Teleportation

[Morpheal]

Teleportation is not going to be the disassembly of basic matter and
its reassembly at another distant location in space as some have
suggested. Rather, the apparent teleportation of matter is its
disappearance at one place in space-time and its reappearance at
another distant place in space-time, conveyed there by being suitably
enveloped in a field which conveys the material object from one place
to another.

A future propulstion system for interstellar space travel will likely
appear to be teleportation, from an external observer's point of view,
but in fact he vessel will be conveyed by being enveloped in a field
that crosses the dimensional boundary. Living beings might potentially
be shielded from the damaging effects of the field that conveys the
vessel, within the vessel itself.

Of course, if science is funded and works dilligently that propulsion
system might be realized by the year 2050. The first vessels thus
conveyed would carry artificial intelligences, not human beings, on
long distance interstellar missions.

Robert Morpheal

[jake]

"Morpheal" <morp...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122925013.1...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

> Teleportation is not going to be the disassembly of basic matter and
> its reassembly at another distant location in space as some have
> suggested. Rather, the apparent teleportation of matter is its
> disappearance at one place in space-time and its reappearance at
> another distant place in space-time, conveyed there by being suitably
> enveloped in a field which conveys the material object from one place
> to another.

Already been invented, the FAX machine. Next.........

[Uncle Al]

Morpheal wrote:
>
> Teleportation is not going to be the disassembly of basic matter and
> its reassembly at another distant location in space as some have
> suggested. Rather, the apparent teleportation of matter is its
> disappearance at one place in space-time and its reappearance at
> another distant place in space-time, conveyed there by being suitably
> enveloped in a field which conveys the material object from one place
> to another.

[snip crap]

Idiot.

> Of course, if science is funded and works dilligently that propulsion
> system might be realized by the year 2050.

[snip more crap]

Controlled thermonuclear fusion is the energy source of the future -
always hs been and always will be.

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf

[ytyour...@p.zapto.org]

Morpheal wrote:

> Of course, if science is funded and works dilligently that propulsion
> system might be realized by the year 2050. The first vessels thus
> conveyed would carry artificial intelligences, not human beings, on
> long distance interstellar missions.

As usual, none of this is going to happen.

If teleportation is ever invented it will be, as usual, some couple
grad-students at Caltech or MIT who will devise it for some kind of
fraternity prank. Or maybe because they get annoyed that they have to
interrupt their homework four times a day to go to the bathroom and
invent it as a means of getting waste out of the human body. Something
like that.

It will be well known amongst the students for years until something
goes terribly wrong and someone gets hurt.

The academic institution will claim the patent and then give it away.
Incurring massive debt. Someone out there will get obscenely rich and
on his death bed will toss that university a tiny bone to "show his
appreciation".

Twenty years later, the technology will have been refined to use for
home delivery of consumer goods. No further (scientific) use will come
of it.

Ten more years later, someone entirely unrelated will receive the nobel
prize for the first concise theory of how the whole thing works. Five
years later, someone will demonstrate conclusively that the theory is
wrong. People will continue to use it for another fifty years anyways.
Because it's the only thing around that doesn't disagree with
everything else.

Another twenty years later, some women's organisation will claim that
the system was really invented by some women somewhere. Who were
somehow stiffed for the credit.

Thirty more years later, a slew of kooks will post on usenet,
proclaiming to "debunk" teleportation and posting scads of "proof" that
the whole thing must be wrong because the equations governing it are
just too "unintuitive".

Meanwhile, the global information-exchange infrastructure will have
made the question of "where something is physically located in 3-space"
completely uninteresting to the average person; rendered a mere
philosophical quibble without any consequences on the flow of energy or
information in the grand scheme of the human infosphere.

--
Remove YourClothes before you email me.

[Llanzlan Klazmon]

Uncle Al <Uncl...@hate.spam.net> wrote in
news:42EE93CC...@hate.spam.net:

<SNIP>

>
> Controlled thermonuclear fusion is the energy source of the future -
> always hs been and always will be.
>

Heh heh. You got to admit though that the ITER project is a good way for
a few engineers to earn a buck. It could all go wrong when someone
starts asking embarrasing questions about results.

Klazmon.

[Techno Warlock]

Morpheal wrote:
> Teleportation is not going to be the disassembly of basic matter and
> its reassembly at another distant location in space as some have
> suggested. Rather, the apparent teleportation of matter is its
> disappearance at one place in space-time and its reappearance at
> another distant place in space-time, conveyed there by being suitably
> enveloped in a field which conveys the material object from one place
> to another.

