defying gravity and the laws of physics
Radio conversations between earth and venus orbit... and no lag? duh!
otherwise enjoyable and interesting
:)
GG
Yeah, although obvious errors in physics can be explained away by "sub-space frequencies" this sorta thing makes me cringe too. But just a little. Creative license is something we've got to accept with these shows. It's hard to forgive the blatantly implausible but who's going to want to sit through 3 minutes of lag during a dialogue? Viewership apparently suffered enough as it was ;)
I enjoyed the show. It's too bad creativity is subject to the censorship of economics. But then, it's only television.
One interesting potential explanation discussed on this board was FTL communication through quantum physics/entangled particles. Anyway, I'm sure eventually the writers would have brought it up just like they subtly brought up other points such as the effects of global warming (Cape Canaveral was under water). I dearly miss this show - the Prisoner and V remakes and Flash Forward don't do it for me. DG was better than all of these combined.
shareI sincerely doubt that the OP has ANY idea of what the laws of physics are 50 years in the future...
share"I sincerely doubt that the OP has ANY idea of what the laws of physics are 50 years in the future..."
Seriously dumb statement!!!!! Unless you were trying to be funny, then i apologize.
"You , Me and Fresno Bob"
Let's see, dumb statement??? How are you going to predict 50 years into the future? I don't think there's a physicist out there who presumes to know what will be that far in the future.
shareHAHA You are trying to justify that statement, and you werent joking???!!!!
Jesus, how dumb do you want to be on one board?
Let me put you in the picture Genius....the laws of Physics will NEVER change.
Technology may change, and our understanding of the laws may change with that, but the laws will never change. The laws of physics existed before our understanding of them.
Its like saying that Airplanes changed the laws of gravity.
Do you see?
"You , Me and Fresno Bob"
You know, it's quite a shame that I am actually arguing with you, I know it's a waste of time. DO YOU REALLY THINK we know all the laws of physics??????? Sorry to inform you but WE DON'T! We are learning new things all the time. You really should educate yourself about the subject before you spout off and make an imbecile of yourself.
Get over yourself.
"DO YOU REALLY THINK we know all the laws of physics??????? Sorry to inform you but WE DON'T"
Considering my last post this is Another dumb statement from you. Can you read what i posted?
As i said, the LAWS OF PHYSICS EXIST WHETHER WE KNOW THEM OR NOT!
Just like gravity existed before there was a word for it, before humans existed there was gravity. The laws of physics have nothing to do with our understanding of them.
Your statement that in 50 the laws of physics could change is dumb beyond reproach. Stop arguing as you look dumber and dumber with each post.
You could say 'in 50 years time our understanding of the laws of physics could change' that might be worth debating. But to suggest the laws themselves will change is just dumb. You could also say 'in 50 years our technology may allow us to overcome the laws of physics' and again you would get away with it. Stop being upset that i called out your stupid statement that the laws themselves might change, you sound like a petulant 12 year old who has been told off.
The show itself is called 'defying gravity' - perhaps in your dumb world you think it should be 'altering gravity to allow flight'
Now make like a tree and leave. You actually lower the IQ on the board with your posts.
"You , Me and Fresno Bob"
Oh this is so lame!
Laws of physics exist and you don't know them. Don't preach to me about learning as we go thru time. That was the point of my initial post.
Learn to read and comprehend. They teach it all throughout the lower grades.
???
are you a retard? You said in 50 years time the laws of physics could change. THEY CAN'T AND THEY WON'T.
"Learn to read and comprehend"? Try your own advice Genius. Its obvious that you lack those very skills yourself.
"You , Me and Fresno Bob"
Are you reading disabled or learning disabled. I can point you to some very effective help.
Discussion over.
Hitherto, I've not stated one derogatory word yet you've partaken every chance you got.
Obviously you're a moron and this is over.
You are boring me now. You think in 50 years time the laws of physics will have changed. You are an idiot.
