Getting Deep

I love stories. I spend as much of my time as possible immersed in a book, game, or movie, placing myself in a sort of “safe” reality. In books and movies, I know everything will work out in the end, and no damage will come to me physically. In games, I am in control of the story, and I can change the difficulty, giving me the power to overcome any obstacle. Also, the stakes are low: if I lose, I can just start over and learn from my mistakes—the game doesn’t matter.

So when, like me, you constantly dwell in these false realities (I personally prefer books, but games are more relevant to this discussion), it becomes very easy to let the entertainment mindset bleed over into the real world. I have found myself deciding, without even thinking, to take a break and come back after I’ve thought awhile—except you can’t take a break from life. Sometimes I get frustrated with something in my life, and my mind will tell me it doesn’t have to be that hard: just drop the difficulty and blow the obstacle to smithereens. I have even found myself getting so tired of aspects of life that I want to just give up, “lose,” and start over.

Except you can’t do any of these things with life. Time floats on, whether you want it to or not. You can’t pause the game of life. There are no checkpoints in life. There is no respawn in life. There is only one difficulty setting: hard. And if all of that wasn’t pressure enough, life actually matters. And you only get one shot.

But there is hope, because we are not playing to win. Our object is not the accumulation of wealth or our own personal happiness. No, our object is to do the Lord’s bidding. When you wreck your car and can’t afford a replacement, take heart: Jesus didn’t need a car to do His Father’s bidding. When your house catches fire and all your wealth and pride is devastated, take heart, for your life has not been in vain. When depression strikes, your happiness is destroyed, and you lose your hope for the world, take heart, for you are not here to be happy. You are not losing at life when you are unhappy. You are not losing at life when you can’t get a girl or see how you will fit in the world. Only give up your own desires and plans, obey your General, and you will find purpose, identity, and fulfillment.

Life is not a game.

Advertisements

Some More Thoughts on Relativity

I admit it, I’m a terrible blogger. At least I am when life happens. Which it kind of always does. Otherwise, I, you know, wouldn’t have one. But if I can’t keep up with a consistent posting schedule, the least I can do is follow up on a promised post. Unfortunately I haven’t done any of the math-work on the promised Special Relativity post (I’ve had enough school to do without calculating a new definition of motion), but I can update you on my discoveries about General Relativity.

As I mentioned in my last post (over two months ago…), I had a chance to talk to Korean physicist Min Seong Lee about my ideas on relativity, and what he had to say enlightened me in a few ways, both positive and negative.

First, it turns out that the problem I found in relativity is actually only a problem in the oversimplification of the theory that is used to explain it to high schoolers. To recap, my problem with the theory was that a simple warp in space time would cause particles to curve in observed space, but not at all in the way we see gravity behaving, and it would never accelerate a particle from a stationary position relative to the space-time. To solve this problem, I proposed that instead of mass warping space-time, space-time moves towards mass. What Min Seong pointed out to me is that, while a particle may be stationary relative to the three dimensions of space, no particle is ever stationary relative to time. Time is always flowing, providing the moving dimension that I proposed was necessary to create motion within space. I am still not sure entirely how this works, even though he showed me an equation that demonstrated how moving time acceleration (or if I did, I have forgotten my understanding in the months it has taken me to get this written down).

Now, the happy part of this is that, because of the moving time aspect and some of the math involved, my idea is basically just another way to say what already existed in the theory, so while I wasn’t the first to come up with this idea (though maybe the first to state it the way I did), my idea was, in fact, correct (or at least mostly so). While I may be merely following in the footsteps of minds greater than mine, it is still exciting to follow their footsteps with my own mind, rather than getting pushed along the path in a stroller. Textbooks are great for learning things, and I would never have been able to discover what I have without the foundation they gave me, but there is nothing like discovering cool science stuff for yourself.

Summer Update and Science Video

So I’ve been a bit behind on my updates lately (5 months…), but I’m finally getting around to it again, so I’m doing an update for all of it at once.

