Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Stellar Wormholes May Exist

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the into-the-gamma-quadrant dept.

Space 94

seagirlreed writes "Pairs of stars could be connected via wormholes filled with 'phantom matter,' according to Kyrgyz researchers. If a wormhole exists within a star, the stellar body may exhibit measurable properties astronomers might detect. Although interesting, other scientists are skeptical, pointing out that this is highly speculative research."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First post? (2)

thomst (1640045) | more than 3 years ago | (#35396960)

Stellar wormholes exist? Yay interstellar subway system!

Re:First post? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35397006)

You go first.

Re:First post? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35399034)

Set your controls for the heart of the Sun.

Re:First post? (2)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397632)

Yay interstellar subway system!

So what I want to know about your Interstellar Subway is:

Re:First post? (1)

Kilrah_il (1692978) | more than 3 years ago | (#35412378)

1) Yes.
2) Yes.
3) A lot.
4) Yes.
5) No.

Re:First post? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35397934)

Stellar wormholes exist? Yay interstellar subway system!

Unfortunately it also seems to be an intra-stellar subway system.

Re:First post? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35400226)

What I am more concerned of is weather interstellar worms exist...

Re:First post? (1)

orkysoft (93727) | more than 3 years ago | (#35401886)

I thought the wormholes were supposed to be in the centre of the gas giants?

This reminds me of a Stargate Universe episode... (5, Funny)

FlapHappy (937803) | more than 3 years ago | (#35396966)

You know, the one that starts, "If we just flying the ship into the sun..."

Re:This reminds me of a Stargate Universe episode. (2)

dimethylxanthine (946092) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397182)

That would end your trip real fast, wouldn't it Luke?

Re:This reminds me of a Stargate Universe episode. (1)

oddaddresstrap (702574) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397722)

A Langston Field [wikipedia.org] will protect you from the heat and radiation, at least for a while...

Crazy Eddie drive (1)

rossdee (243626) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397992)

But you need the Alderson drive to get you through the wormhole that you find inside the red giant star

Say did Larry and Jerry ever do a sequel to The Gripping Hand ?

Re:This reminds me of a Stargate Universe episode. (1)

kanguro (1237830) | more than 3 years ago | (#35400920)

I 'd rather have a General Products n5 shell. It's been extensively tested.

Re:This reminds me of a Stargate Universe episode. (2)

rsmith-mac (639075) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397944)

I was going to go with one of a dozen SG-1/SGA episodes myself.

Suns + wormholes almost always result in a rockin' 1960s adventure - unless it results in changing the makeup of a star and (nearly) dooming the neighboring civilizations.

Re:This reminds me of a Stargate Universe episode. (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397996)

And wormholes are almost always the result of world choices meant to ease production, most notably the work of scriptwriters or authors.

Re:This reminds me of a Stargate Universe episode. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35398662)

SHUT UP. The emperor's clothes are beautiful, and you're just jealous you can't see them.

Re:This reminds me of a Stargate Universe episode. (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 3 years ago | (#35403322)

Sometimes you just need the ability to bring two points together when no straight line between them exists.

Re:This reminds me of a Stargate Universe episode. (1)

Thuktun (221615) | more than 3 years ago | (#35412980)

Sometimes you just need the ability to bring two points together when no straight line between them exists.

A straight line exists, it's just at a higher dimension.

Re:This reminds me of a Stargate Universe episode. (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 3 years ago | (#35413268)

That depends on the universe of interest.

Re:This reminds me of a Stargate Universe episode. (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35555302)

Heck, I'd like to do it probably daily. Sadly, wishful thinking fails yet again... and again ;/

But seriously, IMHO that's often a case of limited (but "broad", man!...) imagination. And/or making our world much smaller than it is (but comfortable for minds used to circumstances on Earth)
Choosing two points which are quite close generally - so communication is fairly rapid - but requirement for some very high energy maneuver precludes them from being easily reachable (say, very different inclinations / intermittently approaching planetary systems in double star system / opposite directions of revolving) would be more, well, respectful to the intellects of the audience.

