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!

Could We Find a Door To A Parallel Universe?

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the alternate-me-is-posting-this-in-esperanto dept.

Space 327

p1234 writes "Though no direct evidence for wormholes has been observed, this could be because they are disguised as black holes. Now Alexander Shatskiy of the Lebedev Physical Institute in Moscow, Russia, is suggesting a possible way to tell the two kinds of object apart. His idea assumes the existence of a bizarre substance called "phantom matter", which has been proposed to explain how wormholes might stay open. Phantom matter has negative energy and negative mass, so it creates a repulsive effect that prevents the wormhole closing. 'US expert Dr Lawrence Krauss, from Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, points out that the idea rests on untested assumptions. He told New Scientist magazine: "It is an interesting attempt to actually think of what a real signature for a wormhole would be, but it is more hypothetical than observational. Without any idea of what phantom matter is and its possible interactions with light, it is not clear one can provide a general argument."'"

cancel ×

327 comments

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

No parrallel universe (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22283558)

Only a parrallel part of the multiverse

The only universe that exists is the one you're in (1)

FromTheAir (938543) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284184)

For a universe to be actualized it must be experienced, that requires an observer and the one reading this, well you are the one. I always thought the universe included everything any way how can you have two different sets equal to the same everything? Matter does not really exist. It is an appearance and quite the mysterious magic trick, to create something solid out of nothing, there is no greater feat. http://i----i.org/The_Book_What_Is_The_Secret/The_Book_What_is_The_Secret.htm [i----i.org] as it says there "The trick is not to respond to the illusion but the reality behind it."

Yes, it's called the "portal" (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22283564)

Geesh, this isn't new news, it happened back in the 1960's... as I recall it was on stardate 3134.0
we sent a captain, a doctor, and a scientist through the portal. Geesh, people have been talking about it for 40 years now.

Re:Yes, it's called the "portal" (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22283680)

Right, and they killed Joan Collins, but she still somehow made it back to be in more TV shows. So I guess things done in the portal stay in the portal, right?

the way we lay waste to this planet/universe (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22283572)

it would not be surprising to find the 'doors' to other worlds closed to us. let yOUR conscience be yOUR guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. there are still some choices. if they do not suit you, consider the likely results of continuing to follow the corepirate nazi hypenosys story LIEn, whereas anything of relevance is replaced almost instantly with pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking propaganda or 'celebrity' trivia 'foam'. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on yOUR brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071229/ap_on_sc/ye_climate_records;_ylt=A0WTcVgednZHP2gB9wms0NUE [yahoo.com]
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080108/ts_alt_afp/ushealthfrancemortality;_ylt=A9G_RngbRIVHsYAAfCas0NUE [yahoo.com]
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon1.html?em&ex=1199336400&en=c4b5414371631707&ei=5087%0A [nytimes.com]

is it time to get real yet? A LOT of energy is being squandered in attempts to keep US in the dark. in the end (give or take a few 1000 years), the creators will prevail (world without end, etc...), as it has always been. the process of gaining yOUR release from the current hostage situation may not be what you might think it is. butt of course, most of US don't know, or care what a precarious/fatal situation we're in. for example; the insidious attempts by the felonious corepirate nazi execrable to block the suns' light, interfering with a requirement (sunlight) for us to stay healthy/alive. it's likely not good for yOUR health/memories 'else they'd be bragging about it? we're intending for the whoreabully deceptive (they'll do ANYTHING for a bit more monIE/power) felons to give up/fail even further, in attempting to control the 'weather', as well as a # of other things/events.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=video+cloud+spraying [google.com]

dictator style micro management has never worked (for very long). it's an illness. tie that with life0cidal aggression & softwar gangster style bullying, & what do we have? a greed/fear/ego based recipe for disaster. meanwhile, you can help to stop the bleeding (loss of life & limb);

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/28/vermont.banning.bush.ap/index.html [cnn.com]

the bleeding must be stopped before any healing can begin. jailing a couple of corepirate nazi hired goons would send a clear message to the rest of the world from US. any truthful look at the 'scorecard' would reveal that we are a society in decline/deep doo-doo, despite all of the scriptdead pr ?firm? generated drum beating & flag waving propaganda that we are constantly bombarded with. is it time to get real yet? please consider carefully ALL of yOUR other 'options'. the creators will prevail. as it has always been.

corepirate nazi execrable costs outweigh benefits
(Score:-)mynuts won, the king is a fink)
by ourselves on everyday 24/7

as there are no benefits, just more&more death/debt & disruption. fortunately there's an 'army' of light bringers, coming yOUR way. the little ones/innocents must/will be protected. after the big flash, ALL of yOUR imaginary 'borders' may blur a bit? for each of the creators' innocents harmed in any way, there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/us, as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile, will not be available. 'vote' with (what's left in) yOUR wallet, & by your behaviors. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious corepirate nazi glowbull warmongering execrable. some of US should consider ourselves somewhat fortunate to be among those scheduled to survive after the big flash/implementation of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate. it's right in the manual, 'world without end', etc.... as we all ?know?, change is inevitable, & denying/ignoring gravity, logic, morality, etc..., is only possible, on a temporary basis. concern about the course of events that will occur should the life0cidal execrable fail to be intervened upon is in order. 'do not be dismayed' (also from the manual). however, it's ok/recommended, to not attempt to live under/accept, fauxking nazi felon greed/fear/ego based pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking hypenosys.

consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."

meanwhile, the life0cidal philistines continue on their path of death, debt, & disruption for most of US. gov. bush denies health care for the little ones;

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/03/bush.veto/index.html [cnn.com]

whilst demanding/extorting billions to paint more targets on the bigger kids;

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/12/bush.war.funding/index.html [cnn.com]

& pretending that it isn't happening here;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article3086937.ece [timesonline.co.uk]
all is not lost/forgotten/forgiven

(yOUR elected) president al gore (deciding not to wait for the much anticipated 'lonesome al answers yOUR questions' interview here on /.) continues to attempt to shed some light on yOUR foibles. talk about reverse polarity;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3046116.ece [timesonline.co.uk]

Re:the way we lay waste to this planet/universe (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22284230)

"your" is written "your" not "yOUR", note the case, you schizo fuck.