So the biggest thing that happened to me is that I graduated High School in May, and started college classes in the summer. I am now officially a student of Moody Bible Institute, Spokane, in their Missionary Aviation with a flight focus! The summer classes I took (Introduction to Philosophy and Christian Missions) were very interesting. I got to share some of my more abstract ideas from this website with the fellow students in the Philosophy course and the professor engaged me about them, so I got to discuss my ideas with someone, and as an added bonus, he actually had formal training in the area.

Also, the past two Mondays I got to meet Min Seong Lee, a student from South Korea who has a PhD in solid matter physics, and we talked about my relativity post (be looking for an update on that post based on that conversation). I learned a lot of science stuff, mostly relating to relativity and quantum mechanics, and he suggested I read the book The Hidden Reality by Brian Greene, which talks about quantum mechanics. He also showed me an online resource called OpenCourseWare, where anyone with YouTube access can actually watch the lectures from certain MIT courses. As much as I am able, I plan to use that resource, combined with the book he recommended, to learn quantum mechanics, which should greatly increase my understanding of science and my ability to develop the ideas I come up with here!

On a  non-scientific topic, I learned to write in Dwarvish this month! There are apparently several variants on the alphabet, the main ones being the original Anglo-Saxon runes, the runes used in Erebor, the runes used in Moria, and the Elvish rune system known as the Angerthas Daeron. The system that I learned appears to be an early version of the Angerthas Moria, before they switched the runes for H and S, and replaced the runes for J and ZH with runes borrowed from the Angerthas Daeron. I have started a prayer journal using this alphabet, and it has the combined benefits of looking awesome (I have a genuine leather-bound book filled with Dwarvish Runes!), helping me think through stuff in my personal life, and helping me grow closer to God.

For those of you interested, here is a picture of what I learned (it is actually the picture I learned it from)The rune (certh, plural is cirth) for S can be reversed with no consequences, and the certh that replaced J and ZH are Certh 29.svg and Certh 30.svg, respectively.

Now, there is a total solar eclipse coming up on Monday, August 21st, so for the science video today, here is Destin’s video about the solar eclipse:

 

Human Hive Mind

Hey guys, sorry I haven’t been doing the monthly updates lately. I have been excessively busy, with working full-time, two 8-week college classes, and farm jobs. However, tomorrow is (Lord willing) my last day of school for the summer classes, so my schedule will clear up for a month before I start Fall classes, and when I do, I will only be doing one at a time, so I should be able to get back in the groove with posting.

Until then, I have a little bit of time tonight (mostly I just don’t feel like going to sleep), so here is a little something I have had floating around in the works for a while. Basically, this is just a single step along the way from my Telepathy idea and my Vision of the Future post, but it has been fantasized about enough in books and movies to warrant its own discussion.

So as I mentioned in my other posts about psychic science, we have the technology to link human minds, and we have already linked one person’s mind to another person’s body, without damaging either person’s neural or physical functions. For more information on that, read my Telepathy post. Now, I don’t know this for sure, but I have no reason to believe that the original owner of the body lost any control of his body, so basically we have an example of two minds controlling one body. Pacific Rim, anyone? Next, we just have to figure out how to also link the minds of the two people to each other, so they can agree on what to do with the body. Then, if we also linked the mind of the second person to the body of the first, we would have essentially created one mind controlling two bodies. Do this on a large scale, and we have a hive mind!

Now, I don’t see this actually being developed to this point for a while, due to the fact that it would completely destroy the individuality of the people involved, but it might be used to help improve quality of life for Siamese twins. Now, I could see this technology being used in conjunction with my RC Humans post, in that one person’s mind could be linked to the bodies of many…vacant…bodies, creating an army of hive mind zombies. Book material for someone, maybe?

What do you guys think? What would happen on the spiritual level if we joined two human minds in this way? This might be a good way to “prove” the existence of souls–the existence of an aspect of the mind outside of the brain might prevent the full integration of the two different minds.

