Whitestar said:
And even if it were possible, one runs into the very severe risk of generating a singularity in spacetime, i.e. a black hole.
I believe that the singularity that physicists describe within black holes is merely their lack of understanding of natural physics. It is said that the singularity is a point of infinite energy and density, thus infinite warping of space and time. But infinities are nonsensical. In real life, infinities most likely do not occur. It is more probable that the singularity simply cannot be explained right now by relativity or quantum mechanics because they in themselves are incomplete. Until a unified picture is given, then physicists can start giving solid, discrete depictions of what's really inside a black hole. This is why in the glossary of Kip Thorne's book,
Black Holes & Time Warps, Kip Thorne describes the singularity as:
A region of spacetime where spacetime becomes so strong that the general relativistic laws break down and the laws of quantum gravity take over. If one tries to describe a singularity using general relativity alone, one finds (incorrectly) that tidal gravity and spacetime curvature are infinitely strong there. Quantum gravity probably replaces these infinities by quantum foam.
Whitestar said:
And even if it were possible, one runs into the very severe risk of generating a singularity in spacetime, i.e. a black hole.
According to relativity the only way to create a wormhole (i.e., passage used in the process of hyperspatial travel) is to create a black hole. A black hole is necessary in order to create what is know as the "traversable wormhole." Then, according to quantum mechanics, there may be numerous microscopic wormholes opening and closing all the time within the fabric of spacetime, just that they are too small to see or do much with. I think that the utilization of a spinning black hole would be the best route to take. Quantum gravity would probably give a better take on the issue.
Whitestar said:
how can a starship weighing only several tons generate a mass several times its own magnitude, when objects such as the Earth and the sun warps space with very little results
A highly advanced civilization would probably know how to create high-energy outputs using some form of technology (such as using naturally-occurring antimatter with matter). Since mass is the same as condensed energy, they would only need to concentrate an exceedingly high energy output into a small space.
Morbius said:
Star Trek makes no reference to so-called "negative energy". Their
writers didn't fall for that bit of contemporary nonsense. Their
starships derived their energy from matter / anti-matter reactors.
How is negative energy (i.e., "exotic matter") contemporary nonsense? In
Black Holes & Time Warps by Kip Thorne, Thorn explains that exotic matter is required to keep a wormhole open,
any wormhole. Kip Thorne further explains that negative energy may be found from "vacuum fluctuations near a hole's horizon" in quantum foam.
When one tries to remove all electric and magnetic fields from some region of space, that is, when one tries to create a perfect vacuum, there always remain a plethora of random, unpredictable electromagnetic oscillations--oscillations caused by a tug-of-war between the fields in adjacent regions of space. The fields "here" borrow energy from the fields "there," leaving the fields there with a deficit of energy, that is, leaving them momentarily with negative energy.
It's also noted in
Hyperspace that this "exotic matter" may also be found between two parallel metal plates due to the Casimir effect.
jdlech said:
In sci fi, the answer lies with "gravity generators". Something that can turn energy into gravity and possibly direct it in a given direction.
I've been wondering about that. How would a gravity generator be created? Since matter is the same thing as "energy," does the term "energy" apply to all types of "energy," including electromagnetic energy, gravitational energy, and even neutrinos? Would it be correct to say that electromagnetic energy has the ability to "warp" spacetime, since matter “warps“ spacetime and matter is the same thing as electromagnetic energy? Or is this question simply flawed?