"You , Me and Fresno Bob"
[deleted]
It's actually called an aeroplane you know.
shareJust like the internet and cell-phone would have been considered fairy tales not long ago, we probably can't even dream of what will be 50 years from now. However, it does seem to me that inter-planetary human space travel is probably something that will not happen for a long long time -- it's too expensive and risky and gives us far less science and flexibility than probes. All of us sci-fi fans have fantasized about being on a starship, but when I really think about it, I'm actually now opposed to manned space travel. Even returning to the moon seems to me like a glorious waste of time and resources. And, even if we get by the incredible costs and logistics of sending humans to an interesting place like the moons of Jupiter, the fact is that space travel is highly detrimental to human health. Probes are the way to go.
shareI am pretty sure the Val guy meant, from what I understand, that our understanding of the laws of physics changes, not the actual laws; however, like he said, your comprehension skills are lacking.
shareWrong.
Laws of physics, once found, do not change.
For example, Newton still applies. Einstein only extended Newton, he didnt disprove the original theory.
We know again for sure that Einstein is incomplete, because it doesnt include quantum mechanics. But the chance that Einstein himself gets disproved is very slim.
So yes, the chance that Newton and/or Einstein and/or quantum mechanics are getting disproved in the future arent zero, but they are extremely unlikely.
So uttering the sentence "I sincerely doubt that the OP has ANY idea of what the laws of physics are 50 years in the future..." is the proof of ultimate stupidity. We most certainly know most of what physics will look like in 50 years, because we already know the basics of it.
Also, given the idea that there would be, at some point in the future, a possibility to effectively communicate faster than lightspeed, it is very likely we wont be using chemical rockets in our spacecrafts any more, and would be able to travel faster than lightspeed ourselves.
Again, claiming that our current knowledge of physics will be radically different in 50 years is like claiming our knowledge of chemistry will be radically different in 50 years. Not completely impossible, but extremely unlikely.
Therefore claiming matter-of-fact-ly otherwise is a proof of idiocy.
---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrp-v2tHaDo
It IS impossible to travel at or beyond the speed of light. If we could, it would no longer be the speed of light & light would have a new speed. Photons travel in the way that they travel. If you matched their speed you wouldn't see anything...so how would you even know you were travelling anywhere?
sharehttp://specials.msn.com/A-List/Lifestyle/Particles-faster-than-speed-o f-light.aspx?cp-documentid=30709819
A great example of how little we know!
you're still an idiot and that guy was correct.
The laws won't change.
and you're a moron! We're learning more things everyday. Even Hawking admits that ... but of course you know all that there is and all that will be
No, laws of physics do not change. Our understanding of what those laws apply to, may.
Example, in our universe/reality/dimension, the laws are static, immutable. In another they may be different.
This means that, scientifically speaking, you're an idiot.
And time is constant! Right. You're so much worse than an idiot.
what are you talking about now?
share@ Bagabot: Actually, it's a problem of thermodynamics that the "laws" of physics, which are man-made constructions and not laws governing the interaction of particles, are constantly degrading, because of a forced increase in entropy. Entropy, being a term that quantifies disorder, always increases. This is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy>;, <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics>;
The concept of entropy more or less lead to all the ideas behind modern physics, because it allows for randomness to increase overtime, quantization of that change, and the conservation of energy, despite the inherent chaos that dominates Lagrangian mechanics (i.e. balance in the universe of mass, heat, movement, and control). --- This is all leading to the idea that any random event is possible, and thus all random events will occur given an infinite amount of time. Furthermore, this lead to the credibility of ideas such as universes, in which only our brains exist.
So, assuming the universe makes sense or is finite at all, the laws of physics will always be changing. In fact, many theorists, especially proponents of string theory, believe that the four fundamental forces were all one superforce at once, and that eventually, there will be another split between them. I could get into how, in the next second, the "laws" of physics could change drastically (world reversal or gravity defying), and we would have no idea because of our interpretation of time as a series of electrical signals and chemical rearrangements inside our brains, but I'm not really that smart.
All our understandings of physics are about at the level of someone arguing on imdb, so let's all try not to come down on someone else, because of our elementary declarations and deductions based on documentaries/NOVA science now (?? I don't know where you studied, really).