How about this. Space-time being just some kind of projection
and to teleport objects, you unmanifest and manifest a portion of
space/time itself which includes the quantum vactuum that
gives matter and energy their identities. Therefore instead
of pulling quarks which mechanically is impossible because the
strong force gets stronger when pulled (which *appear* to forever
confining it). You simply dissove the part of space/time that
gives the strong force its identity. When dissolves it doesn't
mean it can no longer be put back. Assume that there is some
memory behind what gives space/time it dynamics and identities.

This is one of the few possibilities of teleportation. For
many, it seems absurd. But for those who have seen poltergeist
activity where stones can be teleported from outside to
inside the house as well as watching an MIB (techno occult
sorcerers) dematerializing a coin from the victim hand (as
witnessed), etc. Then you'd realize that the physics we study
is just study of the dynamics of space/time. But what is beyond
it is totally unknown to physics. It is therefore not in the
most scientific sense to totally reject it because there seems
to be another dynamics behind space/time that *can* totally
control the mechanics of it. In ancient times. This more primary
reality to space/time is called Akashic field. Many want to
call it Aether but it is suggested that a new word be coined
to avoid confusion from the century old ether concept disproven
by MMX. We are dealing with what seem to be a subtrate or
reality behind space/time itself.

Warlock

[John Sefton]

Techno Warlock wrote:

Each atom is exactly like a spiral galaxy.
These discs precess in order to sweep out a sphere.
Because they influence each other, these precessions
are distributed randomly, and an object's inertia
depends on them.
Imposing a larger field on the material to order
the precessions so they are all always in the same
(changing) plane makes it instantaneously inertia-free
except in the axis of the precession.
No dematerialization or change in the atoms' locale
wrt each other at all.
John
Galaxy Model
http://users.accesscomm.ca/john/

[PD]

Morpheal wrote:
> Teleportation is not going to be the disassembly of basic matter and
> its reassembly at another distant location in space as some have
> suggested. Rather, the apparent teleportation of matter is its
> disappearance at one place in space-time and its reappearance at
> another distant place in space-time, conveyed there by being suitably
> enveloped in a field which conveys the material object from one place
> to another.

Note that an aluminum can is a mighty fine enveloping field, providing
shielding to any object inside from external electromagnetic fields. A
shell more than a few atoms thick is also quite adequate for shielding
against weak and strong nuclear fields. Note that there is also no
problem transporting the can through space-time, though there is a
slight issue in getting it to traverse spacelike intervals, as there
would be for transporting any enveloping field.

>
> A future propulstion system for interstellar space travel will likely
> appear to be teleportation, from an external observer's point of view,
> but in fact he vessel will be conveyed by being enveloped in a field
> that crosses the dimensional boundary.

My 4-dimensional Mapsco maps do not show dimensional boundaries. I'd be
curious to know where you think such a boundary occurs. Heck, on a
2-dimensional sheet of paper, show me the boundary between the 2
dimensions.

> Living beings might potentially
> be shielded from the damaging effects of the field that conveys the
> vessel, within the vessel itself.

And you might potentially be accepted as an author for a science
fiction short story in a magazine. However, the feasibility is about
the same as what you propose.

>
> Of course, if science is funded and works dilligently that propulsion
> system might be realized by the year 2050.

Let's see: what technologies were promised us by 2001 if science were
funded and scientists worked diligently?
- atomic-powered cars
- controlled fusion power
- cheap solar power
- meal-in-a-pill
- human feet on another planet
- hovercars
- terraforming in desert climes
- 1000m skyscrapers
- a cure for AIDS, multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy, ALS,
Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, cancers, herpes, and the common cold

> The first vessels thus
> conveyed would carry artificial intelligences, not human beings, on
> long distance interstellar missions.

That depends a little on how artificial and how intelligent. The Mars
Rovers are artificially intelligent. Sorta. Is that enough?

PD

>
> Robert Morpheal

[Autymn D. C.]

Uncle Al wrote:
> Morpheal wrote:
> >
> > Teleportation is not going to be the disassembly of basic matter and
> > its reassembly at another distant location in space as some have
> > suggested. Rather, the apparent teleportation of matter is its
> > disappearance at one place in space-time and its reappearance at
> > another distant place in space-time, conveyed there by being suitably
> > enveloped in a field which conveys the material object from one place
> > to another.
> [snip crap]
>
> Idiot.

