Alcubierre Warp: A Modification allowing Time-space Displacement possibility

[paul cotter]

I admire your sense of mischief, Tim. I was also mischievous in my youth, not going into details however! Another common hoax is the phenomenon of crop circles which are obviously man-made.

[Electrodynamic]

I think all these ufo's are man made.

As I said prior, this is really no different that the Blackbird project and area 51 which were kept secret for decades. For example, Russia invaded Ukraine to prevent the westward shift of NATO and any possible nuclear weapons on their border. The US was ready to go to war over the possibility of nuclear missiles in Cuba. Now imagine an advanced propulsion system which could move a nuclear weapon anywhere on the planet in minutes not hours. This represents a clear threat to national security and would need to be classified at the highest levels.

In other words, you don't need to know anything about any advanced technology nor do you have any right to know. So far as the governments are concerned your nobody and if you did figure out how this technology works you would be forced to shut up, sign NDA's or end up in prison. "In the US and Canada the national security act can be used to prevent, restrict, or regulate technologies deemed to be a threat to national security". It's one thing to pretend we have the intelligence to understand this kind of technology but they would never allow anyone to build it. Your not even allowed to build a plastic gun part on a 3D printer, lol.

Some may find this odd but I agree with the governments position. After seeing this technology in action my opinion was that it should never be disclosed. All one has to do is read the news to understand why imo.

[CatalinaWOW]

I have seen many, many UFOs.  That is, objects that aren't anything that I can explain at the moment.  A sizeable number of those become KFOs (known flying objects) upon further examination, as the lighting changes or I get closer or or learn something.  One interesting  in particular was observed in August in the late 1960s moving in a straight line over Idaho at about 9:00 PM.  I had seen a couple of satellites pass over and knew their angular rate.  Also spotted a couple of sky spanning meteors that night so had a good read on their speed and light pattern.   Also saw a couple of passenger jets and knew theirs.  Lower altitude aircraft were audible.  This was silent and about four times faster than the passenger jets, but slower than satellites and meteors.  In retrospect it was probably an SR-71.

That leaves a whole lot of things that I have seen that I can't explain.  I am open to the possibility that some of them are aliens or hidden military technology, but still believe that most or all are not, and probably just indicate my lack of understanding of all of the various physical phenomena affecting light.  One obvious possibility is "ducting" or mirage of distant sources through bubbles of atmosphere at different density.  This would certainly explain the "inertia less" movement of many described UFOs.   

[Electrodynamic]

CatalinaWOW

The most compelling evidence imo is many people in close proximity to these craft being effected by radiation with blisters/sunburn as well as a large area of scorched earth. This is a little more difficult to explain as reflected light, a mirage or weather balloons. Unless you believe these people found a large radiation source then severely burned themselves and the surrounding area just to fool you.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/falcon-lake-incident-book-anniversary-1.4121639

At which point the most common explanations verge on absurdity, don't they?. I mean, when was the last time you heard of a weather balloon descending and severely burning bystanders and the ground with intense radiation then leave the area?.

It's also interesting that in the article above the person claimed the craft had a reddish glow. This is exactly what we observed and the craft we saw was enveloped in a reddish orange glow. Not some of the craft but all of it.

[CatalinaWOW]

CatalinaWOW

The most compelling evidence imo is many people in close proximity to these craft being effected by radiation with blisters/sunburn as well as a large area of scorched earth. This is a little more difficult to explain as reflected light, a mirage or weather balloons. Unless you believe these people found a large radiation source then severely burned themselves and the surrounding area just to fool you.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/falcon-lake-incident-book-anniversary-1.4121639

At which point the most common explanations verge on absurdity, don't they?. I mean, when was the last time you heard of a weather balloon descending and severely burning bystanders and the ground with intense radiation then leave the area?.

It's also interesting that in the article above the person claimed the craft had a reddish glow. This is exactly what we observed and the craft we saw was enveloped in a reddish orange glow. Not some of the craft but all of it.

