a very cool interpretation that is close to my feelings too; however this goddamn math does not understand our feelings. I'd like to discuss to you and others about this matter in the following, but for now 'm gonna draw your attention to this conversation and I ask of all the guys here to leave their comments about this:
The story begins from the time I requested of a guy to write about my work in his website and he replied:
I'm sorry, but I don't think you would appreciate any message I would post on the subject. A few "red flags" that I see are as follows:
1) You cite americanantigravity.com, which is a well-known crank site. http://www.crank.net/antigravity.html
2) You cite http://www.stardrivedevice.com
, which is also another crank site.
3) In your paper, you state:
It is clear that if a method of faster than light (FTL) travels would be discovered, its most natural consequences, such as contact to probable intelligent entities & colonizing the earth-like planets, could solve many problems of human race .
Which is an extraordinary claim. "Intelligent entities" are not necessarily probable (it is quite probable that there are no intelligent entities. There is no current evidence of any intelligent entities outside of our little planet). Colonizing Earth-like planets also does not necessarily solve "many problems of the human race."
What really troubles me about the claim is not the extraordinance, it is the reference in the footnote:
 In my view, TWs (even if we do not consider the possibility of converting them to real nightmare for present knowledge, science & logic, i.e., time machines) could have the deepest effects on philosophic & sociologic discussions of the relation between technology, human rights, ethics, etc. Also, its trivial if their applications for FTL or rapid travels would be global, just an international agreement can regularize their usage. See mansouryar.com/whyftl.htm
Which means you've taken an extraordinary unsubstantiated claim, and used an essay you wrote yourself as validation for that claim.
Even if within researching on FTL methods of communication, the related by-products could lead to rapid (not necessarily FTL) ways of transporting humans or things, that situation would be so profitable too .
Again, an unsubstantiated claim. It is not yet even certain that anything to do with space travel can ever be profitable. If we use only the historical data (which would be the scientific way to do it, yes?), we could assume that in fact there has never been anything profitable out of space travel, and projecting that into the future, we could say that there also will never be anything profitable from it. So, again, your statement is an extraordinary claim, which, again, you back up with:
 Obviously, communications with reducing the path would be most revolutionary; See mansouryar.com/investment.htm
Yet another citation to your own opinion.
5) Regardless of the unscientific nature of the above statements, it is also apparent that neither of the above statements is even scientifically relevant. The first is mainly philosophical, and the second is aimed at profitability. Neither of those are scientifically relevant concepts, so should not be included in any scientific work.
All that said, I'm not going to argue the science or mathematics behind it. You may very well be correct in your equations and thought processes.
It is the methodology of your work that I find questionable, not necessarily the subject matter.
Frankly, I am shocked that any scientist wanting a positive and reputable response would ever cite work from americanantigravity.com or stardrivedevice.com. Even if you are not a crank, doing that is a quick and easy method of getting yourself labelled as one.
I hope that you find this criticism constructive. I wish you luck.
Thank you so much for the reply. (You see?, I'm not so selfish you've thought). Surely, such serious criticisms would help me to improve my ideas. Now let me explain you some points:
First of all, I'm not a scientist and consequently a physicist. I'm just a guy with a big idea who likes the engineering plans. So I don't evaluate the totality of a website. Those two ones you mentioned are tribunes for introducing my work to laypeople. Indeed, the project of building a practical spacewarp is so complicated which would require much collaboration from many experts in the various fields of physics, math, engineering, etc. I can compare it to building a huge accelerator, in the first generation of them. As you see, I never used the words, antigravity (except once referred to a famous journal) or stardrive. I did my best to use formal literature and prestigious references and when I would see the first paper written based on mine by known author(s), that would be my first "real" success in the theoretical division. At the moment, I'm in contact to some experts and they've informed me they're now working on my paper. But I bet nobody hates to be appreciated by the others. Therefore, the basic victory would be when I see my paper in the formal literature of the mainstream of scientific investigations.