Also, while writing this article, I had to do a little research on Siamese twins to make sure I sufficiently understood how that works in order to mention them the way I did in this article, and it is really very interesting, at least to me. Look up Abby and Brittany Hensel, two Siamese twins from Minnesota, and the way they have dealt with having two heads and one body is incredibly interesting. While I have no intentions of making a post on the Hensel twins or Siamese twins in general, I would recommend you guys look them up.

Logical Proof of God’s Existence

I will start with the assumption that logic itself is valid, because as a human being I cannot do otherwise. There is technically no reason whatsoever to make this assumption, because if logic is invalid, then logic could be both valid and invalid with no contradiction whatsoever, because any contradiction would be solely a logical contradiction, and logic is invalid. To argue that logic “makes sense,” or that we see it happening all around us, and that it agrees with the outside world are all simply begging the question. These arguments use logic to prove that logic is valid, but if logic itself is on trial, logic cannot be entered into evidence. However, if logic is invalid, both sides of this argument fall apart, and I have no clue whatsoever of how to proceed with an argument if logic is invalid, so it must be assumed, if for no other purpose than for the sanity of the human race.

Thus, starting from logic alone, we know that either the universe exists or it does not. There is no third alternative. We perceive that the universe exists. If the universe exists, then either it has always existed or it has not. If the universe has always existed, either nothing has ever happened or every conceivable possible occurrence has already occurred an infinite number of times, and the mere thought of a “present” is mere nonsense, because there is no way to point to a specific point along an infinite line as viewed, theoretically, in its entirety. Infinity is infinity, and any finitude associated with it is simply nonsense. An infinite yet changeable being is thus a nonsensical construction (sorry Hindus). Thus, the universe must have had a beginning.

Now, so far, I have only proven that which is already commonly accepted, or at least given lip service to. However, the evolutionary hypothesis is that a tiny speck (presumably a singularity) once contained all mass in the universe, and it exploded into the universe. This returns us to the argument of finitude or infinity: either this singularity has existed for eternity or it has not. If it has, then the Big Bang has happened an infinite number of times (we can say for certain that it didn’t not happen, because the world exists), and the thought of “this particular occurrence,” and thus a “present,” and therefore time in general, is completely meaningless. If it hasn’t, then the logical law of causality states that something else must have caused it. If this singularity represents the entirety of the universe at this point (which it both does by hypothesis and must, due to the previous argument of finitude and infinitude, which I will not repeat yet again), then this cause must be outside of the universe. In this case, there is really no point in developing the idea of the Big Bang, because there must still be a “super-natural” cause of the universe.

So the universe is finite, with a beginning and end, and as such requires that something have created it. Now, I could stop there, and just leave it as yet another modified version of the law of causality, but all this has actually just been setup for the “real” thing I have been trying to get to: this whole argument applies to any object to which time can be applied. If a thing is temporal, it is either eternal and unchangeable (in which case it also could not affect anything outside of itself, because that would require it change–it would have to be a completely passive object, completely disconnected from the outside world, and it is strongly questionable that such a concept even makes sense to coexist with any other entity, unless every other entity with which it coexists is precisely such as it), or it is finite, in which case it had a cause. Thus, the fact that the universe exists today means that it had a first cause, and that first cause must, by necessity, be outside of time, or it itself would need a cause. Thus, the mere existence of the universe, or even my own existence as a being (apart from any sensory data, just the raw fact that cogito ergo sum) requires the existence of a being that exists outside of time, that created this universe. And any being that creates a self-contained universe will, automatically, have complete and total control and knowledge of everything that occurs within that universe (think of an author writing a book: nothing happens in a book without the author’s knowledge, consent, and active causing, and if the author stops writing the book, the universe in the books simply ceases to exist at the point at which the author stopped writing).