While this story is not consistent with cloud reflections it isn't self consistent.  A seamless craft and a fragment of metal with obvious edges and mounting holes.  Melting glove fingertips.  At that time gloves would have been leather or fabric or possibly vulcanized rubber, none of which melt.  And a grid pattern on his stomach from an exhaust through a grid shaped vent takes very strange physics.  And particularly the association of this weird physics with a sulphur smell.

[SteveThackery]

At which point the most common explanations verge on absurdity, don't they?.

At which point most of the claims and reports verge on absurdity. Just because you've read something doesn't make it true. Stories get embellished over the years and exaggerated in the telling. A person's memory is not a scientific record: false memories probably constitute a large part of the legend.

You are displaying your trademark gullibility again. Some healthy, scientific scepticism is appropriate here.

[paul cotter]

Great point, Steve, human memory is very fallible, mine certainly included.

[SteveThackery]

Great point, Steve, human memory is very fallible, mine certainly included.

I've had an interest in UFOs and other anomalous phenomena for decades. My position is open-minded-but-sceptical. Certainly, the situation with UFOs (UAPs, if you prefer) is extremely tangled, with folklore, psychology, cultural context, physics, politics, and loads of other stuff all mixed up together. Basically, nothing about the subject can be relied upon.

The fleeting, unpredictable, ephemeral, subjective nature of the phenomenon makes it almost impossible to analyse scientifically. @Electrodynamic says he thinks all UFOs are man-made, and he uses the term "craft". But his is just a belief, and no more valid than any other belief, such as they are aliens from another planet; they are humans from the distant future; aliens from a parallel universe; glitches in the brain induced by natural electrical phenomena; elaborated or false memories; mistaken identity of planes or satellites; residents of a hollow earth; mental fugue states; angels and signs from God, and so on.  It's also likely that multiple, completely different, phenomena are mixed in to the pot, to complicate things further.

One possible argument against @Electrodynamic's position is that UFO-like phenomena have been reported for a few centuries, possibly longer, which makes it less likely they are products of human technology. But we cannot be certain we are talking about the same thing, so this does not prove @Electrodynamic's opinion to be wrong.

The whole thing is fascinating, but there are very few answers to be found.

[paul cotter]

Have you ever seen a UAP, Steve? I fully accept that the phenomenon is real though I have never seen anything other than a fireball on one occasion and Chinese lanterns on another occasion despite spending inordinate amounts of time staring at the sky(for reasons not made public!).

[TimFox]

One early description of a UAP is in the first chapter of Ezekiel in the Bible.

[Electrodynamic]

SteveThackery makes some good points and the whole phenomena is frustrating because the deeper we go the more unbelievable it becomes.

For example, ancient cultures depict flying craft, the Sumerians and Egyptians were much more advanced than we thought and there were many very large civilizations like in the Amazon we missed. It is now speculated that the Egyptians didn't build the pyramids they found them and then built over them. The rabbit hole goes much deeper and suggests while most civilizations rarely lasted 500 years some more isolated may have lasted tens of thousands of years and became very advanced.

What I find really intriguing is the possibility that a different culture could have developed different technology based on completely different principals than we have. We tend to believe we all think and act the same but what if one culture didn't?. For example, Baghdad was once the intellectual hub of the world combining knowledge in science, medicine, mathematics, and philosophy from everywhere. Then the region became radicalized, unstable and after the mongol invasion they basically went back to the stone ages. Many historians seem to think our present civilization is following the same pattern.

It begs the question, what if some of the greatest minds long ago realized most people cannot tolerate each other long term and eventually destroy themselves. The logical choice would be to opt out of humanity and find greener pastures as a matter of survival. In fact, most of the wealthiest people on the planet are doing this as we speak. They are building very large remote self-sustained bunkers and people like Elon Musk are saying we need to build infrastructure off planet as quickly as possible. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if some did get off planet before we nuked ourselves and went right back to the stone ages they would keep evolving and develop even more advanced technology.