Tunnelling /is/ teleportation, Al the shithead. Objects in forbidden
regions are imaginary in expectation and thus have positions orthogonal
to 3-space, so they do leave the dimensional boundary-its ghost part
is left behind though, but is usually Doppler redshifted past the
vacuum background. One needs something to power the teleporter:
http://advancedphysics.org/viewthread.php?tid=974&page=2#pid12912.

>
> > Of course, if science is funded and works dilligently that propulsion
> > system might be realized by the year 2050.
> [snip more crap]
>
> Controlled thermonuclear fusion is the energy source of the future -
> always hs been and always will be.

Wrong retard, there is of course accretion or tidal power to steal
great lots of energy from celestial bodies. And all authorities in the
know agree that the universe's expansion violates energy conservation.
I have already devised an engine that exploits it:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/free_energy/message/16973.

-Aut

[Autymn D. C.]

yt, one wouldn't get hurt other than by normal means:
http://advancedphysics.org/viewthread.php?tid=1429#pid7085.

[Uncle Al]

Tunnel a 1/4" ball bearing.

Idiot.

[Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com]

COMMENT:

It'll just fall out. You're talking to what is likely a loose-sphincter
boy.

Now here's one for you. The wavelength of a ball bearing is h/p where p
is momentum. It can tunnel for distances approximating its wavelength.
But why can't the wavelength be arbitrarily large for macroscopic
objects, since their momentum can be arbitrarily small? Indeed, these
quantities (momentum, etc) are frame dependent. If the quantum
wavelength of thing depends on what inertial frame you look at it from,
why can't you pick one where the wavelength is whatever you like?

SBH

[Marshall Dudley]

"Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com" wrote:

> Now here's one for you. The wavelength of a ball bearing is h/p where p
> is momentum. It can tunnel for distances approximating its wavelength.
> But why can't the wavelength be arbitrarily large for macroscopic
> objects, since their momentum can be arbitrarily small? Indeed, these
> quantities (momentum, etc) are frame dependent. If the quantum
> wavelength of thing depends on what inertial frame you look at it from,
> why can't you pick one where the wavelength is whatever you like?

Would not the proper frame of reference be the one of the material being
tunnelled through?

Tunneling of a macro object. Can it happen? Yes. Is it likely to happen? No. Has
it ever happened? Probably. Is there evidence it has ever happened? Maybe.

Case in point. A few years ago there was a hockey game where the puck went
through the back of the goal. It was hit into the goal, and left through the
back of the goal. At first they said it missed (after all it did not stay in the
goal), but after examining the video of the goal, the refs determined that it was
indeed a goal. Examination of the goal determined that there was no opening
large enough for the puck to have gone through. Despite howls of protest from
the opposing team's supporters, they ended up giving them the goal anyway,
although it was impossible by non quantum physics to have happened.

What happened? No one knows for sure as far as I can tell, but tunneling is the
only scientific explanation I can come up with.

Marshall

[Autymn D. C.]

Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com wrote:

> Uncle Al wrote:
> > Tunnel a 1/4" ball bearing.
> > Idiot.

Stop calling your betters idiots. Senile Schwartz hates maths, can't
use it in his invective, and relies on others to use it to disprove
him. He must be foreign to a concept of an imaginary wave, because
that's the very thing that allows tunnelling of an arbitrary subject.
He ignored the message showing how to power the teleporter, because his
brain's filled with manly cholesterol and copper for some gruesome
mental reactance, as the negative energy in the meson spin resonances
is to match any subject's energy with the potential barrier to afford
fussless and k-less tunnelling. Go squeeze some mesons, or go jump
into a hole: http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw53.html.

To prime the squeezing, cool the subject in one dimension
(http://advancedphysics.org/viewthread.php?tid=1429#pid7085) using my
shelf cooling demon
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/free_energy/message/4126) and, if
needed, a stimulated foton-axion emission radiator
(http://google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&q=%22Primakoff+effect%22).

> It'll just fall out. You're talking to what is likely a loose-sphincter
> boy.

I'll smash your likelihood, Sbh, and your sexual confusion. I'm the
least likely thing in the world. Blend Stella McCartney, Alexis
Bledel, Amy Poehler, Charlotte Church, Annie Lennox, and the Cartoon
Network girl and I would still be ahead. Talk to me and you'd likely
wet your pants. I made me, and I'll take the world down along with you
if I have to. I longly posed twice my age on the internet to fit in
and to focus on my studies, and because I hated other people my age.
Now I can be true and destroy everyone who gets in my way. You are
talking to Hupatia's and Sidis's revenge.

