Inertial Dampening with Time manipulation - a thought experiment.

An Inertial Dampener can be made by altering the flow of time.

This idea is entirely theoretical and I have no hard science to back it up. It is purely speculative, but the ideas involved are completely based in science, so I felt it was appropriate in this forum.

An Inertial dampener is a completely imaginary device. It was invented by science-fiction writers. If a spacecraft were to go from zero to warp speed in an instant, the acceleration involved would kill any persons therein as a result of their inertial mass. Hence the need to dampen said-effect -- and the Inertial dampener was born.

Inertial Dampener

How does something like that work? I have always doubted something like that could ever be built, but tonight I had an intriguing thought.
According to Relativity, time flows differently at different speeds, and also in the presence of strong gravitational fields.

Why Does TIme Slow Down Near a Black Hole

So anyway, my idea is that to damp inertia you have to damp time.
Acceleration is measured in meters per second. TIme is an intrinsic variable in the force equation.
F=ma, where acceleration is measured in meters per second squared.
An Inertial dampener would seek to damp the force in this equation. The only way to do that is to alter the mass variable or the acceleration variable. I agree that altering the flow of time is a tall order but I think not as much as trying to alter the amount of mass.

For example: I am falling to my doom. I jumped from a plane, and my parachute isn't working. Luckily I have my trusty "inertial dampener".

How it works is that milliseconds before I impact the ground, time is slowed down for me. Outside of my frame of reference a few milliseconds pass, inside the time field is ten full seconds or more. The speed at which I impact the ground from my perspective is described in thousandths of meters per second, which multiplied by my mass is negligent; whereas outside the time field my mass would be multiplied by a speed of tens of meters per second and the resulting force would be catastrophic to me.

Of course, altering the flow of time is beyond our present technology, but I think the idea behind it is simple and elegant, like most true connections are.

This hopefully makes good sense to the people who understand these things and I would love some feedback.

What say you ATS?

That is a very interesting approach to affecting the equation. I am not sure you would want to instantly "turn on" the damper, though. The resulting g-forces of such a rapid decrease in relative speed would be catastrophic as well. It would need to have an algorithmic type of curve in effect, relative to the variables in the equation.

But I agree that it would likely be easier to do. Unless someone has unlocked the cheat code for Moon Physics, like on Grand Theft Auto.

You create an inertial dampener by turning off the higgs field. It is the higgs field that impart mass to matter. Since we have now discovered the presence of the higgs boson this possibility is already a step closer....but still quite a way off.

Of course it may be that an inertial dampener is not necessary. If you create a bubble that isolates matter from normal space time then the bubble can accelerate at any rate, since it has no mass. Inside the bubble nothing is moving !!!! therefore no inertia.

Quite how the "ship" inside the bubble can affect the bubbles position in normal space time without interacting with normal space time is an interesting conundrum. But at least I have solved the inertia problem which is a start

Altering space-time is exactly what is hypothesized to rule out the need for inertial dampeners. Or add them in to the system to make it more enjoyable (If I am getting this right and if the fellas at Cern got the Higgs right.)

The idea is that inertia to .xx of the speed of light is going to create a ton of G Forces pushing off, and then slowing down, same thing as you need equal force to stop.

By creating a warp field, ***, you get to bend space time so you can ride a wake of Gene Roddenberry awesomeness, which doesn't have the inertia effects of nuclear or chemical driven boosters.

Correct me if I''m wrong…

PS: Also, every Hawking book I've read, I have never heard it referred to as time, only space-time. Which is a little more complicated. The gravitational forces that cause warping of space-time are kind of tied into one another.

reply to post by JayDub113


You will get some inkling of what you are on about, if you read
my posts on Page 14 of the thread titled ' Exposing the Myths of Settled Science '

Double

Wow, I am impressed guys, very intelligent dialogue. It's almost rare on this site these days unfortunately.

@Boncho

I agree completely that space and time are intrinsically connected. That's the essence of the idea.
The acceleration variable in the Force equation is given in meters per second. A unit of time. Since time and space are intertwined, we can affect that time variable by affecting the spatial component somehow.

This whole idea came about while researching for a short story I am writing, and I wanted to get a deeper understanding of how such a device could feasibly work. Thanks for the input, great stuff.

