What would a dimension with unstable forces be like?

[scifiwriter]

Just want to throw out some basic special relativity here: Tachyons WOULD NOT allow for travel (or perception) back in time. Draw a space-time diagram with a light-cone (light is a 45 degree angle). Draw an event A at your origin, draw an event B anywhere later along the time axis, draw a light-cone for B. Now Tachyons, by definitions, have speeds anywhere from faster than the speed of light (c) to infinitely fast. On your diagram this corresponds to a line which makes an angle with the x-axis anywhere from less than 45 degrees to 0 degrees. From this, please, tell me how you connect event B to A. You can't. Tachyons would violate causality (since they could "beat" the electromagnetic force in a "race") but they certainly wouldn't allow motion backwards in time, they'd also have a velocity with an imaginary component which is pretty WTF.

Oh Maverick thanks now this is truly helpful and I see what you are saying.In order to be able to make this make any sense scientifically within this model no one could go backwards in time to a point in which we are because it would be there past and there is no past for them.

Did I get it right this time?

Ouch Big problem!

 

[scifiwriter]

Yes, but you're missing our point. Our point is absolutely NOT that your story is bad or that you should stop writing. Our point is that you will NEVER be able to make what you propose "more" realistic (it has nothing to do with reality to begin with). Our solution to you is write it anyway, its science will be garbage, but it may be a great story and that's all that really matters. And has been pointed out, really what you're suggesting is basically a spin on the "stuck in a dream world/reality" a la Dreamscape, Nightmare on Elm Street, etc. But there's NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. But you can never expect a physicists seal of "accurate science" approval, so don't bother with it. Strip the extraneous "physics" "concepts" and break it down to the raw story.

I think I am getting the point now. I disagree about it being a dream thing. She would not be dreaming it. If she were to die in this place it would be very real!I am not a fan of Nightmare in Elm Street so I do not know what you mean there. Perhaps I should rent it to understand what you mean.Till now I have had no reason to watch such a slasher type movie. Isn't that the one about a guy with a hockey mask killing people? Confused?!

I guess I am smart enough to know not to expect a seal of Authenticity of Accurate Science. The only way I could do that is to write about this world and this moment in time. For instance a few years back everyone said that Hawkins was crazy to talk about the possibility of a black Hole But now that the Hubble telescope has found them no one questions if it were true.

In the same vein, if I was a author of Sci- fiction in the 9th century and wrote about the world being round I am sure no one would have been able to give seal of "accurate science" award either. So please do not imagine I am asking for this seal. What I am asking if this were true how would this one change effect the whole world I am building.

IE. if you were losing a X amount of particles, that are lost in one hour into aB universe what would happen?
If someone could travel at the stepped of light could they look backwards in time?
If you did look at a M-Brane separating our reality with another what would it look like?

I now know, If I drew your geometry right, that one could not travel backwards in time with current Physics theory and why( because they are outside our time line and can only deal with future events). This is very helpful. More helpful than telling me I am speaking gibberish but not why.

Finally I never intended on telling my reader anything we discuss here as a fact. I intended to have her describe her experience to another group of scientists using a scientific reasoning. And also,To try to make sense in her own mind what she experienced using some form of science theory that made sense to herself.

Problem is if I can not explain my ideas to another scientist ,concerning what she has experienced through scientific theory, how can she a scientist explain it to another scientist? This the continuity I am trying to achieve. I can not have her accept a supernatural explanation as the is incredulous... after all she is supposed to be a scientist.
She must figure this out scientifically because she knows what she experiences doesn't line up with over any current theory, but she is trying to find some (however far reaching) explanation to explain an experience that most would label as unscientific. Especially since she is trying to explain it to a group of 5 scientist.

So I placed myself in her shoes and tried to ask of you some of what I considered would be some her thoughts of theories and posed those questions to you fine men.
So this in a nutshell is the scene and what I am trying to work out. How does a scientist who does not believe in the supernatural, but nevertheless, experiences something that could be considered supernatural by others, explain to other scientists what she experienced without actually admitting it was supernatural. For that matter how does she even work out what happened in her own mind? This is all I am attempting to figure out. What theories does she use to explain what has happened.What I am realizing is that she could never explain what she experienced and possibly would not even attempt to try to knowing that know one would ever be able to understand her experience.

Perhaps her colleagues would never be able to believe what she says she experiences, because, it flys in the face of all current theory.It wouldn't make here experience any less real for her. Just that none of her friends believe it really happened.

 

[scifiwriter]

I don't know if any of you read the blog www.cosmicvariance.com but the main guy there, Sean Carroll, had a post where he talked about being one of the "science advisors" on the new Thor movie. He has a really good post about how, when he came in, they just wanted a bunch of technojargon to patch up the "magic" of the "science" in the plot. However, he strongly pushed for a different approach, attempting to make the physics of the Marvel universe INTERNALLY consistent. In other words, the rules of that universe aren't the same as ours, they're actually this, but given that, this and this are possible. And I think that's the true ticket to a soft sci-fi narrative. Don't worry about matching things up with reality. We see this all the time in movies and sci-fi, each movie lays out its own personal "rules" of time-travel or vampires or whatever and then as long as the rest of the movie conforms to these rules the audience is happy.

