79 réponses à ce sujet

[javierabegazo]

Dark energy does speed up universe's expansion - Technology & Science - CBC News

[Chromie]

Now we just need to find some alien data on Mars.

Modifié par Ringo12, 19 mai 2011 - 07:16 .

[Phaedon]

We knew that for quite some time.

Now, an important theme of mass effect is well, mass.
I think that it was a very good decision of Bioware to go with mass as a means of "space folding", since even modern scientists admit that we know very little about mass.

/Slightlyirrelevantpost

Modifié par Phaedon, 19 mai 2011 - 07:17 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

Yeah, dark energy has been known for some time and Einstein mathematically predicted its existence way back. However, I do not think it's the same dark energy referenced in the ME universe. Seems to only share the same name.

Modifié par Fiery Phoenix, 19 mai 2011 - 07:23 .

[Black Raptor]

I'm pretty sure most of the "science" in Mass Effect relies on the concept of mass effect. Dark energy was simply taken for granted.

Discovery of element 0 on the other hand...

[jamesp81]

Dark energy isn't one specific type of energy. It's basically a catch all phrase for all the energy in the universe that is inferred to exist by mathematics, but that we haven't been able to yet observe directly. Same for dark matter.

[Lady Olivia]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

Yeah, dark energy has been known for some time and Einstein mathematically predicted its existence way back. However, I do not think it's the same dark energy referenced in the ME universe. Seems to only share the same name.

It's the same dark energy and the usage of the concept in ME is surprisingly and refreshingly healthy.

The concept is old indeed; finding actual evidence for it is what made it news. Don't know how good the evidence is - I just read the abstract of the quoted article and it's nowhere near as strong as that news report makes it out to be. It's a prime example of good scientific PR, though.

[Lady Olivia]

Black Raptor wrote...

I'm pretty sure most of the "science" in Mass Effect relies on the concept of mass effect. Dark energy was simply taken for granted.

Mass effect and dark energy are loosely the same thing in ME. You use dark energy to manipulate mass (also create/anihilate? can't remember), so it's called mass effect.

[Bearcut]

Element Zero is the big part.

Something with Zero mass is no longer bound by the speed of light, which is pretty much what the space travel in the ME universe is all about.

Could it possible? Of course. You'd have to be insane to think we've discovered everything there is to know about the physical universe. We hardly know a thing about quantum mechanics.

[jamesp81]

Bearcut wrote...

Element Zero is the big part.

Something with Zero mass is no longer bound by the speed of light, which is pretty much what the space travel in the ME universe is all about.

Could it possible? Of course. You'd have to be insane to think we've discovered everything there is to know about the physical universe. We hardly know a thing about quantum mechanics.

I think maybe they're being a little loose on some things here.  Technically, an object with no rest mass will have a max speed of lightspeed, c.  Assuming you don't do other things such as folding space, for example.  I think that the relays do that.

Element Zero would be classified as what, today, is called exotic matter.  Most present day theories for FTL travel rely on the use of exotic matter.

Modifié par jamesp81, 19 mai 2011 - 07:46 .

[Phaedon]

Bearcut wrote...

Element Zero is the big part.

Something with Zero mass is no longer bound by the speed of light, which is pretty much what the space travel in the ME universe is all about.

Could it possible? Of course. You'd have to be insane to think we've discovered everything there is to know about the physical universe. We hardly know a thing about quantum mechanics.

I don't think that that's how it works.

You know, although people say that FTL velocities are impossible, there are a few cases were that has not been considered true.

But, Mass Effect talks about FTL travel, which refers to spacetime folding.
You know "changes the fabric of space and time itself"

[Gatt9]

Eh, we took the galactic equivalent of a 0.00000000000000000000000000001 second look at what's happening and made up an explanation for it. For all we know, there could be a defined orbit around some unknown object and the "Divergence" we're seeing is just orbital patterns.

We simply do not know enough to say if the universe is actually expanding, or if all we're doing is just seeing some tiny fraction of a pattern.

A century of observation in a Universe many Billions of years old isn't nearly enough to draw the conclusion that the Universe is expanding.