IF THERE WAS A THING TO READ ON CHANGING THE LAWS OF PHYSICS:
"My greatest concern was what to call it. I thought of calling it ‘information’, but the word was overly used, so I decided to call it ‘uncertainty’. When I discussed it with John von Neumann, he had a better idea. Von Neumann told me, ‘You should call it entropy, for two reasons. In the first place your uncertainty function has been used in statistical mechanics under that name, so it already has a name. In the second place, and more important, nobody knows what entropy really is, so in a debate you will always have the advantage.”
–Conversation between Claude Shannon and John von Neumann regarding what name to give to the “measure of uncertainty” or attenuation in phone-line signals (1949)
""laws" of physics, which are man-made constructions"
Man has specific mathematical descriptions of observed phenomena. The laws of physics exist with or without mans observation.
'Fiery the Angels rose, & as they rose deep thunder roll'd.'
The 'Laws of Physics' are simply man made descriptions of the behavior of the universe, as such they change all the time. Also many such laws are actually quite weak or incomplete- take General Relativity. Although many physicists defend GR like religious scripture if you examine it critically in enough detail it turns out to be full of holes. - Objects cannot go 'faster than light' but they can travel at infinite speed, there is basic contradiction about FTL speeds and information, evidence suggests that the universe is three not four dimensional, even worse GR has a fragile causality favoring a young universe and creationism. And yet GR is still probably a lot stronger than its quantum equivalent - its just that it was left half finished.
As for defying gravity sure its physics is patchy in places but its still at the harder edge of sci-fi, the Antares is pretty much buildable today. Even more they make it clear that the mission is taking things to the limits of technical and financial feasibility. Ok it has its flaws, 'FTL' communication or for me far too many flashbacks, but I for one am very disappointed that they have apparently cancelled it. - No doubt due to the ratings, scary another demonstration that the SF vision that is really coming true is "Idiocracy".... :)
I don't think the laws of physics change (I'm not talking about nanoseconds after the big bang or the inside of a black hole) - it's just our understanding of them that changes. Newton's theories work quite well within human experience, but of course with Einstein's theory of relativity, we have more accurate information (especially at near light speeds) and I'm sure we'll have even better theories in the future. However, if you read about quantum physics and entangled particles, you'll see that such weird things are part of the "laws of physics" that it doesn't seem impossible to me that one day we'll be able to have FTL communication. And our predictions of future technology have traditionally been woefully inaccurate. I'm not sure that any scientist being explained the internet and i-phones 50 years ago would think that such a thing was possible; whereas all those flying cars, jet packs and routine trips to Mars never made it.
sharewow old thread but it made me laugh.
That person clearly was talking out their butt, or perhaps simply misstated what they intended to say - but instead of simply "oh yeah I did word that a bit wrong, my bad" they rejected the fact that their post was indeed idiotic as worded (if that's what they actually meant) and kept whining like they had a clue.
So many professional trolls, people unwilling to admit they were wrong, and just generally ignorant people on the 'net these days. That and people who are so clueless that they try to demand that you do a dissertation simply to prove that they're wrong (as they're too lazy to do any research that can't be done on Google), and when you laugh at them they (ignorantly) try to say that you are lying/boasting/wrong. Too funny the nutcases out and about these days!
It was much better a few decades ago. The beginning of the end of the 'good ole days' of the 'net was the day that AOL got access to newsgroups and real Internet e-mail.
i really hope you realised how wrong you were here....eventually, either you don't understand sentences or you just didn't read anyhting he said.
if you have no realised how completely wrong you were, there is nothin g i can add to change your mind, i realise this is a very old post but it was just so painfull to read what you wrote.
i mostly agree with you in this arguement, BUT...
the one thing you put forward as an example(gravity) has been disproven by einstein 90 years ago...there is simply no such thing, it only appears to be true and because it's hard too teach 7 years old kids einsteins laws, they teach the newtonian theory because for practical aplications and daily life it's more then accurate enough
so yes the laws of physcs do change as we learn more
The laws of physics don't change, but our understanding of them certainly does. Examples can be historical (Copernicus, Newton and Kepler,) or relatively current with the 30-year debate over whether Dr. Stephen Hawking's theory that information is lost and thus the linkage of cause and effect are broken. The Laws of Physics said the expansion of the universe must slow down, except now we have cosmic expansion and dark energy. Nothing can go faster than the speed of light, only there is an exception that has actually been measured on quantum scales.