This is frustrating Maverick. You have just restated what I am attempting to do here.

You said
***********In other words, the rules of that universe aren't the same as ours, they're actually this, but given that, this and this are possible. And I think that's the true ticket to a soft sci-fi narrative. ******************

This is it... this is what I want to DO! I do not need a seal of this is how this world works in this world! GRRRR! I am not sure how may more ways I can restate this in order to get you to understand!

OK rant is over... but really this is what I mean to get answers for. Not the this is how this works but how would that world work!

 

[Ryan_m_b]

This is frustrating Maverick. You have just restated what I am attempting to do here.

You said
***********In other words, the rules of that universe aren't the same as ours, they're actually this, but given that, this and this are possible. And I think that's the true ticket to a soft sci-fi narrative. ******************

This is it... this is what I want to DO! I do not need a seal of this is how this world works in this world! GRRRR! I am not sure how may more ways I can restate this in order to get you to understand!

OK rant is over... but really this is what I mean to get answers for. Not the this is how this works but how would that world work!

It's really not come across that you've tried to do this. Throughout the thread you've proposed a series of ideas one after the other, when people have suggested something you've taken that grain of advise and run off to propose whole new (and scientifically nonsense) ideas before asking the validity of those. If you want to write soft-SF just go for it. Make sure it's internally consistent and the implications for society are well thought out. For instance; a friend has just lent me Philip K Dick's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Three_Stigmata_of_Palmer_Eldritch" , it's absolutely full of nonsense science (psychics, evolution under control of a gland that can be stimulated, real time radio communication across light hours, colonists on planets that haven't been terraformed etc) but it's a good book because the "science" is uses is well thought out in terms of the society written.

 

[scifiwriter]

I really found this thread frustrating because I never indicated I was doing anything but trying to get a more realistic take on what that world would be like. I was given preposterous Ideas that I had never considered writing about... such as weird looking skies and one eyed aliens and the like,which I had never even considered as a possible Plot in a book.

Such ideas are better left with H.P. Lovecraft and the like. It amazes me how folks could be so bigoted and narrow-minded and still be considered the cream of the crop mentally. And to think I once looked up to physics Majors as the big thinkers of our day. All my time with you here has shown me is that in truth none of you know anything about anything and all you have left to do is argue about your little pet theories.

Honestly you are worse that a bunch of old ladies at a bingo table when it comes to all the in fighting you do! Do you have nothing better to do with all that brain power than to gang up on someone who has done nothing but admit that she knows nothing really on the subject and was honestly seeking answers to her questions.

I honestly no longer care what you all think anymore. I simply must write this last letter to answer charges laid against me however. What do you all think I have been doing? I have been checking with you all about said validity! AS I said BEFORE NOTHING WAS BEING WRITTEN! I was checking my ideas before I wrote to find out "IF" they had Validity!
But no you all were more interested in scoring points off my intelligence than in actually helping me to understand.

I hope it was worth it seeing I only have a High School education. Does it make you feel superior to stand next to a baby in the world of Physics and scream about how much more you know about physics than I. I was however "smart" to know I needed to get help from experts. Sadly I hadn't counted on the fact that I was on a thread with emotional infants when compared to myself.

Really boys, you really should be ashamed of yourselves. Grow up and perhaps we can talk again in say 20 years when you have matured a bit. Perhaps I can talk with you about sociability and you can finally answer some of my honest questions about physics. But I doubt that many of you would have grown out of your emotional arrest by that time!

Tisk Tisk how sad!

 

[Pythagorean]

...It amazes me how folks could be so bigoted and narrow-minded and still be considered the cream of the crop mentally. And to think I once looked up to physics Majors as the big thinkers of our day...

...Honestly you are worse that a bunch of old ladies at a bingo table when it comes to all the in fighting you do! Do you have nothing better to do with all that brain power than to gang up on someone who has done nothing...

...I hope it was worth it seeing I only have a High School education. Does it make you feel superior to stand next to a baby in the world of Physics and scream about how much more you know about physics than I...

...Really boys, you really should be ashamed of yourselves. Grow up and perhaps we can talk again in say 20 years when you have matured a bit...

A+ trolling

 

[DoggerDan]

"...and the boy stuck his finger in the hole of the spaceship, thus saving all 58,372 passengers."

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

But no you all were more interested in scoring points off my intelligence than in actually helping me to understand.

I am sorry you felt this way. I, and at least some of the other members, were trying to help you understand. Some posters came up with their own ideas because that is about all there was to do since most of your questions can not be answered by real science. I know it is frustrating when you have an idea you love and you bounce it off someone else only to have them suggest that you should write some other completely different thing.

Again, sorry.
Good luck with your writing.