Re:This reminds me of a Stargate Universe episode. (1)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 3 years ago | (#35408122)

I was going to go with one of a dozen SG-1/SGA episodes myself.

Suns + wormholes almost always result in a rockin' 1960s adventure - unless it results in changing the makeup of a star and (nearly) dooming the neighboring civilizations.

Or blowing up the star and its planetary system and hurling you into another galaxy.

Now to tie them into a mass relay system... (1)

noobermin (1950642) | more than 3 years ago | (#35396994)

nt

any evidence at all? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35397026)

Is there any evidence to support this hypothesis whatsoever? Or is this purely based on random scifi-based wishful thinking? The article seems to say "if you accept that A (which really has nothing to support it at all) is true, then B can also be true." Uhh, yeah.

Re:any evidence at all? (4, Insightful)

stardaemon (834177) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397088)

Which may be interesting if B also gives A, and B is testable.
Otherwise, not so much.

Re:any evidence at all? (2, Insightful)

ocean_soul (1019086) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397220)

This is strictly hypothetical, with no evidence whatsoever. This is totally not newsworthy because a) it is nothing new, the theoretical possibility of this is long known b) it is very unlikely that this hypotheses is true. This hypotheses is itself build on other, probably untrue, hypotheses and assumptions. (says a theoretical physicist)

Re:any evidence at all? (2)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397280)

Is there any evidence to support this hypothesis whatsoever? Or is this purely based on random scifi-based wishful thinking? The article seems to say "if you accept that A (which really has nothing to support it at all) is true, then B can also be true." Uhh, yeah.

Worse: It's "If you accept A (which not only has nothing to support it at all, but actually has strong theoretical reasons to assume to be false) is true, then it cannot be completely excluded that B could also be true."

Re:any evidence at all? (1)

tkprit (8581) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397542)

Exactly; it's sci-fi. I get my fill from ST reruns, not /. Sux.

Re:any evidence at all? (1)

boristhespider (1678416) | more than 3 years ago | (#35398790)

"If you accept A (which not only has nothing to support it at all, but actually has strong theoretical reasons to assume to be false)"

Given you appear to be talking about "phantom matter", care to back that up? Sure, it violates a couple of energy conditions but those energy conditions themselves are pretty arbitrary in the first place. "Phantom matter" is also known as "dark energy" and like it or not, there's a hell of a lot of support for something like dark energy. You have to be very clear about what you're objecting to if there's a lot of evidence -- observational evidence -- for something.

That said, do I believe any of this is actual physical reality? No, I don't.

perhaps (1)

chronoss2010 (1825454) | more than 3 years ago | (#35399688)

looking at where they think dark matter is by gravity you might think those are in fact a massive wormhole system?

Re:any evidence at all? (2)

sjames (1099) | more than 3 years ago | (#35400766)

There is none at all. It is just some interesting what if type speculation at the moment. It suggests a few things to look out for in the future, but we haven't seen any of them yet/

Re:any evidence at all? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35404458)

What is a 'Kyrgyz researcher' ?

Re:any evidence at all? (1)

ladoga (931420) | more than 3 years ago | (#35405452)

What is a 'Kyrgyz researcher' ?

It's a researcher who belongs into Turkic ethnic group that mainly resides in Kyrgystan.

You might know where Afghanistan is, Kyrgystan is about 100km (or 62miles) NE of it.

Re:any evidence at all? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35410726)

So it is not 'a researcher from the independent state of Kyrgyzstan' ?

Re:any evidence at all? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35412504)

You need matter with negative energy density to keep the thing open long enough for matter to pass through even at the speed of light; such stuff is hard to come by.

Chevron 7.... (3, Funny)

Blackout for Hungary (1970198) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397094)

Locked!