Conclusion: the universe is finite, God exists and created the universe, He is outside of time and the universe, and He is omnipotent and omniscient with regard to the universe.

I could go on to derive other characteristics of God, but I will stop there, because that is all that comes to me spontaneously, without me specifically trying to intuit other characteristics of the Author Being.

 

Vision of the Future

I was reading a book recently, and it mentioned a “cellular phone.” While it is one of the newer books I have read, I suppose it would be considered an old book now (1992), and the mention made me stop and think about what exactly it meant by a “cellular phone.” When the concept of a mobile phone first came about, they looked more like field radios than what we think of as a cell phone today, but I didn’t know when the cell phone started appearing in recognizable form, so I started wondering whether it was talking about the large field radio type phone or the “traditional” flip phone.

The title picture shows a 1992 cell phone, confirming that the book would have been referring to the former, but it started a very interesting thought process in my mind. I was wondering when the “traditional” cell phone started coming out, but then I realized that what I think of as the traditional cell phone is hardly ever seen any more. This led to the realization that not only are flip phones and all other “dumb phones” disappearing, the entire concept of the cell phone is starting to go away. Everyone still knows what you mean when you say “cell phone,” but more and more, home phones are being replaced by smart phones, and people refer to them simply as “phones.” The home phone is going away, and as a result, so is the concept of a cell phone as opposed to a home phone. Increasingly, we don’t have home phones and cell phones, we just have phones, and the concept is automatically associated with a smart phone. All of this has really happened since the advent of the iPhone in 2007. In less than a decade, we have gone from a standard home phone and a clamshell cell phone to the “home phone” being essentially an office tool, the clamshell cell phone being nonexistent, and the entire idea of a home phone vs. a cell phone being replaced by the standardized idea of a phone being a smart phone.

So what does the future look like?

I would strongly urge you to at least read over Winston Churchill’s essay “50 Years Hence,” in which he predicts with astonishing foresight the technological advances of our time, as well as some advances currently in sight. Now, 86 years later, this post is my version, springboarding off of the future of communication, now that the majority of Churchill’s predictions are simply a part of everyday life.

First, I expect the idea of a home phone to be rendered completely obsolete, possibly even in the next five years. Smart phones will become smarter, “Google glasses,” or whatever they call them now, smart watches, and similar technology will become more and more common, and smart phones may even be on the decline in five years, in favor of wearable technology. I expect the traditional home phone will stick around for awhile as shared phones in offices and the like, but little else.

Eventually, as hologram technology becomes cheaper, more developed and more accessible (and we do have hologram technology already, and it is reasonably accessible as a holographic gun sight), the communications technology of the day will start to be replaced by some sort of holophone, likely wrist based, and offices will use an industrial grade version of that—some sort of console, or even a room devoted to holographic communications (Star Wars Jedi holoconferences are a distinct possibility).

As our understanding of the human brain and our ability to interface with it is further developed, we will start having phones connected to the brain—the new Bluetooth—and from there it would be a short leap to fully integrated phones inside our heads. Originally, I expect they would just be a biologically integrated form of the original “dumb phone”—you talk, the other person hears—no video, no web capabilities, just a simple oral communication device. Pretty soon, however, technology companies would begin to come up with ways to integrate the capabilities of external devices into the Biophone, with video likely coming first. They might access outside camera footage (including the “footage” from other people’s eyes via their Biophones) to construct a 3D image of the person you are talking to and display that in your head, they might provide you the ability to see what the other person is seeing, or they might just decide to do away with the visual aspect altogether. However, as our understanding of and ability to interface with the human brain becomes even more refined (see my Telepathy post), web browsing capabilities, cameras, auxiliary memory space for your brain, and even music would be introduced.

Finally, people will realize that communication no longer needs to be limited to language, and the Biophone will be modified so that direct thought processes can be transferred, instead of constraining the user to talk, or even form the words in the mind, and the word “telephone” will have a whole new meaning. This is the destination of my Telepathy idea.