> Now here's one for you. The wavelength of a ball bearing is h/p where p
> is momentum. It can tunnel for distances approximating its wavelength.
> But why can't the wavelength be arbitrarily large for macroscopic
> objects, since their momentum can be arbitrarily small? Indeed, these
> quantities (momentum, etc) are frame dependent. If the quantum
> wavelength of thing depends on what inertial frame you look at it from,
> why can't you pick one where the wavelength is whatever you like?

Its particles must be sent through an "atom laser" first, though only
in one dimension as I ere described. Otherwise the subject and object
are forced to "quantum teleport" to fall in fase, which is a misnomer
and should be called "quantum parallel transport", which will take
longer and is more wasteful as one'd still need to pump the subject
through the barrier which will make special observation superfluous.

-Aut

[Uncle Al]

"Autymn D. C." wrote:
>
> Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com wrote:
> > Uncle Al wrote:
> > > Tunnel a 1/4" ball bearing.
> > > Idiot.
>
> Stop calling your betters idiots. Senile Schwartz hates maths, can't
> use it in his invective, and relies on others to use it to disprove
> him. He must be foreign to a concept of an imaginary wave, because
> that's the very thing that allows tunnelling of an arbitrary subject.
> He ignored the message showing how to power the teleporter, because his
> brain's filled with manly cholesterol and copper for some gruesome
> mental reactance, as the negative energy in the meson spin resonances
> is to match any subject's energy with the potential barrier to afford
> fussless and k-less tunnelling. Go squeeze some mesons, or go jump
> into a hole: http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw53.html.
>
> To prime the squeezing, cool the subject in one dimension
> (http://advancedphysics.org/viewthread.php?tid=1429#pid7085) using my
> shelf cooling demon
> (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/free_energy/message/4126) and, if
> needed, a stimulated foton-axion emission radiator
> (http://google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&q=%22Primakoff+effect%22).

[snip]

Reply to the OP. Tunnel a 1/4" ball bearing. We'll wait.

[Mike]

Morpheal wrote:
> Teleportation is not going to be the disassembly of basic matter and
> its reassembly at another distant location in space as some have
> suggested. Rather, the apparent teleportation of matter is its
> disappearance at one place in space-time and its reappearance at
> another distant place in space-time, conveyed there by being suitably
> enveloped in a field which conveys the material object from one place
> to another.
>

[snip crap]

Is this a NP-complete problem?

Molecular structure is not explained fully by current QM. Similar
structures have the same Hamiltonian. Tunnel a pig and you get a cow
back.

Mike

[Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com]

Autymn D. C. wrote:
> > It'll just fall out. You're talking to what is likely a loose-sphincter
> > boy.
>
> I'll smash your likelihood, Sbh, and your sexual confusion. I'm the
> least likely thing in the world. Blend Stella McCartney, Alexis
> Bledel, Amy Poehler, Charlotte Church, Annie Lennox, and the Cartoon
> Network girl and I would still be ahead.

COMMENT:

GIRL, then. To quote Stewie Griffin: "So, is there any tread left on
the tires? Or at this point would it be like throwing a hot dog down a
hallway?"

SBH

[Autymn D. C.]

Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com wrote:
> GIRL, then. To quote Stewie Griffin: "So, is there any tread left on
> the tires? Or at this point would it be like throwing a hot dog down a
> hallway?"

You needn't put "COMMENT" before your comments, retard.

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/tree/browse_frm/thread/627a025d1db143c8/757bde94adff3e9c?rnum=1&hl=en&_done=%2Fgroup%2Fsci.physics%2Fbrowse_frm%2Fthread%2F627a025d1db143c8%2F5273945f3f1cb80b%3Flnk%3Dst%26rnum%3D1%26#doc_90d7d7d785cc2742

[Autymn D. C.]

Uncle Al wrote:
> Reply to the OP. Tunnel a 1/4" ball bearing. We'll wait.

That's like asking me to put myself in orbit, when I don't have access
to the machinery, first considering how much was spent to develop the
machinery which greatly overshoots the cost of the machinery itself.
However, you don't even specify how far to tunnel the ball. I will
say-and you will need to use maths to disprove me-that the ball is
already tunnelling arbitrarily.