Kyrgyz Research (0)

dimethylxanthine (946092) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397098)

Although interesting, other scientists are skeptical, pointing out that this is highly speculative research.

While Kyrgyz have been very quite since the collapse of USSR (this is likely the first piece of research coming out of Kyrgyzstan I read), looks like they haven't been sitting idle. I guess other scientists aren't connected to nature in the way Kyrgyz researchers are.

Mongolian shamans have been able to communicate with spirits for millennia - what has western science achieved in all this time - Wireless? We're certainly not having the right things for breakfast when setting off to work??? I wonder if Einstein did his year abroad in Central Asia before coming up with TOGR.

Re:Kyrgyz Research (1)

chudnall (514856) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397252)

Although interesting, other scientists are skeptical, pointing out that this is highly speculative research.

Is there any evidence to support the assertion that the other scientists are interesting?

Re:Kyrgyz Research (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35397288)

Although interesting, other scientists are skeptical, pointing out that this is highly speculative research.

Is there any evidence to support the assertion that the other scientists are interesting?

You asked about them.

Q.E.D.

Daniel Jackson (2)

MoldySpore (1280634) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397136)

If only we could find Daniel Jackson, they'd be able to unlock the mystery of wormholes...and then our military can take over it just like they do everything else. ;) Even Stargate didn't dispute that fact!

Re:Daniel Jackson (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35397224)

Hey, I don't care who they put in charge, as long as they understand the merits of a proper quarantine procedure.

(About 90% of the Stargate episodes were "Oh noes! something bad came through the earth gate with an away team!!!")

Re:Daniel Jackson (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35397358)

It's more like 40% "Oh noes! something bad came through the earth gate with an away team!!!" and 40% "Oh noes! Someone in the away team got sick so we need to leave him in this unsafe place and invent a cure back on earth!!". These two are somewhat overlapping so in something like 35% of the episode something else.

Re:Daniel Jackson (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35397584)

We'll use it to search the galaxy for oil.

Of course Stella Wormholes exists! (1)

bagofbeans (567926) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397156)

In fact she married Bill Posters while he was in prison...

I speculate that... (1)

Proripper (1957670) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397206)

Isn't all research essentially speculative?

Alternative to cosmic inflation? (3, Interesting)

mangu (126918) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397282)

TFA says "Also, if the wormhole is short, so that the two stars it links don't lie far apart, an observer might see another unusual signpost -- two closely spaced objects with nearly identical properties."

However, the wormhole doesn't need to be short, which would mean regions of the universe far apart from each other would have similar properties if wormholes existed.

This would solve one of the big problems in modern cosmology, the horizon problem [wikipedia.org] : how can regions of the universe that couldn't possibly have communicated with each other in the lifetime of the universe have similar properties?

Re:Alternative to cosmic inflation? (2)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397914)

Given Inflation solves both the horizon problem and the flatness problem and it's predictions agree with a bunch of observations, and it's part of mainstream Big Bang theory; the horizon problem isn't really a problem anymore, and certainly doesn't need FTL travel via wormholes...

Re:Alternative to cosmic inflation? (1)

marcosdumay (620877) | more than 3 years ago | (#35399348)

"the horizon problem isn't really a problem anymore"

You are kidding, right? Ok, wormholes aren't a nice explanation, but...

Re:Alternative to cosmic inflation? (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 3 years ago | (#35400220)

It's explained by infation, so no it's not a huge problem for the mainstream theory.

Re:Alternative to cosmic inflation? (1)

Thing 1 (178996) | more than 3 years ago | (#35398210)

TFA says "Also, if the wormhole is short, so that the two stars it links don't lie far apart, an observer might see another unusual signpost -- two closely spaced objects with nearly identical properties."

However, the wormhole doesn't need to be short, which would mean regions of the universe far apart from each other would have similar properties if wormholes existed.