But why stop there? Why not allow for group calls? Why not fully integrate the brain with the internet? Why not create, in essence, a universal consciousness? The technology is in reach. Holoconferences, as far-fetched and sci-fi as they are now, will become obsolete—the new fax.

It will be a short step from there to simply create an entire world in the internet, upload our collective consciousness to it, and live immortally in the internet. I see this happening in one of two ways: either we have enough confidence in our engineering capabilities that we build a self-sustaining system to keep the internet intact, or the rich and powerful get to be immortalized while the less fortunate have to stay and keep the internet going.

Now, I fully expect Jesus to come back before we actually get to this point. In light of the Tower of Babel, I don’t think God wants us to have a universal consciousness, plus, I doubt He would let the human race drive itself extinct like this, but it could happen. He may wait for another 200 years, or even 2,000. I have no way of knowing. However, this is what I see as the current track of technological development, barring any other factors, be they divine, political, cultural, governmental, etc. If the technology industries are left to their own devices, I could easily see all of this happening in the next 50 years, and definitely the next 100.

The Future of VR

I have more to say on Relativity, but I am going to take a break and talk about something a little less mentally taxing: Virtual Reality. A friend recently told me about a book called Ready Player One, in which a VR game has, for all practical purposes, replaced the real world. A film adaptation of the book is scheduled for release in 2018, and there is a lot of VR concept art surrounding the story. One picture in particular got me thinking about the future of VR.

The picture shows the person wearing VR gloves to get hand sensations and goggles for the visual aspect. This is the most obvious route for VR to take: create equipment to externally synthesize in-game sensations. However, I see two other options, one less likely, and one more likely.

I’ll start with the less likely one: using holograms. Basically, we build a large, empty room, and project holographic terrain and other objects into it. Then, we create shaped gravity shields inside the holograms, to make them solid. Fine tuning of the surface shape (microscopic grooves and other texturing), combined with an interactive computer program to simulate surface elasticity (so if you touch something it will squish a little bit) could be used to give things the proper texture. This would be the most realistic version of virtual reality, because you would actually be performing the actions in the game with your physical body. Plus, it would be good for the public health, because if you ever wanted to play, say, a shooter, you would have to actually go run around, jump, climb, slide, and be otherwise physically active. This is my personal favorite version of Virtual Reality, but because hologram technology does not appear to be progressing in leaps and bounds, I doubt we will ever see it.

The more likely route VR will take, and almost certainly its final state, pulls on my telepathy idea. We can already interface, to an extent, between computers and the human brain. So why not create a Virtual Reality system that you simply plug your brain into? When you plug in, it intercepts the signals your brain sends to your body, so instead of moving your physical body, you move your in-game body. It would also block external sensory input, and replace it with artificial sensory input from the game, fed directly to your brain. You simply sit down and plug in, and your body effectively falls asleep, while your brain enters the game. It would work somewhat like the Avatar control bed.

So what do you guys think? Am I on the right track here? I will try to do another post this month on the future of communication, which I already have mostly written out, but I will have to edit it because of the new ideas this has given me.

Some Thoughts on Relativity

As I mention in my “about” page, when I was in middle school I thought I disproved Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity, but almost immediately forgot the thought process. That has created a nagging doubt in my head every time I have used his theory ever since, and I have always been annoyed at not knowing whether I was right or not. However, I just went back over his theory in my current Physics course, and something about the way this guy worded it reignited the thought process I had back in middle school, and I now know what I thought was wrong with the General Theory of Relativity.