It's pretty cool to think the people in these craft could be like us but choose not to interact because they understand the consequences. You see the real problem is not science and technology but human nature. Every civilization in the past destroyed themselves through overpopulation/disease, scarcity of resources, greed/corruption or indifference. If you knew this was coming but there was nothing you could do about it would you stick around given other options?. The most logical answer is no.

[paul cotter]

Most organisms that have no predator eventually outgrow their environment using up necessary resources, leading to collapse. There is no reason to think humans will be any different. The idea of off-planet existence or even bunkers are pipe dreams. Without a suitable 20%O2 to breath and water life becomes extremely hard to sustain and life in a sealed enclosure would drive the best of us batshit crazy. Just because an elaborate setup might be good enough to physically sustain life does not mean it would be psychologically tenable. 

[Electrodynamic]

The most common question regarding ancient advanced civilizations and technology is where is the evidence?.

The answer here is easy to understand. In the past the various religions removed any people, artifacts or technology which contradicted their own beliefs. We have a thousand years of evidence to support this was always the case. This slowly transitioned from religion to matters of national security. Governments found the population not only overreacts to anything which challenges their beliefs but react with violence and hostility. Any government which challenges most popular beliefs is usually overthrown in short order and they realized it's pointless.

For example, in Egypt they supposedly found large tuning forks and some were ten feet tall. The tuning forks had a small copper wire stretched between two tuning forks. The latest theory suggests the Egyptians used copper tools and coring devices which used a much harder powder to cut hard rock like granite. In the same way we embed diamond in our tools surfaces to cut hard material. Which begs the question how to move a tool very rapidly to abrade a material which is where the tuning forks come into play. If they hit both tuning forks with a hammer the wire between them would move at the higher frequency of the tuning forks to move the wire at a high velocity.  Ergo, high speed abrasive cutting tools and coring devices based on oscillation not rotation. The evidence is shown in the marks left by straight narrow cuts and bore holes.

So why was the tuning fork technology hidden?. It was hidden because the archeologists had been saying for decades that the ancient Egyptians were primitive cave men and didn't want to look stupid by having to completely change their story imo. As well, nobody wants to think ancient people were smarter than the average person because it makes everyone look bad. It's easier to believe they were basically cave men. Most still hold the nobody can be smarter than us attitude today.

I also talked with some people in Europe who replicated the Dendera light depicted at the Hathor temple using technology available to the Egyptians at the time. They used the Baghdad battery in series to produce HV driving a hand blow glass bulb with a drop of mercury in it. The bulb produced a bright snake of plasma identical to that shown in the ancient depictions. However we can all agree most people would have a melt down if we suggested the light bulb was invented by anyone other than Edison.

Some of my own research also suggests that the ancient Egyptians may have invented electrostatic generators a thousand years before we assumed. At Hathor temple they show a metal vessel with long ropes having evenly spaced beads coming out of it. To most this means nothing however I recognized it as a contact electrification device. When an isolated glass or plastic bead on an insulating rope contacts a grounded metal vessel contact electrification occurs. In effect each bead carries a charge with it and when the bead rope falls into another isolated metal vessel the charge accumulates on the surface. My Van De Graaff generator uses the same principal with a belt. So I built the device just as shown in the Hathor temple and sure enough it works perfectly just like any other electrostatic generator. It could easily generate voltages near 30kV. Think about it, why depict a bead rope rising in an arc out of one vessel and falling into another?. In fact, Steve Mould has an excellent video on the Chain Fountain effect and explains why a "moving" beaded rope rises. Only a moving bead rope would rise and arc as shown at Hathor not a stationary one.

So we have more than enough evidence to suggest some ancient cultures were anything but primitive imo.