-Aut
Look at Cool Chips in the meantime for 5000 W/cm^2 of thermotunnelling
heat-pumping action.

[Uncle Al]

"Autymn D. C." wrote:
>
> Uncle Al wrote:
> > Reply to the OP. Tunnel a 1/4" ball bearing. We'll wait.
>
> That's like asking me to put myself in orbit, when I don't have access
> to the machinery, first considering how much was spent to develop the
> machinery which greatly overshoots the cost of the machinery itself.
> However, you don't even specify how far to tunnel the ball. I will
> say-and you will need to use maths to disprove me-that the ball is
> already tunnelling arbitrarily.

Ground to low Earth orbit requires the energy of an object's weight in
coal burned. While you are plucking things out of your nether bungs,
design a more efficient modality (reducible to practice) than reaction
rockets. You don't know the difference between pen on paper and steel
on concrete.

Tabulated heats of combustion for coals range from 2.4-3.2x10^7 J/kg.
For an object in low Earth orbit v^2 = Rg, and the kinetic
energy/kilogram is Rg/2. With R = 6x10^6 m (from the center of mass)
and g =10 m/s^2 that works out to 3x10^7 J/kg. A rocket (not the
loathsome Space Scuttle) uses 100X as much energy to put a kilogram of
payload in low Earth orbit.

(A better number for gee at 300 miles altitude is 840 cm/sec^2)

[Autymn D. C.]

Uncle Al wrote:
> Ground to low Earth orbit requires the energy of an object's weight in
> coal burned. While you are plucking things out of your nether bungs,
> design a more efficient modality (reducible to practice) than reaction
> rockets. You don't know the difference between pen on paper and steel
> on concrete.

Yes I do: Pen on paper is cheaper. The more efficient modality has
already been designed, disjointedly and spottedly, which I
beyond-greatly improve and advance here. Nix all solar sail projects
and fix their starting materials to stickwork as specular solar area
ignitors, piloted by guy ropes from the ground on shared anchored
hoops, on blimps' lenticular half-walls alternately filled with gaseous
oligatomic fuels and airs (oxidisers) through clear blimps' half-walls
corkscrewing up to the heavens as a tankless ramjet-glider-helicopter
is flown under the full power of all ignitors focused onto the craft's
CIT-developed Stirling engine into the first few blimps, compressing
and overheating the reaction through tandem and offboard sunly and
chemical power wholly. Now that took under fifteen minutes.

Have you seen the History channel show wherein a woman-led team made a
great kite and scaffold from ancient materials in order to raise a
ton-block and -obelisk with wind power in only minutes? To engineers
and sceptics, nonlinear mechanics is an alien.

-Aut

[Uncle Al]

"Autymn D. C." wrote:
>
> Uncle Al wrote:
> > Ground to low Earth orbit requires the energy of an object's weight in
> > coal burned. While you are plucking things out of your nether bungs,
> > design a more efficient modality (reducible to practice) than reaction
> > rockets. You don't know the difference between pen on paper and steel
> > on concrete.
>
> Yes I do: Pen on paper is cheaper.

You've never worked for the Government. Uncle Al did it for three
months. Never again.

> The more efficient modality has
> already been designed, disjointedly and spottedly, which I
> beyond-greatly improve and advance here. Nix all solar sail projects
> and fix their starting materials to stickwork as specular solar area
> ignitors, piloted by guy ropes from the ground on shared anchored
> hoops, on blimps' lenticular half-walls alternately filled with gaseous
> oligatomic fuels and airs (oxidisers) through clear blimps' half-walls
> corkscrewing up to the heavens as a tankless ramjet-glider-helicopter
> is flown under the full power of all ignitors focused onto the craft's
> CIT-developed Stirling engine into the first few blimps, compressing
> and overheating the reaction through tandem and offboard sunly and
> chemical power wholly. Now that took under fifteen minutes.

http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/joes.htm

> Have you seen the History channel show wherein a woman-led team made a
> great kite and scaffold from ancient materials in order to raise a
> ton-block and -obelisk with wind power in only minutes? To engineers
> and sceptics, nonlinear mechanics is an alien.

The tool was appropriate to the toolmaker. (You're fun to spar with
even when mismatched.)

[Autymn D. C.]

make that a 16-ton obelisk:
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=%22Flying+Pyramids%22+OR+%22Soaring+Stones%22