The problem I have with the theory is actually found in its very foundation. Einstein said that Newton’s laws of motion could basically be restated by saying that “In the absence of external forces, objects travel the straightest possible path in spacetime.” To explain the “force” of gravity in a way consistent with this statement (because, due to the “principle of equivalence” and some weird reasoning that doesn’t quite make logical sense to me, Einstein thought that gravity wasn’t actually a force), Einstein said that “Mass and energy cause spacetime to curve.” Science teachers love to use the illustration of a mass in a pillow or bed sheet, with a marble rolled alongside. They point to the fact that the marble rolls and hits the mass making the depression, and say “See? Mass bends spacetime!” However, the only reason the marble ends up reaching the bottom of this depression is that there is external gravity! Thus, this illustration begs the question by using gravity to explain gravity. In order for this illustration to actually work properly, it must be in a gravity free environment.

So take this setup out to deep space. Replace the bed sheet and mass with, say, a piece of sheet metal that is warped in the middle in the same way that the mass warps the bed sheet, and replace the marble with, say, a magnetic ball, so that it stays attached to the sheet metal the entire time. Now run the experiment in your head, ignoring friction (because there would be no friction in the theory we are trying to illustrate, and you can successfully neutralize friction in a simulated experiment). First, imagine this with the ball moving very quickly: the ball rolls along, and encounters the simulated gravity well. What does it do? It enters the gravity well along its original path, and then leaves the gravity well, still traveling along the same path. Remember, there is no friction, and no external force pulling the object into the well. The only factors to consider are the ball’s velocity and the metal’s warping. There is absolutely nothing to provide a centripetal force to change the direction of the ball. Viewed from above, the ball curves towards the center of the well when it enters, but immediately begins curving back out, and ends up in the same path it was traveling on before. Now, imagine if the ball is stationary, but inside the simulated gravity well. What happens? Nothing! The ball just sits there.

Now compare this to the situation it is supposed to be illustrating. In a real gravity well, if something is moving very fast, its path will bend in response to the gravity well, but it will not be caught in it. This is consistent with the illustration: if the ball is rolling very quickly, it will curve inside the simulated gravity well, but it will leave the gravity well and continue. However, in a real gravity well, the object will have changed direction when it leaves the gravity well, and in the illustration, the final path of the object is exactly the same as the original path. Now think of an object just sitting in the air above the earth. It begins accelerating towards the earth. In the illustration, the ball just sits there, because there is no outside force acting on it.

Thus, no amount of spacetime warping can permanently change the direction of an object, so Einstein was WRONG!

That is as far as I got in middle school, but this time I was able to take it a little further and develop an amendment to his theory that would solve the theoretical problem without actually changing any of the math: instead of saying, “Mass and energy cause spacetime to curve,” I say that “Spacetime flows towards mass and energy.” Now, this statement still needs some work: for example, we now know that mass and energy are the same thing–a vibration in spacetime (see my Matter and Matter Follow-up posts), so we need to come up with a way to make this statement in a way that is consistent with those ideas, but I am fairly certain that this is how it works on the macroscopic scale.

Let’s go back to the original illustration. You have a bed sheet on the floor, and a device in the middle that sucks the threads towards it. When you roll your marble across the sheet, it will begin to curve towards the device. If it is moving quickly, it will escape the “gravity well,” and emerge traveling in a different direction. If it is moving slowly, it will begin orbiting the device, and if it is moving even more slowly, it will eventually hit the device and rest against it. Finally, if you lay the marble at rest a little away from the device, when you release the marble it will begin accelerating towards the device. This is exactly how we see gravity work in the real world!

Now, I also have idea about Special Relativity: not a correction, but a new way of thinking about things that could make Special Relativity  much easier to understand. However, it will involve a lot of math and other homework–by far the most labor and thought intensive idea I have had so far–so it may be a while before I can post it. Despite this, I am really excited about it, and wanted to give a little teaser now to piggyback on the General Relativity post: Basically, I am working on a new mathematical definition of motion that will take Special Relativity into account–essentially redefining motion as distance warped over time warped, instead of distance passed over time passed. Now, this is basically what Einstein was going for when he developed his General Theory of Relativity, so I wouldn’t be surprised in the slightest if he already did this and it just ended up using more complicated math than they want to teach non-physics majors, so I might come up dry or find I am simply reinventing the wheel, but I have stated my goal.

