This is more of a paradox of time itself, but to understand time, it helps to understand time WITH space. I want to address these two images:
These images show the frequencies of space measured by light: that of time.
It takes less time to traverse distance in deep space because there is less space away from gravitational fields, those fields generated by mass.
The warp drive (or hyperdrive; light-drive) makes use of this paradox in order to operate. Obviously the universe looks backwards because it looks like there is much more space between stars, then there are surrounding stars.
This is where we get into concepts in physics called negative space and positive space, etc.
Relativity claims time is faster in deep space away from gravitational fields. However, it says nothing about frequency, and assumes frequency is always the same wherever one is, in the universe. As you can see in the picture on the left, there is more distance to travel closer to gravity, and so it takes longer in time. From outside the star system looking in toward the planets, it would appear that the planets are moving slower in time according to General Relativity.
According to the picture on the right, it would appear to take MORE time to traverse space closer to gravity fields, because there is more space to traverse. These are not contradictions, but the geometry itself of the paradox of space and time. The relation of space and time is intimate however. As space changes, so does time. That ALSO means that the speed of light ALSO MUST CHANGE, because light measures space and time FREQUENCY. Traveling through TIME is the objective of the warp drive, which warps space so it takes less time to traverse great distances. Also, the nature of the warp drive, which is more like a hyperdrive in these physics (there are subtle differences), works with the frequencies of space and time itself, which can travel independently of normal spacetime.
These physics explain that difference and unity, and goes into excruciating detail.
It takes MORE time to travel distance in space, RELATIVELY speaking. General Relativity does not reach the same conclusion. If it takes more time to travel distance in space, then it takes less time closer to gravity traveling in a gravitationally contracted space. General Relativity DOES claim that there are more intervals of time closer to gravity but this is because time is faster specifically! Time only appears to be slow because there are many more seconds in between! Time literally slows down in deep space and speeds up, closer to gravity.
General Relativity claims that time slows down closer to gravity. That is in error.
A warp drive shrinks the distance to travel in space due to a higher frequency in time. VERY simplified. It also has an effect in time. If we are able to witness a higher frequency of spacetime, we would be able to witness something with a faster motion in time, moving faster in time.
Light is independent of time because it has no mass. If the sunlight just above a forest canopy casts shadows that all point back to the sun, but can be measured in lower Euclidean dimensions to appear as the light source is JUST over the forest canopy (instead of 93 million miles away), then we ought to be able to observe the light of that higher frequency of spacetime from a lower frequency (in deep space), and observe faster motion in time.
The paradox of frequency is that deep space can be at higher frequency because matter and mass and gravitation moves more and more slower than the speed of light, the bigger it gets. Oppositely, at higher frequency of mass and inertia, there is faster time, and there is more space. When there is less space, time should speed up however because there is less density. Closer to light there should be less mass and faster time because light is without mass and thus simultaneous in time. All these instances are true and are equal, and yet can be opposite of the other points, which is in paradox for example if someone were at each point of a pyramid, then things would look different compared to where each person stands.
The assumption that time speeds up or slows down is also perceived in different ways, and can be explained differently, using either geometry or wave frequency to illustrate. I think it is incorrect to observe that the faster something goes, the slower it travels however, as General Relativity concludes. Relative acceleration and deceleration tends to clarify that conclusion of General Relativity.
And if we can see that there is less space to travel in deep space, then we can look at that space as higher frequency space (less density; less paradox of separation; time separates), because if there is less space to travel, it should take less time ESPECIALLY if you could adjust your own time frequency to make the journey, which is what all of this is about.
The secret is not to use inertial acceleration of mass to generate a higher gravity field which increases the frequency of time, because that also increases mass density and will compress space (increasing space; making a larger paradox than unifying the paradox). That does have application however. But, the use of inertial acceleration can be two 180 degree wave phases moving in opposite direction, equal and opposite, which reduces the frequency of space while increasing the frequency of time.
General Relativity is inadequate to explain such principles and mechanics.
General (and Special) Relativity now serves as an example only, and is no longer able to explain the truth of the universe but only within local frames of frequency, which is not the case when determining the motion of black holes which incurs a much greater frequency difference in time and space. Relativity changes as soon as you turn on the starship engines, also (after all, it's all relative, and in paradox).
~.. ~ . ~ .
I realize this is a unique way to look at the universe and it may give people trouble depending on how well versed they are with university-taught physics. But if people are going to let special relativity stop them cold in their tracks with an assumption that faster than light travel is practically impossible, then that's the end. Special relativity deals with objects like rockets and protons hurdling through space, and does NOT deal with fields of energy which change the dynamics of space and time, or starship engines flying through space.
It cannot be logically claimed that warp drive is impossible due to special relativity's take on rocks or billiard balls in motion. The ongoing paradox INVARIABLY depends upon your point of view. I've tried real hard but have found no case of an absolute static object-based universe. The universe is fluid, and matter is energy and light, in the form of a paradox and multi-paradoxes.
Frequency itself behaves in opposite ways. For example you can have a high frequency of very dense mass, or a very high frequency of very little mass, both with equal force. If you consider that frequency relates with time, then you can work "empty" scalar space with dense mass-space together integrated all as light, and co-direct force with one common directed path.
With two opposites, X and Y, there is one common unity -- the radius of the whole, the circle of the two, as one. (See: General Blog, "Paradoxes of Unity" for a better grasp on the mechanics of the paradox itself)
There have been instances where Bob Lazar's gravity tube out of Area 51 was reported to freeze time in a gravity engine. Making time still inside the gravity field, rather than speeding it up. But when that field is shut down, time reverted back to it's NORMAL conditions without an event horizon that appears that everything is frozen in time on the inside of the event horizon.
