Could be wrong though.... Time occurs more slowly in high gravity (think black holes).

Yea, that's what I said. The further you are away from a celestial object the slower time is running for you compared to someone else. Hence the example of warping to a friend, if they are waiting for you to warp in (and they are closer to a large celestial object, ie in a gravity well), they will experience said wait as being longer than you experience it as.

Edit: Ohhh, I see where I messed up. Will change it, lol. One word wrong in the first sentence of my explanation >.<
Edit2: Nevermind, I got the whole thing backwards.

Also there's nothing that prevents memory transfers in biology or chemistry. Maybe physics, but it should be roughly possible. Depends on the storage medium.

As for your smaller field stuff. On that point the facts don't back you up. At this point the scientific consensus is that quarks are the smallest component of the universe and that everything is made up of quarks and different combinations of quarks spinning in different ways generates different physical behaviors. We've not discovered anything more elementary actually and frankly, nothing more elementary is required for the standard model of physics. All known natural forces now fit within the mathematical models produced for them. While it doesn't cover the quantum mechanics models and string theory -- we'll get there. String theory may be completely wrong, but ultimately it will be the application of the scientific method that will prove it wrong and not random skepticism from those who haven't educated themselves on the topic -- myself included.

terribly derailed thread is terribly derailed.

meanwhile, EP's arguments boils down to "everyone else must be wrong because I said so"

I see. So your argument is that quarks make up everything and they just interact because they do. Sense, in actuality... it makes absolutely none. But I probably should stop trying to reason with a guy that thinks he can explain his way beyond the limitations of relativity by evoking the Enterprise's warp drive engines, and how they work in imaginary land.


My god man, it's actually not that hard. A particle has no means of interaction if there is nothing in between them causing that interaction. They don't just "magically" interact, and they are not going to just because you read it somewhere on wikipedia and you now consider yourself to be an expert.

But if you don't think things interact without touching, then I got a teaser for you. I place a iron ball inside a larger vacuum sealed glass ball. I then move a magnet around the outside of the glass ball and "magically" the iron ball moves to touch the magnet even though there is no matter between them. Or how about I just microwave something from a distance. Lots of things interact without touching.

But in all this, I feel like you haven't presented alternative theories or even tests that would prove these theories wrong in the least. Anyone can say something is wrong, but you have to create something testable to prove that it's wrong because they've already created a test to prove that it wasn't.

Hey Eternum, what's up?



Also, shed some light onto this stuff you keep saying people haven't asked you about.

Now, I would like to remind people to post constructively, please!

Warp drives don't cause you to get anywhere near the local light speed, they create a field (of totally BS space magic) that decreases the mass of the surrounding space (a 'depleted vacuum') resulting in a large negative density for the region around the ship (the 'warp tunnel'), thus raising light speed and allowing speeds of multiple AU/s without even approaching the local light speed.

The downside to to these drives is that when in standby mode (they cannot be turned off safely) the create a force akin to friction that drags the ship into a zero velocity relative to the local gravity well (usually the local star)

All joking aside, that's not a bad analogy really :)