Sorry guys, can't resist (4, Funny)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283574)

In Soviet Russia, the door to a parallel universe finds us.

Most useless press release ever (5, Insightful)

Wonko the Sane (25252) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283576)

How about publicizing actual discoveries instead of random speculation?

Re:Most useless press release ever (5, Funny)

An. (Coward) (258552) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283640)

Evidence schmevidence, I for one won't believe in any of this black hole nonsense until I actually see one.

Re:Most useless press release ever (5, Funny)

PinkPanther (42194) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283832)

I for one won't believe in any of this black hole nonsense until I actually see one

I was going to post a Google Images link, but without SafeSearch the result list isn't exactly what you might expect...

Re:Most useless press release ever (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22283852)

Actually, you have to go to page 3 of the results to find anything even remotely untoward.

Re:Most useless press release ever (3, Funny)

omega_dk (1090143) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283916)

Maybe with *your* saved search history. What? Google has to use the information they save from your browsing somehow :-)

Re:Most useless press release ever (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22283892)

You lied to us.

Yes, I was bored enough to go and search.

Re:Most useless press release ever (1)

Fuzzums (250400) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283946)

It it were true, it would be [+1 funny] material.

Re:Most useless press release ever (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22284236)

No, it's funny anyway. It may not be literally true, but it is truthful about ourselves as human beings.

Re:Most useless press release ever (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22283898)

Thanks to Hawking radiation, you can.

Re:Most useless press release ever (4, Funny)

ptbarnett (159784) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284056)

Evidence schmevidence, I for one won't believe in any of this black hole nonsense until I actually see one.

Warning! Do not look into black hole with remaining eye!

http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20080131 [userfriendly.org]

Re:Most useless press release ever (1)

vbraga (228124) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284144)

What should I say?

"The tampon! They do nothing!"?

Re:Most useless press release ever (2, Funny)

HAKdragon (193605) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284136)

Lionel Hutz: We have a lot of hearsay and conjecture. Those are kinds of evidence.

Re:Most useless press release ever (1)

Fluffy_Kitten (911430) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283874)

The work of Stephen Hawking is useless schmuck too I suppose.

Re:Most useless press release ever (1)

Wonko the Sane (25252) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284008)

There may be a new type of matter which could hold open wormholes (which might exist), and maybe they would look like black holes.

STOP THE PRESSES!

Seriously, the time for a press release would be when you have something concrete, like some way to test any of these speculations: "I predict that if a black hole has (observable property), then it is actually a wormhole" or "We could determine if phantom matter exists by doing experiment foo"

Re:Most useless press release ever (5, Insightful)

farkus888 (1103903) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283962)

this post being modded insightful bothers me, because it is actually a perfect example of having no insight into the situation.

1. Define the question
2. Gather information and resources (observe)
3. Form hypothesis
4. Perform experiment and collect data
5. Analyze data
6. Interpret data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypothesis
7. Publish results
8. Retest (frequently done by other scientists)

taken from wikipedia those are the steps of the scientific method. I remember them from middle school, so I imagine most of this crowd should have been over them at some point. This article is a perfect example of step 3 in my opinion. step 2 is all of the already observed behavior of matter in the universe. here in step three we form a hypothesis about some detail that is unexplained or not understood. step 4, which these people have not gotten too yet, is to figure out a method to perform tests to prove or disprove their hypothesis and perform those tests. then they will analyze the results of their test, step 5. skipping over this step would leave them with no direction to take in their research, so they would probably never figure out anything.

Re:Most useless press release ever (2, Insightful)

Wonko the Sane (25252) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284058)

I'm just saying that "I have an idea, but have no clue how to test it yet" is a little premature for a press release

Re:Most useless press release ever (3, Insightful)

farkus888 (1103903) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284114)

"I have an idea, but have no clue how to test it yet" is a perfect time to spread the word that you are looking for anyone with an idea how to test.

Re:Most useless press release ever (2, Insightful)

Skevin (16048) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284110)

And speaking of random speculation, I've often wondered why in media, a "parallel universe" is often assumed to be similar our own. Not in terms of having evil twins of everything, but rather, similar enough to even pay a visit.

I actually do believe in parallel universes (given that our own material space is but a single brane along higher dimensions), but I highly doubt that the laws of physics that exist in a parallel universe (or even a brane at a different "angle") would be similar enough to our own to allow for even a few femtoseconds of experience in the new world. Stephen Hawking's Brief History of Time alludes to the laws of physics as we know it being formed *during* the Big Bang... does that mean the laws of physics may have been completely different *before* the BB? (Yeah, I know, there's really no such thing as "before the Big Bang".)