I think there should have been a time delay between Earth and Venus if only because there appears to be a concession that these events are happening in the near future with technology based on what is now available or can be easily extrapolated from current scientific research. So I agree about the program but disagree strongly about your rationale, which is easily punctured.
BTW, my understanding of this bulletin board is that one is expected to use calm language that produces light, not attacks that at times border on ad hominem which only produces heat. In short, cool the language, show mutual respect, and stop making definitive statements about the future.
Ed I.
"The laws ofphysics will never change"
Before you belittle someone, you might want to do some research.
Here's a couple of examples...
http://blogs.forbes.com/alexknapp/2011/05/03/radioactive-decay-rates-may-not-be-constant-after-all/
Follow that link and you'll find that something that was established as an unchangable FACT in physics, has now been found to change in certain circumstances.
It has also been shown that the laws of gravity DO NOT WORK at the sub-atomic level or on a galactic scale. We still do not know what gravity is, we can only measure it.
This seems to indicate that the laws of physics as we know them may only opetate as we know them to, in our specific environment. The laws of physics may be extremely malleable under the right conditions.
Who's the 'genius' now, eh?
"Who's the 'genius' now, eh?"
Certainly not you.
this is a bit of an old thread you have resurrected. if i remember what i was saying, it was that the laws of physics exist with or without our knowledge of them. Your point only proves my point genius.
'You are receiving this broadcast as a dream.'
marwoodwalks wrote:
if i remember what i was saying, it was that the laws of physics exist with or without our knowledge of them. Your point only proves my point genius.
You are right on this issue, but you're talking past the other guy's point. He was saying that, 50 years hence, it is possible that some new physical phenomenon could be discovered through which FTL communication is possible.
Perhaps, for example, in 50 years, communication through Quantum Entanglement -- that is to say, Bell's Theorem, which allows instantaneous transmission of the properties of entangled particles, regardless of distance -- will be widespread.
But I don't think people should really complain about the physics in Defying Gravity, since compared to, say, Star Trek, it is very much Hard SF. :-)
--Brian share
You're throwing "dumb" left and right pretty easily, smartass.
What he wanted to say was that 50 years from now we might discover some laws of physics that, at the moment, we have no idea about.
When he says "laws of physics will change 50 years from now" he doesn't mean "gravity will no longer pull us down", instead he means "the law that we use to describe electromagnetic fields might change 50 years from now", probably into something that explains why faster-than-light energy travel would be possible.
But... I get it. You have a long curly hair so that makes you smart.
When he says "laws of physics will change 50 years from now"
When he says that, he is wrong. That is all.
Like i said before, just because something hasn't been discovered yet, doesnt mean it doesnt exist now. Our understanding of the laws of physics will change, but not physics itself. They way things work stay the same regardless of human knowledge of them.
But... I get it. You have a long curly hair so that makes you smart.
Wait, you think thats me in the photo? Not a fan of movies then?
'COOK, PASS, BaBtridge' share
The OP referred to *radio* communications at interplanetary distances. Radio waves, like all forms of electromagnetic radiation, propagate through a vacuum at the speed of light. Whatever new technologies or physical laws we may discover in the future, most physicists would agree that this is a fundamental constant of the universe that is not going to change.
--Ariston
I'm never wrong--sometimes reality just disagrees with me.
"I sincerely doubt that the OP has ANY idea of what the laws of physics are 50 years in the future."
Are you retarded? The laws of physics will NEVER change, but our understanding of them will.