Oh, wormholes definitely exist; I see the birds picking at them outside my window. Yay spring!

Re:Alternative to cosmic inflation? (1)

warGod3 (198094) | more than 3 years ago | (#35398332)

"Also, if the wormhole is short, so that the two stars it links don't lie far apart, an observer might see another unusual signpost -- two closely spaced objects with nearly identical properties."

And the sign says "No gas for 1,000,000,000 miles" or "McDonalds ahead"?

Re:Alternative to cosmic inflation? (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 3 years ago | (#35399242)

"Also, if the wormhole is short, so that the two stars it links don't lie far apart, an observer might see another unusual signpost -- two closely spaced objects with nearly identical properties."

And the sign says "No gas for 1,000,000,000 miles" or "McDonalds ahead"?

The sign next to the wormhole leading to our solar system reads:

Quarantined Zone: Human Infestation.
Don't Panic!

All craft exiting this wormhole will be vaporized on sight.

Have a nice day, We apologize for the inconvenience
-- God

Re:Alternative to cosmic inflation? (1)

boristhespider (1678416) | more than 3 years ago | (#35398812)

... "would solve" is a very strong statement. "Might solve" would be closer, and you'd have to find a way of getting stars to form before the formation of the CMB, or for the rebalancing of the CMB between its formation and the present epoch to not fuck up the anisotropies, which are now very well observed and fit predictions from inflation to a very good degree.

Strange Matter (5, Interesting)

mbone (558574) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397336)

The original paper [arxiv.org] makes it clear that this, like every other wormhole solution in General Relativity, requires "strange matter" - in their case, "as exotic matter, a massless ghost scalar field has been chosen". The interesting thing is that it links two stars together in a way that may have observable consequences (material would flow from one star to the other to keep the pressure in the cores equal, which would change how the star would evolve from one in isolation).

Note that these wormholes require the "exotic matter" to exist, so it's a mistake to say that this proves they can exist or whatever, as there is no actual evidence for any of the strange or exotic matter possibilities required to support them.

Now, suppose that such exotic matter does exist. Could this be used for transportation by an advanced civilization ? Maybe. You would have to find a wormhole end point in orbit about a black hole, and wait (or engineer) for the star to expand and for the black hole to "eat" the star's gas. If that process could go to completion, voila !, a naked wormhole would be left, and, if that were stable, you could use it for transportation.

Figuring out the necessary black hole engineering to do this is left as an exercise for the reader.

Re:Strange Matter (1)

PPH (736903) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397952)

Figuring out the necessary black hole engineering to do this is left as an exercise for the reader.

But that's not required in order to file a patent on the process.

Re:Strange Matter (1)

mbone (558574) | more than 3 years ago | (#35398044)

I get to work on it right away, if you'll pay my attorney fees !

Re:Strange Matter (1)

PPH (736903) | more than 3 years ago | (#35398208)

You just tell me where they are circling and I'll throw the chum over the stern [youtube.com] .

Re:Strange Matter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35398578)

For this exotic matter, you probably need a star that is in a coherent state. So you'd have to find a star that has some attributes of a laser, and not just coherency of photons but of the matter inside.

So... Outside of a black hole where it's state is hard to observe because of the event horizon... My guess is that if you can find two fast-cycling pulsars that happen to be in otherwise unexplainable yet perfect synch, that would be a good candidate for a wormhole right there. Now whether or not you could exploit that and do anything with that is another question. Besides, if you have the technology to go inside or modify stars, wormholes might not be all that useful. (Because it's likely you'd have the means to quickly traverse vast distances of space with other more reliable methods.)

Re:Strange Matter (1)

Artifakt (700173) | more than 3 years ago | (#35399022)

It has a certain elegance - the black hole clears both ends of the wormhole so the exit is as usable as the entrance. It's also a very testable model - it predicts we would see some stars being gobbled up by black holes AND some stars being gobbled up by nothing at all.