JayDub113
Wow, I am impressed guys, very intelligent dialogue. It's almost rare on this site these days unfortunately.

@Boncho

I agree completely that space and time are intrinsically connected. That's the essence of the idea.
The acceleration variable in the Force equation is given in meters per second. A unit of time. Since time and space are intertwined, we can affect that time variable by affecting the spatial component somehow.

This whole idea came about while researching for a short story I am writing, and I wanted to get a deeper understanding of how such a device could feasibly work. Thanks for the input, great stuff.

No space and time are not intrinsically linked at all, so your idea
is moot. But good luck with your story writing

Space and Time are NOT intrinsically linked? Care to elaborate on how you just refuted the entirety of modern physics and cosmology?

..and you are an engineer and inventor? Really?

well you might see you idea tested out tangentally due to the fact that recently a temporal cloaking effect was verified in a lab.

phys.org...

different reference frames are somewhat confusing too. a lot of the constraints we place on velocity time travel and so forth are due to people analyzing problems from the point of view of the wrong reference frame. for example i have seen several instances where people applied time dilation to the wrong reference frame and insisted that a light speed trip to the nearest star would take thousands of years from the point of view of earth when that is clearly not how time dilation works.

so anyway one thing i have thought of is how do differing reference frames reconcile when they merge? at the end of a two way relativistic trip for example or when the people on a relativistic trip use a weeks worth of food, water, air and fuel from their perspective when they return home where people would expect them to have used years of consumables.

with regards to fuel, for example; relativity in one frame would dictate they need an infinite amount of fuel to get to C but on board the ship time is shortened so they experience weeks instead of years so... how much fuel and stuff should they actually pack? if they experience a week of time why pack 1000 years of food and fuel and water and so forth? additionally; if their consumption and in fact the flow of time itself is so radically different how would their math be different when they can calculate their needs compared to the outrageous needs calculated at rest at home?

the really big thing is fuel wise; since at rest at home the calculations show an impossible amount of energy/fuel due to an impossible to overcome increase in inertial mass as you approach C.

Which view or reality (reference frame) is dominant? I think the travelling frame should determine the physics and so on. but if so; is it as hard as we think since the scientific criticism is based on the stationary reference frame's math and expectations.

originally posted by: boncho
Altering space-time is exactly what is hypothesized to rule out the need for inertial dampeners. Or add them in to the system to make it more enjoyable (If I am getting this right and if the fellas at Cern got the Higgs right.)

The idea is that inertia to .xx of the speed of light is going to create a ton of G Forces pushing off, and then slowing down, same thing as you need equal force to stop.

By creating a warp field, ***, you get to bend space time so you can ride a wake of Gene Roddenberry awesomeness, which doesn't have the inertia effects of nuclear or chemical driven boosters.

Correct me if I''m wrong…

PS: Also, every Hawking book I've read, I have never heard it referred to as time, only space-time. Which is a little more complicated. The gravitational forces that cause warping of space-time are kind of tied into one another.

Hotdamned
Theres still hope for mankind...
Thats one post i REALLY enjoyed
reading from you B...

Could be a lead in to a new realm of physics understanding.
If you have ever played around with large Monte Carlo simulations of "random events" you know there are some spooky results at a distance.
Take the outcome of a "random" coin flip for example, looks pretty random if you flip the coin once.
Flip the coin a trillion times over "time" and you see clear patterns that are anything but random.
The effect could work as an "inertial damper" in some futuristic power plant.

As a child I remember dreaming about a synchronicity dimension, but it might be off topic this thread so please delete if so.

originally posted by: yorkshirelad
You create an inertial dampener by turning off the higgs field. It is the higgs field that impart mass to matter

It's the higgs field that imparts SOME of mass to matter. But most is gluon interaction in hadrons.

it's actually quite complicated:

profmattstrassler.com...

a reply to: Cauliflower

You'll get statistical fluctuations with any random event. That doesn't mean that the events weren't random.

The idea of inertial dampeners is wrong because the ship doesn't accelerate to warp speed, the bubble the ship is in accelerates to wrap speed.

Why not forego the whole dampeners idea and send an avatar, a construct, that doesn't eat, has no need for sleep. Who knows there may be pockets in space that will make you halucinate or impair your thinking. No need to worry about a thing mon.