If thats what you meant, then *beep* type that, don't try to justify you *beep* statement with a load of other statements that are also full of *beep*
I don't think he is retarded at all, his statement is quite valid if you think we do not understand "The laws of physics". How do you know that laws of physics are a constant if we do not fully understand them? I mean they could actually change in the future to allow pink unicorns to exist on Tuesdays how do we know? we are only guessing. Perhaps it's a bit far fetched, but not impossible, just highly improbable.
Now it would be valid to call this TV show improbable :), a bit like mission improbable. Nothing is actually impossible.
Our so-called physics laws are a constantly approaching interpretation of the world/universe we live in. The thing is we can't know what will be possible 50 years from now, as :
1. we are far from seeing the "big picture" and can't explain every phenomena happening, nor do we fully understand the implications of our own laws.
2. our laws are just theories, and as such they may be invalidated in the future. A good example is Newton's law of universal gravitation, his formula F=GmM/r² provides an accurate description of the reality in many cases but it really is an approximation. It took it over 200 years to be invalidated by Einstein's relativity, which won't last forever either.
3. we will never be able to understand the universe because all we can ever have is interpretations of the reality, and models trying to describe what we observe. We will tend asymptotically towards the reality if you will, without ever reaching it.
So arguing and scorning on a board affirming you know what's going on out there sounds a bit dumb to me. The "laws" that govern the universe aren't even a constant spatially or temporally. They aren't the same in black holes, and they weren't the same for million of years following the "big bang". Who knows what might happen next?
Still, good science-fiction doesn't let things like this slide because of plot economy. Real-time communication at such distances isn't and won't be possible by conventional means (i.e. electromagnetic waves). Now, if they had shown a crew member reading a communication transcript that went on in intervals of 3 minutes, or even if they had just mentioned something about a quantum entaglement communicator, fine. But you don't just handwave it. Handwaving damages the consistency in science-fiction unless absolutely necessary.
As far as the laws of physics go, saying "it might be possible that we find a work-around or that they stop applying in 50 years" - yeah, that's not how it works. Even if you acknowledge the possibility that we might circumvent physical laws in the near future, it's IMPROBABLE. Improbability also damages plot consistency; it's like if Hans Gruber had fallen on a randomly-appearing haystack at the foot of the skyscraper at the end of Die Hard, and came out from the fall completely unharmed - it would be so ridiculous that everyone would call *beep* on it. A plot relying on coincidence or improbable circumstances is a badly designed one. And saying that we'll be breaking the immutable principles of the universe for breakfast 50 years from now is quite improbable.
+ to your point:
The concept "never" does not exist. It's used always in relation to human experience, which is absolutely limited in comparison. Thus anything will change eventually, making the point that "physics will never change" moot or impossible.
I just found this old comment and your reply ( along with the 5 pages of reply's and arguments ).
I find your response vaguely insulting and a little dim. The strength of this show was it's attention to detail and the reasonable extrapolation of current tech to future tech.
It's gonna be a looooong time before we find a way to crack the delay that the speed of light imposes on radio and hence all long range communication.
Being a scifi fan I recall many movies where the delay in coms becomes a basic element in the story and helps to isolate a crew from home. ( eg 2010 )
It seemed lazy of the writing/production team to overlook this fundamental of long range solar system exploration... to me.
A real shame it was cancelled and thank you all for an interesting thread ( even if I'm 4 years late to the party ( lol Now thats a delay and a half :) ))
This. I skimmed till someone said it. Handwaving tech because the writers are lazy is lazy handwaving.
A show with this premise has constraints (actually, all shows do... doctor shows don't use time travel to solve problems). You know what constrains are? Not problems, but benefits. A handful of people on a ship in dangerous territory with limited/no help from a distant home? Awesome! A classic premise. Anyone who cannot write their way out of that needs to be fired.
Global warming? Talk about creative license and bending the laws of physics. By the time the show aired everybody with an above double digit IQ knew it was a cash-cow hoax by people like Algore. People do remember having their intelligence insulted and will rebel by refusing to watch a TV show for example. I still would have watched it, just would have ignored the global warming and gay marriage propaganda, my choice.
______________________________
The wise are not in need of a word.