Comment on Make it so

DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

• IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I thought someone redid the math a while back and got the energy requirement down to simply the mass of Jupiter.

  source

  • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Corrct, but, it also still requires negative energy density to be a conceptually and physically possible thing.

    Which is… currently not understood to be possible, or exist.

    There have been even more recent attempts to… reconceptualize the whole, which have resulted in less required negative energy density…

    arxiv.org/pdf/2102.06824

    … but not 0. So this is still sci-fi, untill we discover… anti-energy, or… something like that.

    source

    • chuckleslord@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Negative energy is almost certainly not a thing.

      If two objects made up of matter and antimatter collide, they would annihilate each other and release all of their energy as an explosion

      If two objects made of energy and anti-energy collided they would also annihilate each other… except there would be nothing afterwards. Total information loss as no energy would escape the impact, since there would be no more energy afterwards.

      source

      • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Yeah I’m inclined to agree.

        If negative energy is somehow possible, it causes … an absurd number of paradoxes, very quickly, if it can just… exist, without bounds.

        I am not any kind of actual physicist, but if I had to attempt to concieve of some framework where it even might be possible…

        I’d go for some kind of 11, 12, whatever dimensional universe, when it would concievably be possible to have energy be able to bleed off in higher dimensions, which might kind of look like ‘negative energy’ to us 3D spacetime things, but actually wouldn’t be.

        Of course… all of that is mind bogglingly complex as well, and probably causes paradoxes I am too ignorant to understand.

        source
      • lime@feddit.nu ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        since energy is a property of matter rather than something on its own, it would be more like a totally inelastic collision.

        but while we’re on sci-fi, what if negative enerfy is possible in a moving reference frame?

        source
      • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Wait.

        Ok uh… what if…

        What if anti-energy + energy = 50.0000…1% matter, and 49.9999…9% anti matter?

        We… still don’t actually know why matter dominates the universe over anti-matter, right?

        … just spitballing here.

        Does that even … possibly make sense?

        I don’t know.

        source
    • lemmyman@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Sir are you accusing this meme of lying to me?

      source

      • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Just want you well appraised of the facts, sir, up to you to judge the rest.

        source
  • davidgro@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    But in negative energy, which isn’t known to exist independently. (You can’t take the Casimir effect out from between the plates, etc.)

    source
• boolean_sledgehammer@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  And a completely hypothetical state of matter and energy.

  source