Re:Strange Matter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35402372)

"Alright! We did it! We almost bankrupted the Federation, but we finally made a stable wormhole! So, where does it go?"

"Well, you end up at the border of a black hole and the heart of a sun..."

"..."

Re:Strange Matter (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 3 years ago | (#35404254)

the wormholes would have more profound effect once one of the stars collides with something else, no?

but how would the wormhole happen originally, spontaneously? why would the two stars be connected? that question doesn't go away even if you decide to use a magic property to explain the actual link, there's still the problem of the link happening in the first place or do they just ping to ether and see if a link occurs?

what the author has actually done, has been to invent a theory that could be used every time a star changes it's size in a nonstandard fashion. pretty clever in social aspect regard..

Re:Strange Matter (1)

mburns (246458) | more than 3 years ago | (#35412198)

Michio Kaku explains in his book, HYPERSPACE, that, in the theoretical construction, worm holes are the goal, and exotic matter is the deduced means or source of this effect. Unfortunately, both the source and the effect are contradictory to more fundamental properties of spacetime. Actually, superluminal spacial horizons do not have end points, they are conserved out to infinity by reason of the Bianchi identity, "The boundary of a boundary is zero". Exotic matter is likewise inconsistent; the negative mass is just fine, but its repulsion by ordinary gravitational fields is contrary to every other result of general relativity - the equivalence principle is broken for instance.

Stella Wombles? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35397354)

sheesh... I think I must be working to hard today... I read the headline as "Stellar Wombles May Exist".

Although, thinking about it those stellar wormholes would be great for getting rid of the rubbish on Wimbledon Common (-:

that joke was insightful (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397514)

"about the space ship mission to the sun, they were going to go at night". no wonder we never heard from them, they went through the worm hole, (and got worms)

why not call them lifespheres? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35397522)

as we have absolutely no definitive concrete concept of the process/evolution/time/space/circumstance even of who/where we are right
?here? this second? there appears to be a remarkable absence of fear becoming available as never (seen by us) before, as we (hopefully, most of us) move (may as well, everything else is) to the next 'level' of this ever-expanding 'situation'?

it would also appear that there are some elements of 'society' that would prefer that we resign ourselves to triviality & discomfort, prior to dying prematurely, stuff like that. that's not what's happening at the million baby+ play-dates etc... no need to doubt/fear/thank them, they believe they were created for us/this time of transition, & remain hopeful that we will fail to 'moof it' for ourselves/them.

observation (1)

Redshift64 (1900594) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397756)

Assuming they exist, I wonder if they'd be more likely to form between binary stars. If not, then pairs might as well be between galaxies; making the phenomenon exceedingly difficult to find.

Who is keeping score? (2)

aristotle-dude (626586) | more than 3 years ago | (#35397930)

So far, scientists have invented the following imaginary forms of matter/energy in an attempt to prop up their failed models and understanding in recent times: Dark Matter, Dark Energy and now Phantom Matter. They have also created concepts like cosmic strings, branes and a multiverse. We don't have the technology to test for or detect any of those things. Isn't anyone else bothered by this? We all laugh at the idea of "ether" now but why are so many ready to accept these new invented types of matter/energy?

It seems to me that if these scientist were interested in pursuing intellectual honesty, they would admit that the models are broken and go back to the drawing board rather that trying to create something out of thin air.

I find it ironic that people on the internet these days like to put down faith and god but seem to completely miss that these scientists making shit up and you are just accepting it as fact.

Re:Who is keeping score? (2)

PPH (736903) | more than 3 years ago | (#35398006)

'Doing the math' on such hypothetical forms of matter allows scientists to make testable predictions about them. Then, if someone should see a bizarre new particle in an accelerator they'll recognize it as possibly satisfying the hypothesis.

At least it will allow them to make predictions about the size and power of the next big accelerator needed to settle the question and allow the hunt for funding to commence.