I'm now working on another one for a conference in the U.S. in the current September which is a peer reviewed one. A little patience would clarify many things. Besides, there are many wired claims which I don't waste my time to thinking about them. Certainly, I have my own personal beliefs (e.g., I have an essay in Persian discussing on the levitation of a human by a special style of breathing along with the essential concentration, like what some Indian fakirs do), but when I present a claim, I have to behave like a normal theorist.
.. "Intelligent entities" are not necessarily probable .. solve "many problems of the human race."..
Come on man! The subject "probable" answers this flaw. When something is probable - in my view - that's in the 50-50 state of being existent. If you don't believe in living species in other planets, you should prove it; in a rigorous mathematical point of view. However, I think if we could detect (or be detected!) a civilization more advanced than us, and dare to contact to them, we'd be able to ask them many technical discoveries, then the human race would improve very rapidly in a short interval of time, of course if that'd be done reasonably.
By the way, have you thought if Mars or one of the satellites of Saturn would be colonized, that would possibly reduce the population of the earth, and when you have less population, you could mange them for doing the growing (improvement) programs, couldn't you? I know that's a controversial matter and I'm not an expert in politics or sociology, but I try to be optimist.
As a funny scenario, the U.N. could appropriate any planet to different groups of people due to racial, linguistic or religious affiliations to avoid of such a numerous conflicts or wars on the earth as we observe it now!
Beside, if one considers say twenty billions of people as the population of some spheres of the solar system, along with a suitable communicational system between them, that would cause a great mental consequence, in my eyes. I mean "extending of the (civilized) world". Thus, one could say: There is always a job for me, there is always a good physician for my illness, a better place for living or pleasure, a higher chance of finding a true fried, etc; also among more numbers of humans the probability of finding one like Edison or Einstein who attend to solve the pains of humanity is higher, but unfortunately, that's similar for appearing mad criminals like Hitler or Bin Laden.
You know Orstio, almost any innovation has been created for a more peaceful world, but that might be applied in a wrong way, e.g., inventing the automobile has caused many benefits for people, but on the other hand, so far many ones have been killed in the car crashes too. I think we have only two ways, or accept the modernism and always attempt to improve it, or deny it completely, the third way would be ended up to fundamentalism.
.. you've taken an extraordinary unsubstantiated claim, and used an essay you wrote yourself as validation for that claim ..
I think generalizing the present way of transferring the analog or digital data to the goods or humans has many benefits and it's trivial! But anyway, if the terms in my website really troubles you, please introduce me another essay for referring and I'd take it into account in the future.
.. we could assume that in fact there has never been anything profitable out of space travel..
I agree with you to some extent. Unfortunately, many actions in that field - initiated from the Cold War - were expensive propaganda. In that direction, I don't like NASA policies and I think Americans should reconsider about their tax dollars for it; anyway, that's none of my business. However, I believe if private sector wants to invest, we should be happier and more hopeful, the reason is clear: no independent investor wants to waste his (her) money to show a fictitious thing like in the atmosphere of the Cold War.
.. and projecting that into the future, we could say that there also will never be anything profitable from it ..
Stop dude! Don't compare previous bad things to next useful ones.
.. Neither of those are scientifically relevant concepts, so should not be included in any scientific work ..
I told you: I'm not scientist, but they can't ignore my ideas, we'd see it in a close future!
.. You may very well be correct in your equations and thought processes ..
Be sure of it! Although, perfect calculations are too hard and I insist on going based on experiments.
.. I am shocked that any scientist wanting a positive and reputable response would ever cite work from americanantigravity.com or stardrivedevice.com. Even if you are not a crank, doing that is a quick and easy method of getting yourself labelled as one..
As I explained above, please take it easy. I cite above links for introducing my paper to laypeople like you. In my correspondence to the experts, of course I use the technical language.
As the last remark, I again thank you for your attention. It's quite your decision to make a post on my work or not. But if you are interested to do it (e.g., showing the basic idea and outlines of the paper in your taste or making guess about its effect for space exploring or so), I'm ready to help you and answer any related question. Please don't forget I'd really appreciate any post by you, because in my view that would help to present my work to more numbers of people and perhaps leading to change the face of the world in a more ethical and more pleasant manner, that's a dream I'm deeply believe in it.
