Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 [3]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: New Star Trek and Ham radio ?  (Read 2811 times)
K5END
Member

Posts: 1309




Ignore
« Reply #30 on: June 09, 2009, 11:12:44 AM »

>
"Re END...
Nope its a TOS and perhaps TNG script explanation question.
I remember the mention of Sub Space Frequencies. But I do not ever seem to have any memory of what exactly these allegedly SSFs per scripts."

You'll have to forgive my ignorance, but I can only guess about those acronyms. "TNG" probably means "the next generation," but "TOS?" "The original show," perhaps?"

I'd have to speculate what they mean by "sub space" propagation or frequencies.

Physics is all about dimensions. Everything is a dimension, except "dimensionless" numbers like 'pi' or gain (for y = mx + b, x, y and b represent constant and variable values in dimensions; "m" is the gain of a perfectly linear amplifier and is dimensionless.)

There are 4 fundamental dimensions in the universe that cannot be described without using the dimension as its own description. "Time" is one of these 4, for example. All other dimensions are derived from these basic 4.

Electromagnetic waves propagate in 3 dimensional space and according to other dimensions, such as time, electric field, constants of the medium, etc.  

If there exists a way to collapse the relevance of one or more dimensions to--in our present understanding--"cheat" and send information from one place to another place in space and arrive faster than it would have otherwise at the speed of light, that could be one explanation for "subspace propagation."

Why they chose to call it "subspace frequency" may imply that the usefulness and efficiency of their method is a function of frequency, much as the index of refraction in a dielectric is a function of wavelength and the nature of the dielectric matter.

If the above assumed is sufficiently close to being accurate, "subspace frequency" might mean a specific frequency within the allowed bands of "subspace" propagation.

But what do I know? Take it with a cubic mm of sodium chloride in the solid crystal-lattice state. I only watched Star Trek the two years it was on TV the first go 'round. '67 and '68 or so, as I recall. By the time the first movie came out I was out of college and in my first career. My impression is it was a hyped special effects response to "Star Wars" released a couple of years prior. I would have enjoyed it more had they not shaved the head of Persis Khambatta.

I appreciate the mention of the books, but so far I'm pretty comfortable with my understanding of physics and its relationship to science fiction.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

More importantly, the TECHNOLOGY of Star Trek was nothing short of clairvoyant!!

Many examples exist, but the lapel communicators, the Bluetooth earpiece worn by Lt. Uhura, the PTT Nextel phones, microwave-laser neurological stun guns, and of all things, the CD-ROM storage of historical information and executable files needed for the equipment to transport one to that era of history!!!

This to me is the most impressive aspect of the original TV series.

Bravo for Gene Roddenberry!!!
Logged
K7PEH
Member

Posts: 1124




Ignore
« Reply #31 on: June 09, 2009, 11:29:44 AM »

K5END and subspace propagation...

Actually, subspace propagation is a real physical phenomena described by General Relativity -- at least in theory.  This is indeed the same kind of physics as wormhole traversal.  But, this is after the fact.

In the original TV series, the mention of subspace channel for communication was mentioned from time to time and it clearly indicated a kind of communication that would transcend the obvious problems of distance and speed of light and time.  But, it was not explained.

In the TNG show, this was actually explained as being a subspace wormhole type communication.  This is basically folding space as in the book Dune.  And, this is explained in a rather detailed manner in Kip Thorne's book that I cited on an earlier posting.

You mention that your understanding of physics is good enough for science fiction (or, whatever it was that you said) and that is fine.  Not everyone is into this kind of physics discussion.  But, I really enjoyed the books myself but maybe that is because of my degrees in physics which gives me maybe an added dimension to enjoy the discussion.

Also, if the story was rewritten for today they would use quantum entanglement for their form of instantaneous communication.  By the way, there is a very interesting article about time travel and QM in the Physical Review Letters and a summary of it at http://focus.aps.org/story/v23/st18.  The Physical Review Letters publication though is available only under APS or PROLA.
Logged
K5END
Member

Posts: 1309




Ignore
« Reply #32 on: June 09, 2009, 11:47:49 AM »

>
"You mention that your understanding of physics..."

Yeah, that came off sounding haughty and I didn't mean it that way, even as much as it does sound like I meant it that way.

I'm home with a cough and am bored to tears...don't know what I was thinking. Actually, I do. I had my mind on something else very specific.

I appreciate your perspective and I will check out those books.

Thanks again.
Logged
K7PEH
Member

Posts: 1124




Ignore
« Reply #33 on: June 09, 2009, 11:51:36 AM »

>>>>
I'll have to check out the Krauss book.

Please tell me that at some point he makes it clear that there is a very good reason they call it "science **fiction**."
<<<<

Krauss does not attempt to prove that such "fiction" as it appears on the TV or movies can be possible, he actually does more of the opposite but along the way explaining what would be needed in order for such things to be possible.

I read the book when it first came out which was a number of years ago.  I don't even have my copy anymore because I gave it away.

Now, the author Kaku is a little different.  He actually believes that there could be such a civilization as depicted in the Star Trek movies, maybe thousands of years in the future though rather then a few hundred.  Kaku provides a measurement of a technological culture as to weather they achieve mastery over the earth, mastery over the Sun and System System, mastery over a Galaxy, and so on.  The Star Trek show depicts a technological advancement that fits into Kaku's mastery over the Solar System but still confined to a Galaxy type thing.  I am not doing his work very much justice in these short words though.