Re:Who is keeping score? (1)

mbone (558574) | more than 3 years ago | (#35398026)

This work has nothing to do with dark matter or dark energy (at least, as far as we know).

The model may be broken, but pursuing unusual solutions of the field equations assuming materials with unusual properties is not evidence for it.

Re:Who is keeping score? (1)

boristhespider (1678416) | more than 3 years ago | (#35398898)

Well, to be fair, this "phantom matter" is something that looks suspiciously like a dark energy. It's just a fluid violating an energy condition. If you read the original paper, they even use dark energy as the first motivating example -- although the matter they choose to employ is something that wouldn't normally be used as a dark energy because it's a "ghost" field and can cause some major problems with stability.

Re:Who is keeping score? (1)

mbone (558574) | more than 3 years ago | (#35399008)

Yes, but this mathematics is really more like the equivalent of mathematical physicists playing with Legos. They are not trying to fix anything, they are postulating wild and crazy stuff and asking, what can we make of it ?

Re:Who is keeping score? (1)

jouassou (1854178) | more than 3 years ago | (#35403640)

I'm all out of mod points, but this should certainly be +5 insightful.

Nobody is saying that stellar wormholes exist in our universe. They mathematically create a hypothetical universe in which exotic matter forms does exist, and then go on to unravel the possible implications this might have. In addition to unraveling the possible consequences of existing hypotheses, some of which might prove testable at our current or near-future technology level, the work is interesting in it's own right. And the important thing is that I bet they're doing all of this out of sheer curiosity.

tl;dr: the job of a hypothetical physicist, if you will, is to discover all the cool consequences of wild (but possible) hypotheses. And they're doing it for the lulz.

Re:Who is keeping score? (1)

boristhespider (1678416) | more than 3 years ago | (#35404226)

Yes, except their motivation for saying that exotic matter exists is the widely-accepted notion that dark energy exists -- and much as you may dislike it (and I'm no fan myself, as a quick browse through my comments on slashdot would reveal), there is some very strong evidence that *something* of the sort has to exist. So let's take that evidence, which is both observational and theoretical, and assume that there's some basis behind it. That's the very nature of science: make repeated observations, use them to build a predictive theory, test those predictions and then use it to make further predictions. We've done the repeated observations part (from various cosmological observations), made predictions (specifically the location of the baryon acoustic oscillations in the large-scale structure) and seen them validated. All these guys are doing is saying "OK, so dark energy appeals to be real. If we assume it's not a cosmological constant -- and no-one likes the idea of making it a cosmological constant if there's a dynamical alternative -- then we've got a type of matter that violates the weak energy condition. There has been work studying matter that violates the null energy condition, and it fits cosmological observations, so let's apply it to the interior of stars and see what effects you get."

Yes, of course it's speculative. Mainstream cosmology doesn't employ this type of matter because it's very contentious. Even so, it *has* been used in cosmology and hasn't violated any observations, only encountered theoretical prejudice. So it's a valid thing to do to apply it to different situations. They just picked a situation that's of intrinsic interest -- wormholes. And that's only natural.

My point isn't really to argue, it's to point out that it's not as wild and crazy as it seems -- it is, somewhat, since they're deliberately choosing ghost fields, but that's not something new. They've been studied for a very long time. So they've taken something that's been applied to physics and applied it to a new field to see if there are any predictions they can make. Sounds fair enough to me.

Re:Who is keeping score? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35398288)

So far, false skeptics and humanities graduates love to proclaim that scientists believe wholly and faithfully in postulates that cover known discrepancies in current ("failed") models, such as that failure known as the "Standard Model", useless for predicting nuclear as well as gravitational interactions. These skeptics have also created novel and progressive concepts such as "we shouldn't accept these new models of reality" and "I feel bothered that other people are thinking about d-branes".

It seems to me that if these rational thinkers were interested in pursuing intellectual honesty, they would admit that their explanations are toothless and should go back to creating something on a board instead of creating something out of thin air.