It would only take a single change in almost any behavior of physics (e.g., electrons attract instead of repel) to make anything passing through such a "door" immediately disintegrate on the atomic level.

That having been said, if anyone is still interested in visiting any alternate universes with no foresight to what I just said above, I'm constructing a machine that projects a large, vertical plane of annihilative energy (roughly circle-shaped) in my backyard - I'm calling it Darwin's portal. Just pay me five bucks and step right in...

Solomon

Re:Most useless press release ever (2, Insightful)

Joe Tie. (567096) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284212)

I've often wondered why in media, a "parallel universe" is often assumed to be similar our own.

The extent of most science reporters education in science doesn't extend very far beyond star trek and sliders.

Sounds like science fiction (5, Insightful)

geek (5680) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283584)

It's like proving something exists buy using something that doesn't exist. I admire the guys imagination though. Just seems like he wants it to exist so he's making it so. IMHO science should be about working with the facts, which isn't what's going on here.

Re:Sounds like science fiction (1)

rucs_hack (784150) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283714)

Hmm, something that looks like a black hole, and acts like a black hole, might be a wormhole to a parallel universe?

Seems to me that if its identical in most respects to a black hole, its probably, y'know, a hole of the blackish persuasion, other universe or not.

Even if, in some fanciful way, they were usable, what good would it do us?

First off, the closest black hole is pretty far off.

Secondly, about that other universe, if it had different laws of physics, we couldn't exist there anyway.

Therefore, I say we call wormholes blackholes, and stay the hell away from them.

Re:Sounds like science fiction (1)

EmotionToilet (1083453) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283794)

It's theoretical physics. Isn't that more of an oxymoron in itself? Theoretical observation? It just shows how little we actually know about the universe.

Re:Sounds like science fiction (1)

vertinox (846076) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283876)

"It's like proving something exists buy using something that doesn't exist."

To be fair, if you can prove something doesn't exist or isn't true, then you can assume another theory is the more probable scenario. However, one must be opened minded that the next best possible scenario also might be proven to be false eventually as well.

Actually, I think most of astronomy and quantum physics is basically about what you can prove isn't true rather than what you can prove true mostly for the fact that we are limited to how little we can observe at really large and small scales. Its not like a researcher can get an exacto knife and split atoms into their core parts for view under a microscope or ask his assistant to run to the nearest neighbor galaxy to pick up a sample of dark mater. The best they can do is say "Well... We know its not that!" and cross it off an almost infinite list of theories.

Science Fiction has tended to become reality (1)

FromTheAir (938543) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283924)

Science Fiction has tended to become reality. It has been said Those things we thought to be fiction became reality. Those things we thought to be true were realized to be fictions.

Re:Sounds like science fiction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22283936)

I admire the guys imagination though. Just seems like he wants it to exist so he's making it so. IMHO science should be about working with the facts, which isn't what's going on here.

I'll let someone else do the talking for me:
"Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited , whereas imagination embraces the entire world, stimulating progress, giving birth to evolution." Albert Einstein

Re:Sounds like science fiction (1)

glwtta (532858) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283974)

Just seems like he wants it to exist so he's making it so.

That's theoretical physics for you. If this catches people's imaginations, 50 years from now Phantom Matter will be treated as fact by most people, just like all the other made up "matters" we have now.

Re:Sounds like science fiction (1)

XorNand (517466) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284078)

Sounds like science fiction. It's like proving something exists buy using something that doesn't exist.
No, it sounds more like the US federal government to me.

Re:Sounds like science fiction (1)

discontinuity (792010) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284080)

It's like proving something exists buy using something that doesn't exist. I admire the guys imagination though. Just seems like he wants it to exist so he's making it so. IMHO science should be about working with the facts, which isn't what's going on here.

Actually, science advances through the interplay between theory and observation (what you're calling "facts"). The general MO is that a theory (sometimes more than one) is popularized and people make lots of observations that either disprove or fail to disprove the theory. Whenever an observation contradicts a theory, then a bunch of people go scrambling for a new theory. However, there really is no requirement that a theory be confined to previously observed observation (which, to me, is more like "fitting a model to the data" rather than coming up with a new theory). In fact, the only requirement to make it scientific is that it leads to testable (i.e., contradictable) hypotheses. I admit I have no idea whether this guy's ideas will turn out to be testable, but that's all that would be required for it to be science.

Not a door, but a brdige (1)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283586)

The Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky bridge allows you to travel between universes. Just to mess with the timer.

Sqrt(Negative energy) = head hurts (4, Interesting)

G4from128k (686170) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283614)

IANAP, but most "energy" variables can be thought of as the square of some other physical properties (kinetic energy is related to velocity squared, electrical energy is related to voltage or current squared, etc.) So to get "negative energy", it would seem that we need imaginary (as in the number i = sqrt(-1) ) values of velocity, voltage, current, etc. So now my brain hurts (and the real physicists on slashdot can enjoy ripping me to shreds or educating me as is their wont)

Re:Sqrt(Negative energy) = head hurts (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22283952)

You don't even need to be a physicist for that - being an electrical engineer is enough. Things like imaginary current etc. *do* appear in electrics; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imaginary_part [wikipedia.org] for instance.

Re:Sqrt(Negative energy) = head hurts (2, Interesting)

bheekling (976077) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284164)

Imaginary numbers are used purely as a mathematical device, and do not point to anything tangible or real.

