white and 1 black, and 1/4 chance of 2 black. Okay that's all fine.

Now let's entangle them. You put both chips in a bag and click them together. Somehow the paint on them transfers and you now have 1 fully black chip, and 1 fully white chip. I reach into the bag and grab one, and so do you. Neither of us looks at our chips though. Now there's a 50/50 chance you have a white chip, or a black one, and same for me, but quantum mechanically, we say that the chip in my hand is still 50% black and 50% white, and so is yours. It's just that once we observe the ships that their wavefunctions collapse into either purely black or purely white.

So with our hands closed, we each go home. Cause I'm a freak, I go to the moon. When we each get home, you open your hand to see a black chip. Instantaneously, you know that I have a white chip. The way entanglement is presented is that both chips are half white, half black, observing yours as black makes mine white instantaneously over that great distance. That's kind of misleading though because it's not like you can do anything to make your chip black and thus send me the "white" message.

And once you've seen yours is black, and determined mine is white, it's not like you can flip yours over and have mine flip too.

 

[Soccerman06]

Originally posted by: f95toli
I think I know a thing or two about entanglement.
I work as a physicist at an NMI. At the moment I working on cavity-QED using solid state qubits. In the experiment a qubit, which in this case is simply used as a two-level system, is entangled with an external cavity. The entangled state can then be probed using microwave spectroscopy.

I have explained the reason why you can't use entanglement to transfer information FTL in an old thread. Try searching. Or, even better, try google.

Oop prove me wrong. BTW, I always take the optimistic side, so excuse my rudeness.