I find it ironic that people on the internet liken faith in god to holding any kind of belief or opinion whatever. It just feels like they are making shit up, but they really do accept that.

Re:Who is keeping score? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35398782)

It seems to me that if these scientist were interested in pursuing intellectual honesty, they would admit that the models are broken and go back to the drawing board rather that trying to create something out of thin air.

So instead of seeing there was a problem, and coming up with news ideas, scientists need to see there is a problem and come up with new ideas? Scientists did go back to the drawing board, came up with a bunch of ideas, some of which were dark matter and dark energy. Most attempts at new ideas can't even explain data that old models fit, let alone address the new problems being found. Of the new ideas, dark matter and dark energy does the best at explaining current data, but there are still a lot of other scientists working on other ideas in case they end up doing better. I find it funny how people complain scientists came up with dark matter instead of coming up with a new theory, when dark matter is a new theory.

*You* might laugh at the idea of ether... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35398840)

...I won't dare to laugh at this man [wikipedia.org] .

The Lorentz equations, born within ether theory, bloomed later handsomely within special relativity. Same formulae, slightly different interpretation.

That's how scientific progress work.

Re:Who is keeping score? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35399038)

You seem to be under the impression that scientists should completely finish and prove a theory of everything, before coming out of their scientist-lairs and talking to honest, hardworking, law-abiding citizens about what they're doing. That could take a while... (if not forever)

Meanwhile, in the real world, scientists talk about what they're working on. And the fact that they're working on it, is usually a sign that it still needs work :)
Maybe you could take the time to look up WHY they talk about (and work on) all these "crazy" things?
The real reasons are much more interesting than "just making stuff up", "intellectual dishonesty" or "putting down faith and god"....

Re:Who is keeping score? (1)

ShooterNeo (555040) | more than 3 years ago | (#35399984)

You forgot virtual particles (which arise from the ether)

Modern physics still has an ether : the catch is that ether puts an absolute speed limit on things due to the limited refresh rate of the simulation engine running our universe.

Re:Who is keeping score? (1)

Latinhypercube (935707) | more than 3 years ago | (#35400238)

Agreed. It's wacky. All that is necessary is a modified understanding of Gravity (MOND) to wipe out all this 'dark' hocus pocus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOND [wikipedia.org]

Re:Who is keeping score? (1)

amRadioHed (463061) | more than 3 years ago | (#35401480)

Why do you laugh at the idea of "ether"? It's wrong but it was a perfectly reasonable theory at the time. I don't see anything laughable about it.

Re:Who is keeping score? (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 3 years ago | (#35402452)

You're hilarious. We can, and are, looking for dark matter, both as indirect observations and directly. We have indirectly observed dark energy. "Phantom matter?" You mean the stuff they're talking about in the article? That's not exactly "scientists" talking. It's some guys with an interesting hypothetical situation they're playing with.

You clearly don't understand what you're criticizing, and very likely don't want to.

Re:Who is keeping score? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35403034)

Most of us don't put down faith and God. We put down people who use faith and God as an excuse to run other peoples' lives, destroy education, and condemn critical thinking. We do that gladly and will keep on doing so, no matter how much made up crap about science and scientists such people like to spew. Science has a flaw: sometimes the people working at it are wrong. Science has one saving grace: things can be proven. This stuff isn't even close to proven yet, and it may be proven wrong, but given certain religious people's reaction to other controversial stuff that has been proven, I'm not sure that matters so much. The last 30+ years have pretty much proven that a lot of people have an agenda to construct a totally fact-free society, and we're paying for it big time now.

Captain: (1)

pubwvj (1045960) | more than 3 years ago | (#35398070)

Folks please place your trays in the upright position and fasten your seat belts as we dive into the sun. We'll be transiting to Sirius IV via wormhole gate 12993. Weather at our destination is 1.32 million degrees Kelvin. Have a good flight!