Kaku, is a bit of a strange guy though.  He is a popular guest on the "Coast to Coast" radio show, first with Art Bell (W6OBB) and now with whatever his name is, George ??.  I actually do not listen to the show myself as it is on too late and I am not interested.  However, Kaku is a very good physics "teacher" -- his text on Quantum Field Theory is very good and he makes such a difficult topic just a little bit easier.
Logged
K5END
Member

Posts: 1309




Ignore
« Reply #34 on: June 09, 2009, 11:52:28 AM »

>
"if the story was rewritten for today they would use quantum entanglement for their form of instantaneous communication"

I assume this refers to separated, paired particles/spins and Bell's theorem, that sort of thing?
Logged
K7PEH
Member

Posts: 1124




Ignore
« Reply #35 on: June 09, 2009, 12:04:21 PM »

"... assume this refers to separated, paired particles/spins and Bell's theorem, that sort of thing?"

Yes, that sort of thing.  Quantum entanglement was scoffed at by many physicists for years and never taken seriously.  Back when I was in school, it was not even seriously pursued as an area of study.  However, experiments are done today that show quantum entanglement is a reality.

By the way, the article I mentioned about time travel and QM involved quantum entanglement as the means of connecting the past and future events together.
Logged
SV1ENS
Member

Posts: 124


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #36 on: June 09, 2009, 12:43:42 PM »

This is what I really appreciate about Amateur Radio Operators; they take a trivial comment about a poorly set up of a Hollywood movie stage; and turn it into a quantum physics discussion !!!

Although my physics knowledge stops at the basics, I was never really alienated by the Star Trek physics, it all sounded realistic at the context used !!!

However, I remember reading the "Digital Fortress" by Dan Brown and kept thinking to myself; "what a pile of crap"... As IT is my cup of tea, I found the plot build around a CIA super computer simply idiotic...

73
Demetre - SV1ENS
Logged
K5END
Member

Posts: 1309




Ignore
« Reply #37 on: June 09, 2009, 01:09:41 PM »

...
well, all things are relative, right?

:-)

I hope to get over this cough soon. I've done way too much ehamming lately.
Logged
KE4DRN
Member

Posts: 3729




Ignore
« Reply #38 on: June 09, 2009, 06:49:26 PM »

hi,

I'm going to look at those books too !

this topic just may give one of the
young pups a spark to explore quantum physics
and who knows what he or she will come up with !

73 james
Logged
K7PEH
Member

Posts: 1124




Ignore
« Reply #39 on: June 10, 2009, 09:43:33 AM »

>>>well, all things are relative, right?

Yes.  Except for the speed of light which is actually fixed.  Of course, I mean speed of light in a vacuum but even this is not correct.  Think of a photon as a massless particle (which it is).  As a massless particle, it can care less whether it is in a vacuum or not, it always and forever travels at the speed of light.  But, the effective measured speed of an electromagnetic wave has to consider the problems of those photons interacting with other matter that gets in the way.  This is the reason that the speed of light is less in some non-vacuum realm and why the effective electrical wavelength of transmission line or antenna is less then it would be if calculated purely from lambda =  speed-of-light divided by frequency (note my segue back to ham radio).

If a photon is massless and thus is FORCED to travel at the speed of light, of course ALL massless particles MUST travel at the speed of light (such as gravitons).  But, if a particle has mass, such as a proton, electron, quark, whatever, then it travels at a speed necessarily less then light.  So, there is something about mass that interferes with a particles natural speed (that is, the desire to always go at the speed of light).  Mass becomes some kind of hindrance to normality.

So, some bright physicist decided to invent some invisible field that permeates all space and this field sort of gives some force against a particle that has mass so that it cannot travel at its desired speed.  In fact, it is said that this field creates inertia which his another word for mass.  This field is the Higgs field and it is the current primary goal of modern theoretical physics and that is to discover the Higgs Field by finding the field's quantum particle called the Higgs particle.  The motivating factor to build the LHC was to find this Higgs particle.

Sorry, I get carried away when it comes to topics such as this.
Logged
SV1ENS
Member

Posts: 124


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #40 on: June 10, 2009, 11:29:11 AM »

Taking under consideration that ST science has managed to make warp technology a reality, and can send a body through space many times the speed of light using a time/space bubble, why do we assume that similar advances have not been made in two-way communications to achieve similar results ?

30 year ago in high school, we used a teletype keyboard connected to an IBM main frame with a coupling modem achieving the incredible speed of 300 baud. It used to take several minutes to communicate a simple program to the main frame and get a reply back!!!

Today, I'm siting comfortably in my veranda with my MacBook Air on my lap connected over a 100 Mbit wireless  personal net with over 15 Mbit connection speed to a global network of computers exchanging Treky thoughts...

How much of science fiction would the latter sound to me or anyone of us 30 year ago Huh

Just my two euro-cents worth...

73
Demetre - SV1ENS
Logged
K5END
Member

Posts: 1309




Ignore
« Reply #41 on: June 10, 2009, 01:40:02 PM »

">>>well, all things are relative, right?

Yes. Except for..."

Actually I was being facetious, but I see what you mean.
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 [3]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!