To be fair General and Special Relativity confirms that reality. Yet the red-shifting of distant star systems demonstrates the stretching of space into a longer wave due to the contraction of space closer in the star system due to gravity which stretches the space at the edges. This also explains a relative "speedbump" aspect near the edges of an "event horizon." (Note: the stars are visually blue-shifted to the naked eye though, to everything outside our star-system's gravity field, just thought I'd mention)
If spacetime can be stretched, it can be contracted. The condensing of electrical space is also a close cousin of capacitance, as electrical condensers were used 100 years ago in Tesla's time.
This is about the best way to explain warp drives though, by NOT using General and Special Relativity but only for example. Seeing how space moves is a better way in my opinion, because GR and SR also are only concerned with what happens outside the event horizons of inner universal events (object-based, instead of frequency-based).
Examining pure frequency and energy, we see that the universe behaves very differently. I'm concerned about the "whys" of this, but I'm more focused on the inception of warp drives than stabbing myself in my foot over it over, and over. If I can explain how a technology can work, and demonstrate aspects that provides further evidence to it working, even though the physics may be radically different than the usual, then at least there is a basis to take it seriously, and to allow oneself to believe that "yes, it could work."
IF INDEED Gravity does separate mass from a pure higher frequency of light further and further, incurring a longer time wave, as GR and SR suggests (light being the unity of matter and mass, without mass and without time), then GR and SR show that light is unity of time and space, and also implies that the gravity-cancellation engine will increase the ship's frequency in time.
Regardless, the charts above would be correct in that situation in regards to unified motion of the starship's engines (using the OTC-X1 as the foundation for this). It explains why a black hole must get massive with fast spin, to maintain equilibrium with the rest of the inertial universe.
It doesn't mean the pictures above are wrong. It means that General and Special Relativity are based around Light Unity, rather than gravitational frequency. Yet and also, if light measures the frequency of time, then we could very well BE backwards with General and Special Relativity. Light should be assumed not to have a speed at all! Mass is what has the speed, the speed of space in gravitational and massive field conditions as Einstein theorized, while time is the speed, the frequency of mass and gravitational information to move from mass to mass -- thus showing the separated universe from pure light; the living paradox of space and time as a universe of energy where there is universal Action not seen as objects (when the ego divorces self from all action and perceives an objective reality of identity and sub-identity instead of fields of energy and Cosmic water and sound and light).
Simultaneous space is Light Space, which is pure unity, and multi-dimensionality, entire fields of time simultaneously in motion, where there is no time in the rest of Existence but only in our little realm we call the "universe."
When we can compress space, then we can create a focus, a "compact" of energy and form, which would ALSO LOOK THE SAME as expanding space around a ship, which would STILL shrink it down to a little ball.
It just makes more sense to show how frequency increases in compressed space, because that's how electricity works, and we're gonna be using electricity to warp time and space obviously, unless we'd rather learn about using pure sound and intention on granite or something.
There can be no model which shows how space and time expand infinitely to achieve light unification that the ego-identity-conscious mind can grasp and relate with. It has to be drawn on paper. It has to fit into a machine. The universe may be able to expand spacetime to make galaxies move, but the human being is small and tiny and is a singular point of view than a universe-all-points-of-view. The Human has to build a little thing and make the universe work in reverse according to him/her. It's easier to contract space to work with the universe in expanded ways than to expand space and work universally upon a smaller space.
The Conclusion:
Also to simplify all that mess below in the other posts, if you can compress space where there is an imbalance then you can expand space at the edges and/or midpoint between normal space and contracted space, so that time slows to a crawl. That's the Event Horizon. What is inside the Event Horizon is where GR and SR cannot go. I've had huge issues with GR and SR as I'm sure others have, too. But if I just bypass GR and SR without addressing it, then that's irresponsible. The only thing that can truly be done is to integrate GR and SR with models of paradoxes of frequency, and see what truth results, and just take it from there, which does even MORE to explain how the universe works. Time slows to a crawl near an Event Horizon, and we can see how that works due to gravitationally contracted space, which inflates space paradoxically (literally "expansion within").
Literally, every star system is a realm where space is created and expanded around those stars. There is very little actual space between stars in deeper space. There is the illusion of it, but that's the entire nature of the paradox. GR and SR perform calculations on the illusion of space only. Why are black holes so massive? It's because that's the event horizon we see around near-infinitely contracted space, there could be entire light-years to travel actually ever before a pilot reaches the actual singularity or black hole star itself, once passing through the event horizon, to illustrate.
It makes perfect sense and does NOT contradict General and Special Relativity. If anything, because of GR and SR we now have to look at the inflation of space very differently. I could also assume that no one has truly understood General and Special Relativity until the advent of warp drive physics.
In fact in Bob Lazar's account of turning on the ET gravity engine and observing a burning candle inside the field, after the field was switched off it was shown that the candle had burned all the way out and had melted on the table. That DOES provide an account supporting evidence of a faster time frequency within an Event Horizon. Bob Lazar never mentioned any testing of that aspect of time however, or has told the public any results confirming the existence of a faster flow of time within a gravity field, specifically (he hinted at something, though).
In the case of gravity cancellation, according to special relativity the frequencies of time increase. See: Warp Drive Engineering under the section "LAU-X3 Dragon Eye."
RSS Feed