You could replace "i" everywhere with "sqrt(-1)" and everything would be the same. The fact that sqrt(-1) has no meaning in the physical world says nothing about using it to find a real answer; as long as the answer doesn't *contain* sqrt(-1). In fact, using imaginary numbers in calculations is very similar to using vectors.

The concept of negative energy OTOH, is not a mathematical device, and is *expected* to point to something "real".

However, the OP's claim that energy can be thought of as a square of some physical property and hence cannot be negative is purely deduction from example (hence with no basis), and does not contradict anything. Infact, a form of energy called potential energy is very often negative in calculations since it is a purely relative quantity.

Then again, I should mention that potential energy is also a mathematical device (with a vague physical counterpart), as are all other forms of "energy". *grin*

Re:Sqrt(Negative energy) = head hurts (3, Interesting)

jonnyfish (224288) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283982)

Negative kinetic energy happens all the time in quantum mechanics. That's what tunneling is. In classical physics, the total energy is E=T+V, where T is the kinetic energy and V is the potential energy. In tunneling, a particle can pass through a "barrier" where V>E, so that the kinetic energy E-V is negative.

I still think the claims in the article are ridiculous though.

Re:Sqrt(Negative energy) = head hurts (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22284120)

There are no imaginary numbers in physics when it comes down to measuring an actual physical quantity. Imaginary numbers are just convenient constructs that make the mathematical treatment of the subject matter simpler, but the same analysis can be done using real numbers.

Re:Sqrt(Negative energy) = head hurts (3, Interesting)

rasputin465 (1032646) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284242)

IAAP, although not in this field (and actually I don't know anything about "phantom matter"). The idea of imaginary physical quantities isn't actually as forbidden as you might think. The best example I can think of are tachyons [wikipedia.org] . Non-physicists invariably hear about these particles in sci-fi (I seem to recall multiple references to them in star trek), but actually a number of current theories predict their existence. They are particles that travel faster than the speed of light, which means that their rest mass is imaginary. You need not worry, however, because they never travel slower than the speed of light. One example, supersymmetery [wikipedia.org] , predicts a number of particles whose mass^2 is positive at high energies (read: very soon after the big bang), but goes negative at lower energies; hence their rest mass is imaginary and are tachyons.

Less esoterically, in the realm of electronics, the electrical impedance of capacitors and inductors is imaginary. However, one could argue that this is just a mathematical trick to aid computations.

I might also note (and probably other commenters have too) that Lawrence Krauss, who's mentioned in the summary, is the author of the famous The Physics of Star Trek [amazon.com] , which is a great read.

What a Ride! (1)

AndGodSed (968378) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283616)

I bet the first guy ever to actually attempt riding through a wormhole will have the ride of his LIFE. Remember Farscape?

Re:What a Ride! (2, Funny)

kylben (1008989) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283858)

Yeah, but he should do it in a barrel, from the Canadian side.

Phantom matter (1, Informative)

PolarBearFire (1176791) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283634)

"His idea assumes the existence of a bizarre substance called "phantom matter"" I propose this mysterious matter is actually the facial hair from our evil counterparts in the parallel universe.

It's the Beard. (4, Funny)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283636)

"possible way to tell the two kinds of object apart"

It's the beard. We've known this for some time.

Re:It's the Beard. (1)

ilikepi314 (1217898) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283812)

I think that only works on telling the good object from the evil object.

What if they're both good?!??!?! (or both evil)

what's up with that? (0)

ILuvRamen (1026668) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283642)

Why would they make up the opposite of gravity when, if I'm not mistaken, the other 3 forces in the universe are capable of pushing and pulling. Wouldn't it be simpler to just say one of those is responsible? Anyway, I read a while ago that the singularity of a black hole makes such a dent in space that it goes right through to somewhere else. But of course you can't go in one cuz you'll get destroyed. But since the singularity is infinitely small but large enough to exist, it doesn't have a measurable radius. So if particles all spin into it in the same direction, it will rotate it faster and faster and theoretically spin faster than the speed of light since you can't say "oh well, the outside edge is traveling at ____ speed" because it doesn't really have an outside edge to measure rotational speed at a given point. And somehow they think when that happens, it's no longer capable of emitting gravity. So my point is, if there's a particle created inside a black hole that generates the opposite of gravity and it's still emitting gravity, it will still be too violent to get near. And if it stopped emitting gravity, the opposing "spread out" force would blow the thing up, especially since it's spinning so fast. With no inward force and all outward force, it would just spread out and dissolve or whatever. So no matter what, we're probably not going to be able to use a black hole as a useful wormhole. We're gonna have to build a stargate and dial it up!

Re:what's up with that? (1)

kryten_nl (863119) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283822)

Couldn't you just have posted a reference to some obscure work of Sci-Fi? That would have made more sense.

Gravity is a property of space not matter (1)

FromTheAir (938543) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284072)

Gravity is a property of space not matter, at least that is part of the

(R)evelation, (Our) Evolution

Physics too much like Star Trek (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22283644)

It seems more and more that they are inventing some new form of matter-energy every time observation doesn't match theory.

Dark matter, dark energy, and now phantom matter.

Re:Physics too much like Star Trek (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22284064)

Just wait until they get some of the other Star Trek things: Quantum Filaments, Vidrion Particles, Subspace, Soliton Waves, Kreiger Radiation, Tetrions, and many many more...

I've got dibs on the quantum torpedoes though. I've got me some tourorists (yes, people sightseeing who drive too slow) that I need to shoot on the freeway.

