Star Trek and RL antimatter
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Star Trek and RL antimatter
http://www3.telus.net/sci-fi-tech/st-antimatter.htm
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco ... -soon.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... atter.html
http://www.daviddarling.info/encycloped ... rprop.html
http://www.startrek.com/database_articl ... r-universe
http://movies.ign.com/articles/114/1143929p1.html
Antimatter-based universe is one possibility I myself have been thinking about, but I don't agree with "time running in reverse" thing. If there is copy of our universe based on antimatter, why would that cause sudden reversal of timeline (antitime)? I see no reason for that.
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco ... -soon.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... atter.html
http://www.daviddarling.info/encycloped ... rprop.html
http://www.startrek.com/database_articl ... r-universe
http://movies.ign.com/articles/114/1143929p1.html
Antimatter-based universe is one possibility I myself have been thinking about, but I don't agree with "time running in reverse" thing. If there is copy of our universe based on antimatter, why would that cause sudden reversal of timeline (antitime)? I see no reason for that.
-
- Jedi Master
- Posts: 2239
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Star Trek and RL antimatter
Well that explains a lot.Picard wrote:http://www3.telus.net/sci-fi-tech/st-antimatter.htm
- Khas
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1287
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
- Location: Protoss Embassy to the Federation
Re: Star Trek and RL antimatter
Who knows? Maybe the laws of physics were different in that universe? Normal universe antimatter behaves realistically in ST, for the most part.
-
- Jedi Master
- Posts: 2239
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Star Trek and RL antimatter
As I recall multiverse theory suggests there may be at least one universe out there that time runs in reverse from our perspective as I recall. The whole everything being the opposite of our universe is therefore theoretically realistic as I understand it as a guy on the street.Picard wrote:http://www3.telus.net/sci-fi-tech/st-antimatter.htm
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco ... -soon.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... atter.html
http://www.daviddarling.info/encycloped ... rprop.html
http://www.startrek.com/database_articl ... r-universe
http://movies.ign.com/articles/114/1143929p1.html
Antimatter-based universe is one possibility I myself have been thinking about, but I don't agree with "time running in reverse" thing. If there is copy of our universe based on antimatter, why would that cause sudden reversal of timeline (antitime)? I see no reason for that.
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Star Trek and RL antimatter
Such universe might exist (althought I don't see how) but it has nothing to do with antimatter. Antimatter abides to same laws as matter does in certain universe; claimimg that just beacouse universe is composed from antmatter time must automatically go in reverse (anti-time), is absurd. To me it seems that someone likes anti- prefix too much.
-
- Jedi Master
- Posts: 2239
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Star Trek and RL antimatter
Multiverse theory says each universe will have it's own laws of physics, and at least some versions of the theory say that mommy universes spawn baby universes in pairs that are equal but opposite in every way.Picard wrote:Such universe might exist (althought I don't see how) but it has nothing to do with antimatter. Antimatter abides to same laws as matter does in certain universe; claimimg that just beacouse universe is composed from antmatter time must automatically go in reverse (anti-time), is absurd. To me it seems that someone likes anti- prefix too much.
You are mixing up alternate time lines with alternate universes.
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Star Trek and RL antimatter
I know what alternite timeline is, and I know what alternate universe is. But I am pointing out that there is no connection between antimatter and antitime.
-
- Jedi Master
- Posts: 2239
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Star Trek and RL antimatter
Anti-Time is canon in Star Trek, and nearly destroys the universe.Picard wrote:I know what alternite timeline is, and I know what alternate universe is. But I am pointing out that there is no connection between antimatter and antitime.
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Anti-time
Time not moving the same way in all universes is part of multiverse theory.
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Star Trek and RL antimatter
I know. But that has nothing to do with my point about connection between two (or better, lack of connection). You can have antimatter-based universe where time is running normally, antitime universe based on matter, as well as antitime universe based on antimatter.
EDIT: On another note, "antitime universe" is probably impossible - you would have (for example) apple tree growing backwards towards being sapling, then that sapling turning into pit, then pit turning into rotten apple, and rotten apple "unrotting" towards new apple. Problem is that, at one point, you would have to have apple which fell to the tree "jumping" back on traversal; that partcular feat would require gravity changing into antigravity; as everything we see in universe (planets, stars, etc.) is held together by gravity, there would be literally no visible objects in universe, only particles held by nuclear, covalent, ionic or similar bonds would exist (making mollecules largest possible "pieces" of matter / antimatter within universe). That alone makes universe same as ours which just has time running backwards utterly impossible.
EDIT: On another note, "antitime universe" is probably impossible - you would have (for example) apple tree growing backwards towards being sapling, then that sapling turning into pit, then pit turning into rotten apple, and rotten apple "unrotting" towards new apple. Problem is that, at one point, you would have to have apple which fell to the tree "jumping" back on traversal; that partcular feat would require gravity changing into antigravity; as everything we see in universe (planets, stars, etc.) is held together by gravity, there would be literally no visible objects in universe, only particles held by nuclear, covalent, ionic or similar bonds would exist (making mollecules largest possible "pieces" of matter / antimatter within universe). That alone makes universe same as ours which just has time running backwards utterly impossible.
-
- Jedi Master
- Posts: 2239
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Star Trek and RL antimatter
Picard, the anti-universe would be possible because the laws of physics would be different there then those in our universe.Picard wrote:I know. But that has nothing to do with my point about connection between two (or better, lack of connection). You can have antimatter-based universe where time is running normally, antitime universe based on matter, as well as antitime universe based on antimatter.
EDIT: On another note, "antitime universe" is probably impossible - you would have (for example) apple tree growing backwards towards being sapling, then that sapling turning into pit, then pit turning into rotten apple, and rotten apple "unrotting" towards new apple. Problem is that, at one point, you would have to have apple which fell to the tree "jumping" back on traversal; that partcular feat would require gravity changing into antigravity; as everything we see in universe (planets, stars, etc.) is held together by gravity, there would be literally no visible objects in universe, only particles held by nuclear, covalent, ionic or similar bonds would exist (making mollecules largest possible "pieces" of matter / antimatter within universe). That alone makes universe same as ours which just has time running backwards utterly impossible.
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Star Trek and RL antimatter
And that is entire point. For anti-universe to exist, everything should be opposite - meaning that gravity should deflect objects apart, instead of drawing them together. Meaning that nothing would be able to remain in one piece.
-
- Jedi Master
- Posts: 2239
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Star Trek and RL antimatter
Given the "stars" were black I'd say the place runs on a different set of physical laws then we do.Picard wrote:And that is entire point. For anti-universe to exist, everything should be opposite - meaning that gravity should deflect objects apart, instead of drawing them together. Meaning that nothing would be able to remain in one piece.