Well, Theo, Mammad is certainly exhuberant.
I guess the best way to handle this is firmly and mildly.
Not being a scientist or physicist or engineer is problematic. IMO,it means that Mammad lacks necessary discipline and care with respect to developing scientific ideas. But how to convey that nicely.
Certainly, the ramifications of essentially unlimited travel without significant cost are profound.
I asked MM if he had proposed this to NASA (NIAC) and they apparently scoffed at the idea.
So, I hope we can find a way to temper his enthusiasm while keeping him calm.
What's going on? Is everything OK? I hope so.
Please don't forget that I'm still waiting to see a post on my work by YOU! Indeed, something like the blogs I sent you.
I have been out of my office at several meetings and conferences during the last two weeks.
I still haven't forgotten you TW theory.
One question I would have is the energy required to generate such a phenomenon. This must be related to the field energy density.
May I ask what is your background?
With warmest regards,
Thanks for the reply. Now let's deal with your question. In spite of what is generally being thought by the laypeople about the required energy of a traversable wormhole in cosmic magnitudes, recent theories have shown that the exotic matter needed to create and stabilize a TW could be in minor and achievable amounts. I've used some peer-reviewed ones as my references and I can suggest you to take a glance to e.g., the abstracts of the papers written by Peter Kuhfittig. For instance, see: http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0401048http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0207057http://www.npl.washi...AV/altvw99.html
All previous models suffer from serious limiting features but my model has no known drawback. Indeed, I can claim my paper has severely decreased the researches on the traversable (Lorentzian) wormholes field. You could check this fact out by comparing the rate of e-prints releasing about this subject before and after submitting my work in the arXiv.org (which covers from 1992-up to now); (in addition) regarding the realities of the academic researching, rapid improving of science and some other statistical factors which you know better than me.
I repeat: be sure of its scientific validity, but if you'd like to provide a more confident (or hotter!) post in Everything-Science.com or otherwise, you could contact (phone seems nicer) to Kuhfittig (http://www.msoe.edu/...php?id=kuhfitti
) or Christopher Fewster (http://www-users.york.ac.uk/~cjf3/
Anyway, I propose you (one reason is, your English is much better than mine ) write about the picture of a world without any serious physical distance for the humans . For example, inventing of the telephone caused the people to send and receive their voices in principal (however the technical problems don't prevent the philosophical issues of its effect on our life, in respect to when there was no telephone at all). Now I encourage you to write your dreams if there would be no "distance" between the points; e.g., a man could to his office in a far country at the morning and backs to his home in another country at the noon! Or radically generalizing it, one could work in a planet and lives in the other would-be-colonized planet
By the way, looking at the below links might seem cool to you for start (sorry for old news, although these are very well-written with no similar texts on the net): http://www.npl.washi...AV/altvw33.htmlhttp://www.npl.washi...AV/altvw39.htmlhttp://www.npl.washi...AV/altvw53.htmlhttp://www.npl.washi...AV/altvw69.htmlhttp://www.npl.washi...V/altvw103.html
As a cooler suggestion, maybe watching the movie "Contact" (starring Jodie Foster) or "Stargate" (starring Kurt Russell) would be a good pleasure.
At last, please allow me not to say my backgrounds, that remembers me terrible things . I think a "young theorist" is a nice expression to explain me.
P.S.: I hope your post results in preparation of all for a new era, in which we should reconsider about something i.e., cars, planes, ships, trains, etc; also we should consider its terrorist applications , the certain role in what some sociologists call "the gap between north and south countries". The media revolution (as an effective agent) caused decaying of the Soviet Union (Eastern Block, actually), therefore we should expect decaying much bigger structures, if spacewarp communications be realized. By the way, (since I have unbelievably unbearable situations herein ) I hope that (= your would-be attractive post, I guess a (long? ) article, in fact!) would help to motivate an investor or any kind of interested entity to contact me as soon as possible!
What do you think abou the above remarks?