[Electrodynamic]

Most organisms that have no predator eventually outgrow their environment using up necessary resources, leading to collapse. Their is no reason to think humans will be any different. The idea of off-planet existence or even bunkers are pipe dreams. Without a suitable 20%O2 to breath and water life becomes extremely hard to sustain and life in a sealed enclosure would drive the best of us batshit crazy. Just because an elaborate setup might be good enough to physically sustain life does not mean it would be psychologically tenable.

It's debatable, all of the most intelligent people I know are introverts who have no issue with being alone or in small groups indefinitely. It's the extroverts obsessed with other people and what they think who tend to be narcissistic and irrational imo.

As well, if one is intelligent to get off planet and build a sustainable habitat then water and O2 is hardly an issue. Intelligent beings do not hunt and gather resources like cave men they farm or generate them where needed. For example, "recent breakthroughs by researchers at the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) have demonstrated transmutation turning lunar soil into water". Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe and oxygen comes in third so water isn't an issue.

Any truly intelligent beings would not use the wasteful consume and discard model we do. The most likely model is transmutation and recycling. In effect, everything is broken down to it's basic elements then built back up into whatever we need. Only primitive beings consume and discard eventually running out of stuff to consume and die. No worries, people much smarter than us have already figured all of this out.

[CatalinaWOW]

Electrodynamic, your last two posts are examples of what I call "Sciencish" language.  Sounds like science, has a vein of truth running through it.  But also includes complete and utter balderdash.

Your Egyption Granite Cutting theory for example.  The truth.  Embedding harder materials in a softer carrier for cutting is a real thing.  Tuning forks are a real thing.  Making them vibrate using a hammer is a real thing.  But then you just leave reality behind.  A ten foot tall tuning fork will have a very low resonant frequency (throwing some numbers together and assuming bronze construction I got answers in the neighborhood of 20 Hz), so no high frequency.  And any cutting action is damping in the system so continuous heavy whacks with the hammer would be required.  Seems it would be easier to just do what we do and make a loop and then drive it with water power (technology the Egyptians did have access to).   By your theory they would have preferred using cranes and other tools to hoist a very heavy tuning fork into position and build platforms for the hammer wielders. 

[Chet]

Electrodynamic, your last two posts are examples of what I call "Sciencish" language.  Sounds like science, has a vein of truth running through it.  But also includes complete and utter balderdash.

Your Egyption Granite Cutting theory for example.  The truth.  Embedding harder materials in a softer carrier for cutting is a real thing.  Tuning forks are a real thing.  Making them vibrate using a hammer is a real thing.  But then you just leave reality behind.  A ten foot tall tuning fork will have a very low resonant frequency (throwing some numbers together and assuming bronze construction I got answers in the neighborhood of 20 Hz), so no high frequency.  And any cutting action is damping in the system so continuous heavy whacks with the hammer would be required.  Seems it would be easier to just do what we do and make a loop and then drive it with water power (technology the Egyptians did have access to).   By your theory they would have preferred using cranes and other tools to hoist a very heavy tuning fork into position and build platforms for the hammer wielders.

What it may lack in frequency, it will make up for with torque!

[paul cotter]

Torque from a tuning fork? (WTF)squared.

[Electrodynamic]

Electrodynamic, your last two posts are examples of what I call "Sciencish" language.  Sounds like science, has a vein of truth running through it.  But also includes complete and utter balderdash.

Your Egyption Granite Cutting theory for example.  The truth.  Embedding harder materials in a softer carrier for cutting is a real thing.  Tuning forks are a real thing.  Making them vibrate using a hammer is a real thing.  But then you just leave reality behind.  A ten foot tall tuning fork will have a very low resonant frequency (throwing some numbers together and assuming bronze construction I got answers in the neighborhood of 20 Hz), so no high frequency.  And any cutting action is damping in the system so continuous heavy whacks with the hammer would be required.  Seems it would be easier to just do what we do and make a loop and then drive it with water power (technology the Egyptians did have access to).   By your theory they would have preferred using cranes and other tools to hoist a very heavy tuning fork into position and build platforms for the hammer wielders.