No subsidies! (1)

bth (635955) | more than 3 years ago | (#35398156)

Congress will immediately begin cutting the budget for all intra-stellar mass transit.

Re:No subsidies! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35399616)

But, but... how will we get to Mars when climate change and pollution makes Earth uninhabitable?

Re:No subsidies! (1)

bth (635955) | more than 3 years ago | (#35399662)

Leave it to the private sector.

Reminds me of Hoagland. (1)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 3 years ago | (#35399084)

Anyone ever read crackpots for fun? I've read Richard Hoagland's website a few times over the years, for laughs, and this sounds like the same type of "hyper-dimensional" bullshit that he claims to have "discovered". I love science, but this type of bullshit has to go. Unless there is some observation they've made, or some data they can point to, this isn't much different than Hoagland just making shit up.

Re:Reminds me of Hoagland. (1)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 3 years ago | (#35399906)

I just did :)

May favorite thing mentioned so far, "Nazis in space".

I can't help but remember Jews in Space from Mel Brooks movies and wonder if there is not some epic space battles happening up there right now. Oy Vey!

Re:Reminds me of Hoagland. (2)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 3 years ago | (#35402458)

They've used their model to predict observable effects. That's the way science works. Someone comes up with a crazy idea and someone figures out how to test whether it's real or not. The difference with the crackpots is that they either a) don't have models that will ever make actual predictions or b) refuse to believe evidence that their predictions are incorrect.

hoax (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35402630)

This is obviously a hoax. Who's dumb enough to believe there's a place called Kyrgyz? That's just nonsense.

True Blood Seasons 1-3 DVD Boxset (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35403376)

True Blood is an American television drama series created and produced by Alan Ball.The series follows Sookie Stackhouse, a barmaid living in Louisiana who can read people's minds, and how her life is turned upside down when the Vampire Bill, walks into her place of employment two years after vampires 'came out of the coffin' on national television..

Leading Role: Chris Bauer, Anna Paquin, Stephen Moyer, Sam Trammell, Ryan Kwanten, Rutina Wesley, Jim Parrack, Carrie Preston

Director: Alan Ball
Screenshots from True Blood Seasons 1-3 DVD Boxset in maxdvdshop.com
http://www.maxdvdshop.com/true-blood-seasons-13-dvd-boxset-p-127.html

Fantasy? (1)

Internetuser1248 (1787630) | more than 3 years ago | (#35404188)

Can anyone explain to me the difference between 'highly speculative research' and pseudoscience? Apart from acceptance by the scientific community as being deserving of funds I am having trouble differentiating them.

Re:Fantasy? (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 3 years ago | (#35404296)

pseudoscience: oprah.
speculative research: research fund applications.
but you forgot: none of this speculative pseudostuff actually needs any money. why do you think quartz crystals are used as soulmate crystals and not diamonds? cheaper. writing theories on paper about magic matter needs you only to have someone to pay your food and some paper. kyrgyz might not have social security, but the university probably functions as one

"physicist Vladimir Folomeev of the Institute of Physicotechnical Problems and Material Science in the Kyrgyz Republic and his colleagues" - probably they thought when setting up the place that physicists would actually work with something physical. but now the team can say that they were featured on american science news channel... whilst their work would be more at home at a scifi literature fair.

Re:Fantasy? (1)

Internetuser1248 (1787630) | more than 3 years ago | (#35417416)

I asked for an explanation of the difference, not two examples. I can furnish examples on my own. I also would like to point out that crystals are not a good example of pseudoscience as they are used for hundreds of valid scientific uses, eg. digital clocks, record players, cigarette lighters. Sure some people do crazy things with them but people also stab other people with ice picks, this does not invalidate the field of surgical medicine. Crystals have many amazing properties that we don't understand well, this is scientific fact. Does anyone here have an actual way to tell the difference between speculative science and pseudoscience?
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?