 

[LJW]

Ok, I am no physics major…. I am a writer, but I truly need to get some Physics information. I am sure that should I get this work in progress published, some physics major will be able to blow huge holes in my idea, as it stands today. So I would like to throw out some suppositions here and let those who know what they are talking about discuss my idea here. This will help my work in progress to be more realistic for my sci-fi audience.
So here goes….
1) My Protagonist’s (female) mother was kidnapped by my Antagonist and hidden in another Dimension.
2) My Protagonist follows my Antagonist and My Protagonist’s Mother into that Dimension.
3) My Antagonist has the ability,when in this dimension, to manipulate Strong Force, Weak force, and Electromagnetic Force to cause them to be what he wants. I see him considering himself a kind of cosmic computer simulation programmer in this Dimension.
4) I see this Dimension as having more instability in these forces than our own.
5) When my Antagonist or someone of his race it not existing in this dimension long-term cohesion is not possible.
I know this supposition is tenuous at best. But what Can I say, I am a sci-fi writer. What I am asking is the following questions.
Say such a dimension actually exists….
1) What would it be like to exist here even for a billionth of second without cohesion? What I mean is if My Antagonist simply held her together but not the rest of the proto- matter around her?
2) How might to human brain try to process what it was experiencing in this dimension?
3) What universal Laws would have to exist in order for this dimension to exist?
4) What would this proto-matter look; act; and be like? What it be a corrosive, or alkaline substance? Would it be Liquid, semi- solid, or gas? Would it be none of the above?
5) Since my Antagonist doesn’t actually come from this dimension but another dimension that allows him to move very quickly (say the speed of light) how would this supposed Proto-matter react to his presence.
6) What other things would you all be able to suppose about my hypothetical dimension?

1) Extra dimensions have been hypothesized before as reasoning for the disparity in the strengths of gravity and other forces. At the Planck distance general relativity isn't effective at evaluating gravity, but delving into string theory and quantum mechanics could quite possibly be a bit to sci fi for your readers, but it's an options. You have the other options, although slightly cliched- for example wormholes, singularities, whatever. I'd go for something fresh and apply some poetic licence.

2) This is more of a philosophical question. Well, what's this dimension like? Do we still have light, sound, matter, energy? You need to describe it first. However I think something that applies is Plato's allegory of the cave, where puppeteers cast shadows which restrained prisoners watch. After a long time of watching the shadows and accepting them as reality and truth, if they were to be released (Plato hypothesized a philosopher would be able to escape), they would not accept the real world, even though it's obvious. They still think of the world as being made up of shadows, light and dark, even though they can now see the sunlight, and the trickery of the puppeteers. The truth is blindingly obvious, but they cannot accept it, and some would even wish to return to watching she shadows, which they consider to be the truth and the real world, even when they have learned of the real truth. The idea of Plato's cave was played on in the Matrix, for a common perspective. When Neo is awoken from the matrix (turns around, looking at what casts the shadows, rather than at the shadows), he cannot accept it. The truth is obvious- but he is not willing to accept it to begin with. If this dimension is observably different, you would probably have a reaction similar to the subjects of Plato's cave- they would be unwilling to accept it, and unbelieving of it, even if it is obviously the truth.

3) I wouldn't invent additional forces, especially ones that have absolutely no grounding in reality or feasibility in any model of physics or the universe. You do have poetic license on your side here, but do exercise some modesty. You could probably change no laws and be fine- after all, we cannot disprove an infinite number of alternate universes exists.

5) Tieing in with #3, you could toy with some laws. We view c as a universal speed limit- perhaps in this dimension the universal speed limit is far lower, etc. Don't be afraid to change things- afterall, a science fiction novel based on nothing but present day fact could be rather dull. Personally, I'd rather see manipulations of existing physics, rather than new, completely groundless happenings.

6) I have no idea. It's your blank canvas to create. You have a lot you can play with. For example the thought experiment Schrodinger's Cat postulates that there are branch points, alternate universes, identical but unreachable that peel off every time and instance happens in a certain way. For example- think of it like this. You fall down the stairs, and at the instant before you fall another universe peels off, one in which you don't fall. And another universe for every single thing- one for hitting the 8th stair with your right arm, one for not hitting it there. Depending on your interpretation of it, a lot of universes could peel off. This is of course a thought experiment, and we could not view or interact with any universes that occur from it.

But you could change things around- maybe a universe is created every time a critical choice, or event occurs. Life or death, whatever. Now of course the normal population is completely unaware of this, but the protagonist can transcend into the other universes somehow. Hell, he could go to a universe where Adam never ate the apple if he wanted. Of course- this is different to how you envisage your story, but it's simply an example of how you can apply things.

One big thing I'll warn you of, that I'll assume you're aware of as a writer, is that this story, with the dimensions and protagonists abilities seems, to me at least, to be incredibly vulnerable to ending with a deux ex machina.

 

[berkeman]

Thread closed for now.