The best analogy that I have heard so far, from just about anyone (here, school, crazy physics profs) is the ball of silly-putty which you take pieces and smush them together. This is quickly followed by the proviso that it's all in dimensions that we cant understand, and that nothing we can say or write will really explain it, but that's not the point. So from this, here is my question/comment. I have heard several people rant about how it wont work because an object cannot exsist in two places at once. But it seems like that's not really what's happening. Really, the object is exsisting in only one place, but two locations are occupying the same part of the 4th/11th/umpteenth/whateverth dimensional space that we're dealing with. So... 1) wouldnt that mean that we could (providing we build a wormhole) successfully compress the entire univers onto a single geometric point? 2) doesnt that mean that if we could build one wormhole then energy would be no problem, by simply using the first wormhole to facilitate fissin/fusion (i get the two mixed up) to supply all the energy we need?
Actually, the "scientific method" in which you seem to place so much faith, HAS been changed. Sure, hypothesis-experiment-record-conclude worked pretty well when science was just mixing different colored liquids or disecting sheep. But now that we're talking about sub-atomic particles, which we only know are there because we think they have to be, and light speed, which is the fastest speed only because a german patent office worker said so, it doesnt work. We can't see any of the relevant things, and cant detect the important ones. A large percentage of physics is just people figuring out the math, and then saying it's true because if it wasn't then the math wouldn't work. For the past 50 years, progressive theoretical science has been completly untestable physically. So even though this guy might be wrong, just because he hasnt made a wormhole yet, doesnt mean that he's wrong. He might be right, and we wont know for another 200 years, but he would still be right. Just remember, Capernicus didnt fly in a spaceship to prove the earth went around the sun, he just worked the math. waffles
Slashdot Mirror
The best analogy that I have heard so far, from just about anyone (here, school, crazy physics profs) is the ball of silly-putty which you take pieces and smush them together. This is quickly followed by the proviso that it's all in dimensions that we cant understand, and that nothing we can say or write will really explain it, but that's not the point. So from this, here is my question/comment. I have heard several people rant about how it wont work because an object cannot exsist in two places at once. But it seems like that's not really what's happening. Really, the object is exsisting in only one place, but two locations are occupying the same part of the 4th/11th/umpteenth/whateverth dimensional space that we're dealing with. So... 1) wouldnt that mean that we could (providing we build a wormhole) successfully compress the entire univers onto a single geometric point? 2) doesnt that mean that if we could build one wormhole then energy would be no problem, by simply using the first wormhole to facilitate fissin/fusion (i get the two mixed up) to supply all the energy we need?
Actually, the "scientific method" in which you seem to place so much faith, HAS been changed. Sure, hypothesis-experiment-record-conclude worked pretty well when science was just mixing different colored liquids or disecting sheep. But now that we're talking about sub-atomic particles, which we only know are there because we think they have to be, and light speed, which is the fastest speed only because a german patent office worker said so, it doesnt work. We can't see any of the relevant things, and cant detect the important ones. A large percentage of physics is just people figuring out the math, and then saying it's true because if it wasn't then the math wouldn't work. For the past 50 years, progressive theoretical science has been completly untestable physically. So even though this guy might be wrong, just because he hasnt made a wormhole yet, doesnt mean that he's wrong. He might be right, and we wont know for another 200 years, but he would still be right. Just remember, Capernicus didnt fly in a spaceship to prove the earth went around the sun, he just worked the math. waffles