Now, I have had this idea for an amendment to Relativity for a while, but it was based on some other ramifications, such as the possible existence of antigravity (gravity that pushes instead of pulls), antimatter, white holes, etc., but this base has allowed me to flesh it out some more. I will try to write on the other ramifications of this amendment in my next post.

Finally, I have the image at the top linked to the page I found it on. I have not read it, but I want to read it as soon as I have the time. It appears to be a well thought out argument for another problem with Relativity, so I linked to it in case you guys were interested.

Any thoughts? I hope I explained this clearly enough, but knowing how abstract this whole concept is, I wouldn’t be surprised if I simply left your minds even more twisted than before. I know my mind went for quite a few loops while figuring this out. I would love to answer any questions you have in the comments. Also, I might be wrong about all this, and simply be misunderstanding Einstein’s theory, but I am fairly confident in my analysis, and I would love to be challenged so I can refine or recant my idea.

Some Cool Science Developments

I recently received a couple of emails from an astronomy organization about some promising scientific developments related to my theories, and I also ran across a Wikipedia article about a scientific theory along the lines of my Gravity Shield idea. The articles are relatively large, so I will post a quick summary with a link to the full text of each piece.

NASA Wants to Create the Coolest Spot in the Universe
NASA has created a piece of equipment that they call the Cold Atom Lab, or CAL, which will be used to study atoms at temperatures so cold (0.000000001K, or one billionth of a Kelvin) that they form an entirely new state of matter that doesn’t obey the “familiar rules of physics.” The article says that in this state, “Matter can be observed behaving less like particles and more like waves.” This is further confirmation of my Matter idea. NASA (who wrote the article) says this piece of equipment will likely provide us with much greater understanding of dark matter and dark energy (which make up 95% of the universe, according to “current models of cosmology”), and lead to vast technological improvements (e.g. quantum computers)

New Path Suggested for Nuclear Fusion
Is there anything lasers can’t do? This article suggests the use of lasers to “nudge” atoms close enough to fuse. The point of the article is that we might very well have found the key to cold fusion. What got me going, however, is the fact that they are using lasers to manipulate atomic particles! That was the first scientific advancement required for my Ultramatter idea to be feasible, and this article says we have made that advancement!

Alcubierre Drive (Space-Warping/Faster-Than-Light Theory)
This is a hypothesis that has been around since 1994, that basically suggests that if we could figure out how to manipulate the space-time continuum, we could squish the space in front of an object and contract the space behind it, allowing it to traverse distances as if they were actually smaller distances, allowing for apparent faster-than-light travel. I was intrigued by this for two reasons: it is another use for the motive ability behind my Gravity Shield idea, and it is an accepted scientific theory that makes the same “if only…” statement I do in my Gravity Shield idea (If we could manipulate the space-time continuum, then we could do xyz), which means I am not completely off my rocker in making that statement.

February Update and Science Video

This month, I finally got my first real content post since August posted! I also just went back through and edited it, cleaning it up a little, clarifying pieces, and adding a few bits, so that it now does a more effective job of communicating my ideas on the subject. You can find those revisions at the original post here.

In other news, I finally got the new logo finished and uploaded, so it should start showing up as a favicon soon, and my gravatar picture is now set to my new logo. It is designed in the form of a coat of arms, and reflects the fact that a Christian worldview is the key to unlock the mysteries of science. A big thank you to Timothy Schutz for helping me make the logo, and dealing with me as I reinvented the wheel of photoshop and literally had him create a padlock and skeleton key out of basic black and white shapes. My website improvement task for this month is to work the new logo into the rest of the pictures on the website.logo-no-background-with-shield-pngOnce again, I have two science videos: one is just a standard science video about how engines work, but shown in a new way that is really pretty for all you pyromaniacs out there, and the other is a little bit of publicity for a podcast this guy is doing. Enjoy!