Phantom Matter == Exotic Matter? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22283658)

Phantom matter? Why invent a new name for something that's already been thought about, called Exotic Matter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exotic_matter/ [wikipedia.org] ? Probably should read the article... ;-)

If you're really interested try this book by Kip Thorne:

K.S. Thorne, Black Holes and Time Warps: Einstein's Outrageous Legacy (W.W. Norton & Company, New York, 1994).

Re:Phantom Matter == Exotic Matter? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22283726)

You've already gone and made the point I intended to make Mr. Anonymous Coward, as soon as I saw "His idea assumes the existence of a bizarre substance called "phantom matter", which has been proposed to explain how wormholes might stay open" I thought "Isn't that something that's already been thought of and called exotic matter?" Then I come to find you've already stolen my thunder by making your post.

You did screw up your Wikipedia link to Exotic matter [wikipedia.org] so I fixed it for you.

Re:Phantom Matter == Exotic Matter? (1)

tloh (451585) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283950)

sounds about right:

....."phantom matter", would have negative energy and negative mass, causing it to exert a repulsive effect.
It would be identical to the qualities that Kip Thorne postulated.

Matter does not really exist. (1)

FromTheAir (938543) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284092)

Matter does not really exist. It is an appearance and quite the mysterious magic trick, to create something solid out of nothing, there is no greater feat by nature.

Assume away, pal... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22284226)

Right, and if I just "assume the existence" of a bizarre substance called "Flubber," then I can fly!

Directly from MacSLash ... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22283668)

Caroline Merchiers writes "According to The GayMen Observer, 40% of men are represented by 'switcheurs'. It would be safe to assume that another portion of GayMen are made by users new to gay men entirely. Last time I checked, GayMen come with a rather bare bones instruction manual, if they come with anything at all. While most of us feel our man is designed so well, it is self documenting, not all users have such an easy time. Man Help made it's first post on January 06th 2008, in an effort to guide a new user though the process of becoming proficient with gay men. Most of the readers here on MacSlash probably are well beyond these types of tutorials. That being the case, we feel the site is a great starting point for new users. Rather than pulling your hair out trying to teach basic concepts to whoever you convinced to buy a GayMan, just send them our way." Kinda' weird that a site for new GayMen users uses the geekiest and most obscure Gay-related mascot, Anusley. (Also, my personal favorite mascot ever. )

Does any of this matter really matter? (4, Funny)

Stanislav_J (947290) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283670)

We had "anti-matter," "dark matter," now "phantom matter." Jesus, is there anything substantial and real in physics anymore? As the years go on, physics starts to sound less and less like science and more and more like "Alice in Wonderland." Everything seems to hinge on things we can't see, or can't measure, or can't prove. Unless some of this mumbo jumbo can give me eternal life, make women throw themselves at me, or build a better and more luscious cheeseburger, I'm not interested.

Re:Does any of this matter really matter? (1)

lionheart1327 (841404) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283700)

Hey don't knock theoretical physics. Someday they'll finally invent faster-than-light travel and then we can get all the Orion slave girls we want!

Re:Does any of this matter really matter? (1)

geek (5680) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283798)

I wouldn't eve call this theoretical. My understanding of the scientific community (which isn't great, admittedly) is that a theory is proven somewhat true and supported by facts as well as holds up to testing, like relativity. This is just wild speculation and guesswork. It seem to sit more in the philosophical than anything else.

Re:Does any of this matter really matter? (0, Redundant)

Bartab (233395) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283778)

There is also "doesn't matter"

Re:Does any of this matter really matter? (3, Insightful)

ilikepi314 (1217898) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283780)

Well hold on, anti-matter is real, as long as you mean in an anti-particles sense. Positrons (anti-electrons) have been observed and I want to say some team in Europe made anti-hydrogen atoms. I wish I had links, but I know I read about it.

As for the rest, I pretty much agree with you.

I had the wonderful opportunity to see a talk by one of the experts of (and I think original proposer of) dark matter. He said he was starting to feel dark matter is not real and that a possible better explanation of it can be made by modifying Newtonian/Relativistic mechanics. That seems more satisfactory to me, if for no other reason than we can use a correction in the equations to make predictions about other things, and see if we observe that effect.

That's much better than assuming something exists, but you don't know any of its properties except that it fixes this one problem in your other theory. That's pretty bogus. Science is all about observation, and seeing if our predictions based on current research are true. If you can't do either, it really doesn't qualify as science.

Re:Does any of this matter really matter? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22283806)

Antimatter is real and has been observed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter [wikipedia.org]

Re:Does any of this matter really matter? (1)

Bottlemaster (449635) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283842)

We had "anti-matter," "dark matter," now "phantom matter." Jesus, is there anything substantial and real in physics anymore? As the years go on, physics starts to sound less and less like science and more and more like "Alice in Wonderland."
I agree, but do keep in mind that antimatter was suggested by theory, and only a few years later the real stuff (antistuff?) was produced and measured.

Re:Does any of this matter really matter? (1)

The Only Druid (587299) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283928)

I thought this "phantom matter" had already been referred to as "exotic matter" by people like Stephen Greene...