It may help to explain the everyday physics, when I want to cut a piece of wood I use the thinnest blade possible so I'm not cutting extra material which requires more work and time. As well when were talking about the work in cutting something were talking about a force applied over a distance. We can a apply a large force slowly or a lesser force more rapidly to do the same work.

Suppose we did have large tuning fork at 20Hz, this is still 1200 cycles per minute which is 1/3 of modern oscillating tools at 3000 cpm and much faster than doing something by hand. As well using an abrasive wire cuts the absolute minimum of material to make a cut and mining operations still use diamond rope saws for this reason. Remember some of these pieces of rock weighed hundreds of tons and were larger than your house.

In effect, it's on you to explain how they made cuts 1/8" wide, ten feet long and ten feet deep with a hammer and copper chisel. It's not only impossible but completely absurd. As an engineer it is literally the stupidest thing I have ever heard. Do you expect me to believe they were using 1/8" thick soft copper chisels 10 feet long?. A rope saw is the only viable explanation.

To me using an oscillating tool like a tuning fork makes perfect sense. You see unlike a chisel if we hit the tuning fork once and it could cut for 100 cycles. The input is no longer 1:1 and the cutter cycle rate is twenty times faster. As well the people who saw the actual tuning forks claim they ranged from one foot high to the largest at ten foot. The dimensions work out to around 1" thick oscillating elements on a 48" tuning fork which could easily be moved by two people.

I suspect someone with some common sense observed the stringed musical instruments they had at the time and thought hey what if I applied those string vibrations to cut rock. The string would wear out so they found smaller harder materials to apply to a rope and invented a conventional rope saw. They were not obsessed with rotary motion like we are today but they did understand the concept of vibrations and oscillations. They already had string and percussion musical instruments so an oscillating rope saw is not a great stretch of the imagination.

So your objections have no merit imo.

[Chet]

Torque from a tuning fork? (WTF)squared.

@Paul Cotter
More torque with less rapidity from a larger tuning fork. It's all relative; this is not absolute. But rephrasing a relativistic comparison -- as an absolute -- increases the drama while lowering this conversation's IQ by way of the removal of context, namely: the larger framework from which the snippet is quoted.

[fourfathom]

so an oscillating rope saw is not a great stretch of the imagination.

Except that the oscillating tuning fork tips move together and apart.  This will not impart a sawing motion to the rope -- in fact the rope will prevent any significant oscillation.  And that's only one of many reasons why this is a silly idea.  Who thinks up this stuff anyway?

[Chet]

so an oscillating rope saw is not a great stretch of the imagination.

Except that the oscillating tuning fork tips move together and apart.  This will not impart a sawing motion to the rope -- in fact the rope will prevent any significant oscillation.  And that's only one of many reasons why this is a silly idea.  Who thinks up this stuff anyway?

Hmmm. Let's see .... If I learned anything from studying Eric Dollard's analog computer in LMD mode is that doing things in pairs is when the action gets spicy. We marry, form business partnerships, apprenticeships, 'cuz it works out better that way. Likewise with caps and coils. But also with tuning forks.

So, a pair of tuning forks, if they are synchronized with each other (struck at the same time) and are mutually resonant, then tine 'A' of fork 'A' should vibrate in the same direction and in phase with tine 'A' of fork 'B'. And tine 'B' of fork 'A' should vibrate in the same direction and in phase with tine 'B' of fork 'B'. This will give the opportunity for two rope saws to operate simultaneously.

[TimFox]

A popular technical discussion of Egyptian stone cutting, based on examples in the Cairo museum:
https://www.thearchaeologist.org/blog/how-did-the-ancient-egyptians-cut-granite-insights-from-the-unfinished-sarcophagus-in-the-cairo-museum
The usual explanation is copper saw blades with abrasive material.

