Re: White Paper on Revolutionary Technology - X-FORCE
Hello Heinrich,
I think either my post has not been communicate enough or those who have replied have not read the original post patiently.
Therefore, I will once again try to clarify the "X-Force" theory and hope I succeed.
From the Original Post "Unified Field Theory and Albert Einstein"
Einstein spent a great many fruitless years seeking a unified field theory that would tie together all the fundamental forces and particles into a single theoretical framework. Einstein was unsuccessful and this unification still remains as a challenge to modern thinkers.?
From the Original Post "What is Unified Field Theory?" Can you imagine another type of force, different from these?? Many scientists are trying to unify all these fields in only one theory, and probably they will do it in the future. The mathematics involved is very complicated. Einstein took a precious role in this field and - through his theory - he could develop some concepts like the warping of space-time to explain the gravity force. For sure you know the idea of a heavy ball on the surface of a body made up of rubber.
My Remarks on this: See, scientists are all along trying to find a unified force Theory. Therefore I believe there could exist an "X-Force"
Your Remarks:
Point No. 1 "I suppose you do realise that it takes quite a high amount of energy to start a neutrino-producing reaction. The two most common sources is from the suns centre and from nuclear reactions in the upper atmosphere triggered by "hard" fast particle radiation. How can it be possible to copy these high-energy processes with nothing but a common electromagnet? By the way, which type of neutrino is the product of the x-force? Electron, muon or tau?"
Point No. 2 "How about electromagnets made of a super conducting material? Why hasn't this loss of energy due to the generation of x-force ever been observed here?"
Point No. 3 "It is commonly accepted that the faster you go, the heavier you (and your ship) gets. As a result of this gain in
relativistic mass, time is slowed down compared to the "neutral" surrounding space - or you could say that the ship travels into the future. The closer to C you get, the faster you travel into the future. The speed C = infinite mass (which is impossible) = infinite TT-speed."
My Remarks on Point No.1:
Yes. I totally agree with you that it takes quite a high amount of energy to start a neutrino-producing reaction. The "X-Force" formed by action of the Magnetic Field, Induced Electromagnetic Field and Gravity acting simultaneously at a point does produce such a high amount of energy. In Electric Motors, this energy is produced for an infinitismally small fraction of a second. This energy released by the unified "X-Force" converts
"an infinitismally small" amount of mass in its plane to "Neutrinos" or "Neutrino like" particles. You can call them Tachyons if you want. The second interesting thing to note is that the energy released is completely utilitised in propelling the "Newly created" particles at speeds equal or greater than light. So this means, unlike in a nuclear or a chemical reaction, the energy released is first of all infinitismally small and secondly is completely absorbed by the newly created particles and hence we are not able to detect it. As the newly created particles are propelled at speeds equal or greater than that of light, they are not detected either as they simply cease to exist in our time space and travel to the future time space.
My Remarks on Point No.2:
In an electronic motor, though the "X-Force" is formed, only infinitismally small amounts of matter is converted to "Neutrino Like" particles. We can neither detect the particles or the energy released. All we can do is detect the infinitismally small difference in loss of mass in the e=mc2 equation. However, in stars and other stellar phenomenon, the "X-Force" is significantly more pronounced and visible in action. Therefore, scientists around the world are trying to understand and create the same kind of process here on earth and thus try and detect the "X-Force".
My Remarks on Point No.3:
I do agree that matter or anything that has mass as we know is bound by the limit of speed it can attain. What I am talking about here is a particle that exhibits "Tachyon" or "Neutrino" like properties and yet has a mass or characteristics that is not bound by the standard theories in existence. It is an established fact that "Neutrinos" change characteristics as they travel. It could be possible that the particles released by the "X-Force" have a mass or characteristics similar to "Tachyons" and as they travel or arrive in the future time space, turn into "Neutrinos". Therefore when a SuperNova explodes billions of light years away, we only observe the release of "Neutrinos". If we are closer to the star, we would probably not detect them at all. It is an established fact that when we observe a Supernova Burst, it is in our Time Space and in its Time Space, the SuperNova has already burst and possibly become a Neutron Star or a Blackhole. Therefore, what we observe here in earth is the future of the star that exploded. And hence we observe the burst of "Neutrinos".
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(\"Heinrich Hundekok\")</div>
Realtimeguy,
I'm a bit confused...
Your theory is quite a mouthfull, so I'll just stick to commenting the neutrino part.
I suppose you do realise that it takes quite a high amount of energy to start a neutrino-producing reaction. The two most common sources is from the suns centre and from nuclear reactions in the upper atmosphere triggered by \"hard\" fast particle radiation. How can it be possible to copy these high-energy processes with nothing but a common electromagnet? By the way, which type of neutrino is the product of the x-force? Electron, muon or tau?
How about good old friction? Would'nt this account for the energy loss?
Or turned the other way around:
How about electromagnets made of a super conducting material? Why hasn't this loss of energy due to the generation of x-force ever been observed here?
Now, this one's pretty hard for me to swallow! I do not deny the existence of \"particles\" beeing able to travel FTL - the theorized-about so called
tachyons - but, Realtimeguy, neutrinos are way out of that class. They're still not fully understood, fair enough! There's a wider window o' possibillity here, but...
This is still too far out. And what about the \"faster than light = future time span\" idea?
It is commonly accepted that the faster you go, the heavier you (and your ship) gets. As a result of this gain in
relativistic mass, time is slowed down compared to the \"neutral\" surrounding space - or you could say that the ship travels into the future. The closer to C you get, the faster you travel into the future. The speed C = infinite mass (which is impossible) = infinite TT-speed.
But....
Faster than light speeds... if possible
at all, how would they apply to this widely accepted and experimentally verified theory?
I'm just asking.
Happy thinking!
H.H.[/b]