Re:Does any of this matter really matter? (4, Insightful)

Mr_Huber (160160) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283948)

Are you really that surprised? We worked out how most of the world around us works over three hundred years ago. We put electromagnetism to bed over a hundred years ago. We've known enough about atoms to make them go *boom* real good for over eighty years. Everything left to work on is far, far outside our day to day experience. Our common sense is calibrated for temperatures between about zero and one hundred C in a thick nitrogen/oxygen environment with a 1 g gravitational field. Of course it fails miserably when confronted by absolute zero vacuums or temperatures and pressures extreme enough to fuse matter or places with gravitational fields strong enough to capture light.

Hell, I'd be more surprised if someone announced "Black Holes: Just Like Detroit" or some such.

And as for that eternal life and women throwing themselves at you, we've already given you healthy diets and pheromones. Why not try meeting us half-way?

Re:Does any of this matter really matter? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22283972)

Perhaps the easy parts of physics have already been seen, measured, or proven. The proposed dark matter, dark energy, etc. are attempts to fill in some of the remaining gaps in our math models and reconcile them with the observed universe. It's hard to come up with experiments to test things like black holes.

Re:Does any of this matter really matter? (1)

jmdc (1152611) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283976)

Come again? You're putting cheeseburgers on the same level as sex?

oh yeah, this is slashdot

Don't lump them together (4, Insightful)

SEE (7681) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284016)

Antimatter is something real, observed, understood, and which we can actually make, albeit in tiny quantities.

Dark matter is a shim used to make our theory of gravity and the motion of the observed universe match.

"Phantom matter", properly called "exotic matter" [wikipedia.org] , is a purely hypothetical construct, not necessary to explain anything in the universe which has been observed; it's just something the laws of physics don't rule out.

Re:Don't lump them together (1)

Mr_Huber (160160) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284178)

Incidentally, dark matter was observed last year. Or rather, we've seen its effects via gravitational lensing with enough resolution to map its distribution in relation to some other objects. This in turn helps us say what it might be and what it definitely isn't. For example, the bullet cluster image demonstrates pretty clearly that it is stuff, as it has been stripped away from a couple of galaxy clusters in collision. This best fits the WIMP (weakly interacting massive particles) theory of dark matter and is a big blow to the modified relativity camp. See here [nasa.gov] and here [nasa.gov] for some pretty pictures and explanations.

Re:Does any of this matter really matter? (2, Interesting)

knowsalot (810875) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284020)

Just for the record, anti-matter is real, has mass, kinetic energy, et cetera, is affected by gravity, and is all around us. Lots of antimatter particles are created in nuclear reactions, and also naturally when radioactive elements decay. It's really not that weird. The only thing that is a little odd about it is that when antielectrons or antiprotons get together, they create (pairs of) photons. But on the other hand, a photon can create a matter-antimatter pair of particles also.

Dark matter, for the most part, is anything that is not a big ball of glowing hydrogen. The earth is not a big ball of glowing hydrogen, so much of what you know is ordinary "dark matter". The issue is that most of the mass of the universe *ought* to be concentrated in big balls of glowing hydrogen, yet galactic rotation rates and other observations predicated on the laws of physics as we know them imply that there is more out there than these big balls of glowing hydrogen. So what is the nature of all that non-hydrogen? That is a bit of a puzzle to physicists.

But "phantom matter" -- matter that is repelled by other matter (anti-gravity) --? That is just plain imaginary nonsense. Like asking what happens if you can travel faster than light, or if you can turn time around. In fact, all three of these concepts may in fact be the same idea in different aspects.

I'll be the first to admit that the laws of physics may not be the same everywhere (or everywhen) in the universe, but what exactly is even *meant* by a "connection to another universe"? If you can (even just theoretically) observe it, then it's within this universe, by definition, no?

Re:Does any of this matter really matter? (1)

DreadPiratePizz (803402) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284022)

Anti matter has been detected an observed. It's pretty 'real".

Re:Does any of this matter really matter? (1)

jonnyfish (224288) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284038)

Antimatter isn't any less real than ordinary matter, it just has a really stupid name. And dark matter is just stuff that we have to observe indirectly (through its gravitational effects) since it doesn't seem to interact with the EM field.

The only universe that exists is the one you're in (1)

FromTheAir (938543) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284042)

For a universe to be actualized it must be experienced, that requires an observer which is the only thing that can actualize potential, you are the one. There can be only one. In fact it is you writing these words from another point of view.

Re:Does any of this matter really matter? (1)

dissy (172727) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284082)

We had "anti-matter," "dark matter," now "phantom matter." Jesus, is there anything substantial and real in physics anymore?
Yes, atleast half of what you listed exists.

anti-matter is real, has been observed, and created by man.

dark-matter is real, and has been observed at least here on earth, thou only durring the 12 hrs out of 24 that it is no longer classified as dark.
But if its there in those 12/24 hours when its not dark, and noone moves it, its clearly still there in the other 12 hours while it *is* dark-matter.

phantom-matter was just made up by this guy in his theoretical guess, but since he has so little scientific backing to his idea, i cant see anyone else wanting to put any effort into proving him right or wrong, chances are he will just be ignored.

As for jesus, well, i wasnt around back then, however since most of the things attributed to jesus are clearly physically impossible, while i cant say ALL of the things (ex. his existance) are also impossible, odds are he either didnt exist, or if he did was just a normal schmoe like us.
Since one cant actually prove a negative, we really dont have to disprove jesus. Its up to someone else to prove it, and that hasnt happened (nor will after this much time has passed)

Re:Does any of this matter really matter? (4, Insightful)

Xelios (822510) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284142)

Physics has been running into a wall for decades now. I think the problem is gravity, we still don't know what it is or how it operates. We say it warps space, but does it really or is that just a mathematical abstraction that lets us model its effects? Physicists have gotten something fundemental wrong, and it's leading them to shape ridiculous explanations for things we don't understand.