[Electrodynamic]

so an oscillating rope saw is not a great stretch of the imagination.

Except that the oscillating tuning fork tips move together and apart.  This will not impart a sawing motion to the rope -- in fact the rope will prevent any significant oscillation.  And that's only one of many reasons why this is a silly idea.  Who thinks up this stuff anyway?

Who thinks up this stuff?, engineers and scientists.

What do you think oscillation means?, it means to move back and forth like a reciprocating saw blade does. Pick up a hand saw, do you rotate or oscillate the blade?. In fact one of my most useful tools for reno's is my 20v Dewalt oscillating tool which is priceless.

On a tuning fork I agree it has some limitations. The optimal setup would use a big tuning fork with the abrasive rope attached to one fork and a flexible member under tension like a tree branch on the other end of the rope. The tree branch acts just like a spring would only it's much easier to build. As well we could hit the fork not attached to the abrasive rope and the resonant motion would be transferred to the fork which is. There is no physical or scientific reason this couldn't work.

Of course, the other option is to use a 1/8" thick soft copper chisel ten feet long and pound the crap out of it. Which do you suppose is the more logical choice?.

[TimFox]

There is a definition difference between "reciprocation" and "oscillation" and "vibration".
An oscillating hand saw is used as a musical instrument.

[CatalinaWOW]

so an oscillating rope saw is not a great stretch of the imagination.

Except that the oscillating tuning fork tips move together and apart.  This will not impart a sawing motion to the rope -- in fact the rope will prevent any significant oscillation.  And that's only one of many reasons why this is a silly idea.  Who thinks up this stuff anyway?

Who thinks up this stuff?, engineers and scientists.

What do you think oscillation means?, it means to move back and forth like a reciprocating saw blade does. Pick up a hand saw, do you rotate or oscillate the blade?. In fact one of my most useful tools for reno's is my 20v Dewalt oscillating tool which is priceless.

On a tuning fork I agree it has some limitations. The optimal setup would use a big tuning fork with the abrasive rope attached to one fork and a flexible member under tension like a tree branch on the other end of the rope. The tree branch acts just like a spring would only it's much easier to build. As well we could hit the fork not attached to the abrasive rope and the resonant motion would be transferred to the fork which is. There is no physical or scientific reason this couldn't work.

Of course, the other option is to use a 1/8" thick soft copper chisel ten feet long and pound the crap out of it. Which do you suppose is the more logical choice?.

Of course a ten foot copper chisel is absurd.  But there are other alternatives.  The tuning fork is an absurd one.  Why is cutting a ten foot long, ten foot wide slot with a ten foot tuning fork that causes no relative motion of the rope (as pointed out above a single ten foot tuning forks tines move in opposition) not absurd?  Of course tines moving in opposition is not the only vibration mode of a tuning fork.  If you can solidly fix the base of the tuning fork and make the string strong enough you can excite a back and forth mode by striking the tine outward so the rope pulls the other one.  But now we have this heavy (in the neighborhood of ton) tuning fork fixed to something massive and strong enough to keep the base from moving when you hit it, but still movable to create the cut.  And either a magical worker who can repeatedly strike the fork in phase with the existing motion, or a much slower whack when the vibrations die to uselessness.   There is a reason we have this fascination with rotary motion.  And the Egyptians were as familiar with the wheel as they were with vibration. 

But I really suspect what they used is another device that is common in the outdoor world today.  A string saw.  In their case a long abrasive embedded cord being pulled back and forth by teams of workers.


But lets try something exotic.  Why don't you build a small demonstrator of your concept.  Say a one foot size tuning fork and then use it to cut some foam blocks.  A video of the success of such a tool would be a major step in the credibility of your concept.  I am personally convinced you will find the results underwhelming, but will say that is because you aren't as smart as the ancients.