That's my speculation, do I get an article in New Scientist now?

Phantom matter, eh? (3, Insightful)

MOBE2001 (263700) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283678)

Sounds more like crackpot physics to me. Only physicists can get away with crap like this. In any other field of science, this sort of voodoo bullshit would not be tolerated. I tell it like I see it. Mod me down and see if I care. ahahaha...

Something. (1)

iknownuttin (1099999) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283992)

Sounds more like crackpot physics to me

I don't think it was crack he was doing. Smoking something, yes; but not crack.

Sounds like (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283702)

"Tales from a Parallel Universe"

Man, you're a bunch of goody two-shoe geeks! (0)

MindPrison (864299) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283706)

Do you actually believe in the theory of a parallel universe...or anything related to a "parallel existence"?

Come on people... this is weird even by science-fiction standards, don't get me wrong - I like to dream as much as the next guy, but get real...nothing so far proves that anything even closely related to this would have any substance to it, whatsoever!

If you want "real" - why don't you try to look beyond the know universe instead, I bet you (and I hopefully..) would find something of interest there. I'm quite sure we still have something to discover on earth yet - but the real answer lies lightyears away...so why not try looking there first, eh?

Yours local..smartass...signing off for now, another beer to be conquered :)

Re:Man, you're a bunch of goody two-shoe geeks! (1)

dinog (582015) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283856)

Come on people... this is weird even by science-fiction standards, don't get me wrong - I like to dream as much as the next guy, but get real...nothing so far proves that anything even closely related to this would have any substance to it, whatsoever!

When I was younger, people thought much the same about black holes. The neutrino was theorized, but not yet detected. Nanotechnology was bizarre even by science fiction standards. Using currently "known" facts, we cannot explain why galaxies do not fly apart, so we have to go beyond the known to explain the seen. Weird is only an opinion, and what we believe, or think we know, isn't always the reality.

The question in my mind is why does he call it a door ? It seems that he is speculating on a wormhole with a negative mass, and thus a negative gravity, on the order of a black hole. How does one go through such a door ? It seems to me that we would need to go faster than light to get in, which obviates the need for a wormhole to begin with.

Dinog

Every time we produce a more powerful telescope (1)

FromTheAir (938543) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283708)

Every time we produce a more powerful telescope we create more stars and galaxies.

so maybe to create these worm holes we just need to create the math for it and or speak it into existence.

also

In infinite play the movie there is a saying supposedly from recently found notes thought to be written by Albert Einstein something about an experiment that could not be completed till after his death.

When one realizes there is no travel, they can go anywhere in the universe. ~Albert Einstein from here http://i----i.org/BlueLight.htm [i----i.org]

Disturbing yet liberating (1)

FromTheAir (938543) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283904)

They say that the truth of our reality requires a 180 degree shift in our perception. How we are taught to perceive the universe is backwards. To the individual the truth that is to be revealed is disturbing yet liberating.

Don't know what to make of it all but it sounds compelling, and science does not know as much as we sometimes assume it does, we don't even know what energy is yet, only it's effects and crude ways to harness it

The notes found were in this book have not been authenticated as to who the real author is, but perhaps that is not what is important. Sometimes the source does not matter if the content contains truth that will become self evident once an entity is made aware.

http://i----i.org/The_Book_What_Is_The_Secret/The_Book_What_is_The_Secret.htm [i----i.org]

Negative mass is mathematically possible (2, Informative)

Ummite (195748) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283712)

Jean-Pierre Petit, ex director of CNRS, made a lot of mathematical proof of the possibility of negative mass and the implication. If interested, please read those explanations.
http://www.jp-petit.org/science/arxiv/publications_recentes.htm [jp-petit.org]
Link to :
Bigravity as an interpretation of cosmic acceleration : http://www.jp-petit.org/science/arxiv/CITV_1_acceleration_english.pdf [jp-petit.org]
Bigravity : A bimetric model of the Universe. Exact nonlinear solutions. Positive and negative gravitational lensings: http://www.jp-petit.org/science/arxiv/CITV_2_exact_solutions_english.pdf [jp-petit.org]

Re:Negative mass is mathematically possible (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22283900)

Funny, I always thought bigravity was the invisible force that makes two drunk girls in a bar make out with each other for attention.

Caution is indicated... (1)

flajann (658201) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283800)

While this all sounds "cool" and very "Star Trekish", I would caution on entertaining wild-ass theories without at least some theoricial backing.

Negative matter, if it could exist, would be cool, though, because that would allow you to construct a perpetual motion machine of the first kind. For example, if you had a one ton ball of "regular" matter and a -1 ton ball of this "negative" matter, and were to hook them together on a fixed rod, you basically would've constructed a perpetual motion "engine" that would accelerate along the axis of that rod without any expenditure of energy.

Since such a thing would violate the first law of thermodynamics, I would tend to rule this out as a possibility.

Re:Caution is indicated... (2, Insightful)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283930)

> For example, if you had a one ton ball of "regular" matter and a -1 ton ball of this
> "negative" matter, and were to hook them together on a fixed rod you basically would've
> constructed a perpetual motion "engine" that would accelerate along the axis of that rod
> without any expenditure of energy.

That would no more produce acceleration than would the same experiment done with positive and negative electric charges. The two gravitational charges will just repel each other, producing tension in the rod.

Re:Caution is indicated... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22283938)

But what would you make the rod from?

Palance (1)

Boronx (228853) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283816)

Is there any one else from the universe where rear view mirrors don't have a night position and Jack Palance died in the '90s?

Could We Find a Door To A Parallel Universe? (1)

venkateshkumar99 (791435) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283860)

Yes we can a Stargate with 10 chevrons.

I know how to make one... (1)

powerlinekid (442532) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283870)

It involves heating the object up and spinning it extremely fast. It only seems to work on small foot shaped items though...

Cool! An Anne Hathaway/Minnie Driver love scene! (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283902)

Come on, nerds! Do you really wanna find a parallel universe where you're suave and sophisticated and successful with the ladies?

In any case, this just makes the Fermi Paradox even worse, because now some far more statistically likely ancient civilzation should have long since colonized and clogged all universes.

The Existence of Phantom Matter has been Proven (2, Funny)

DoctorMabuse (456736) | more than 6 years ago | (#22283968)

Phantom matter can be observed but only for a limited time. A wormhole can only stay open stay open for 38 minutes, unless the O'Neill power booster is connected to the power supply to the gate.

whatcouldpossiblygowrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22284032)

Is anyone else thinking this tag is getting overused just a bit? What *could* possibly go wrong?

Uh well... assuming this guy's is 100% right, we can open wormholes to other dimensions? How is that bad? We don't even know what might go wrong in a situation like that, we don't even know if it's possible. There's not even any evidence saying that it's possible.

It just doesn't make a lick of sense to worry about what might go wrong with something that probably doesn't even exist.

If you can get there from here (3, Insightful)

Dorceon (928997) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284134)

isn't it part of the same universe?

We published this already (5, Informative)

Geoffrey.landis (926948) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284180)

This is interesting, but looking at the article, i can't see that it's much different from work that we published over a decade back in a paper where we pointed out properties of wormholes, and noted that they might be visible by the signature of the negative effective mass on the bending of light: Natural Wormholes as Gravitational Lenses [arxiv.org] , John G. Cramer, Robert L. Forward, Michael S. Morris, Matt Visser, Gregory Benford, Geoffrey A. Landis. U.C. Irvine even wrote a press release about this paper [sff.net] , which I've put on my website.

It's a little hard to tell from this very brief article, but what he calls "phantom matter" is what other physicists call "exotic matter" or sometimes "negative matter," which violates one of the positive energy-conditions, and thus has negative energy (in some reference frame). Matt Visser's book Lorentzian Wormholes has a lot more technical details about the various formulations of the positive-energy conditions.

This theory (3, Insightful)

Z00L00K (682162) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284188)

This theory assumes that the difference between universes (or as they may be called multiverses) can be quantified.

<Speculation>

If not, if the difference is the same as time or length in a dimension that we aren't able to consciously manipulate or see, then it is possible that we all are floating in roughly the same direction, but since the differences are very small it's impossible to recognize if we are in the same sector as when we started our lives.

All this since there are in theory dimensions that we can't see. Why they are invisible is a different question. It may be that we all are mentally and physically unable to "see" the dimensions or that they are "curled up" or "flattened" in a way that makes them immeasurable. This is just about the same question as if you are on a board (like our universe) on a completely friction-less surface where there is no perception of wind and no reference points. You have every perception of everything on the board, but you can't tell if the board is still or if it's actually drifting at the speed of sound with the wind. If you can't even "see" outside the borders of the board (the universe) you can't really tell if there are other universes out there.

And it's not even possible to say if the laws of physics are general or specific for a universe. It may well be that the laws of physics are the same in any given universe, and that we just are inside a bead of glass. (watch the end sequence of Men in Black to catch this idea...). Just "infinity" is hard to catch up, but it's like living on the surface of a globe - where is the end of the world? And if you walk a straight distance on the surface of a globe large enough - will you ever come home again or will you even recognize that as home [hmv.co.uk] ?

I think that there is no straight answer, and that Keith Laumer [keithlaumer.com] in the "WORLDS OF THE IMPERIUM" may have one approach, and Robert Anson Heinlein [heinleinsociety.org] had another in "Number of the Beast" (among others), but I think that Douglas Adams [douglasadams.com] got really to the point in the statement "There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened.". At least his statement will explain a lot.

But this is still in the area of speculation, and I think that it's hard for the human race to get outside the universe. But I don't say that it's impossible - there may be a discovery around the corner waiting to happen!

</Speculation>

What is most important is that we try to keep our minds open - there may be a grain of truth in every theory that at first sight may appear ridiculous. Notice that the continental drift [geekculture.com] was considered completely outrageous [wikipedia.org] by many until the end of the 1950's. The continental drift is now a widely accepted fact (but there may still be those that doesn't accept it).

Gandhi [brainyquote.com] once said "Nearly everything you do is of no importance, but it is important that you do it.", and this still applies. If you do nothing nothing will be accomplished, and you will be sure that you are unimportant, but if you do something you may have the force to provide a stepping stone for something that will prevail for generations to come.

The End [romlist.com] .

Did-a-chick? Dum-a-chum? (1)

Kozz (7764) | more than 6 years ago | (#22284204)

If the door turns out to be an "ordinary looking" wooden door that opens on a beach, and if you hear odd sounds like "Did-a-chick? Dum-a-chum?" on the other side... well, it's better to stay here.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>