TBH, I'm reminded strongly of the theory that the Earth was the center of the universe because it looked like the Sun was circling it.

[Black Raptor]

Bearcut wrote...

Element Zero is the big part.

Something with Zero mass is no longer bound by the speed of light, which is pretty much what the space travel in the ME universe is all about.

Could it possible? Of course. You'd have to be insane to think we've discovered everything there is to know about the physical universe. We hardly know a thing about quantum mechanics.

Something with 0 mass is still bound by the speed of light. Things with mass can't ever reach the speed of light, let alone go faster. Things with 0 mass can go the speed of light, but don't go faster.

For example, photons don't have mass and they go at the speed of light. 
Essentially "mass effect" warps the space time continuum and enables long distances to be travelled because the fabric of space has been warped to make the distance between 2 points shorter.

It's my understanding that they have still found a way to travel at FTL speeds without the use of Mass relays though.   

[Bearcut]

Photons do have mass.

Edit: As evidenced by the fact that they can be "Trapped" in black holes, and tend to "bend" spectrally around large celestial objects.

Modifié par Bearcut, 19 mai 2011 - 07:59 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

Gatt9 wrote...

Eh, we took the galactic equivalent of a 0.00000000000000000000000000001 second look at what's happening and made up an explanation for it. For all we know, there could be a defined orbit around some unknown object and the "Divergence" we're seeing is just orbital patterns.

We simply do not know enough to say if the universe is actually expanding, or if all we're doing is just seeing some tiny fraction of a pattern.

A century of observation in a Universe many Billions of years old isn't nearly enough to draw the conclusion that the Universe is expanding.

TBH, I'm reminded strongly of the theory that the Earth was the center of the universe because it looked like the Sun was circling it.

We think the universe is expanding because of the light spectrum of far-off galaxies, which analytically suggests that these galaxies are receding from us, which in turn is thought to be due to a progressive expansion of the Universe. Also don't forget that the Big Bang itself was an instantaneous expansion; in other words, the Universe has been expanding since then.

That being said, there is definitely much to be known yet. When did we start observing anything beyond the Milky Way? In the 1930's when Hubble began his ambitious astronomical research? It hasn't even been a century yet.

[Black Raptor]

Gatt9 wrote...

Eh, we took the galactic equivalent of a 0.00000000000000000000000000001 second look at what's happening and made up an explanation for it. For all we know, there could be a defined orbit around some unknown object and the "Divergence" we're seeing is just orbital patterns.

We simply do not know enough to say if the universe is actually expanding, or if all we're doing is just seeing some tiny fraction of a pattern.

A century of observation in a Universe many Billions of years old isn't nearly enough to draw the conclusion that the Universe is expanding.

TBH, I'm reminded strongly of the theory that the Earth was the center of the universe because it looked like the Sun was circling it.

The observations that the universe is expanding goes back 13.7 billion years. When we look into space, what we see is the past. The photons emitted by those stars and galaxies at the moment, won't be seen for years to come. 
However, no matter where we look the universe is always red shifting. Everything we see is moving away from us even though what we are seeing is millions, billions, or over 10 billion years old. 
It's not just a century of observation, the things we are observing are behaving in a way that they've been doing since the first stars formed. 

[Black Raptor]

Bearcut wrote...

Photons do have mass.

Edit: As evidenced by the fact that they can be "Trapped" in black holes, and tend to "bend" spectrally around large celestial objects.

lulz. Photons are "sucked" into black holes and bend around stars and galaxies because these objects are so large that they bend spacetime. 
Ie the straight line the photon is travelling on is not straight relative to the observer. It's not because they have mass. 

[Phaedon]

Photons do have mass, we know that for decades now, don't we?

[Bearcut]

Phaedon wrote...

Photons do have mass, we know that for decades now, don't we?

Thank you.

[Lady Olivia]

Bearcut wrote...

Photons do have mass.

Edit: As evidenced by the fact that they can be "Trapped" in black holes, and tend to "bend" spectrally around large celestial objects.

No they don't. They do those things because they must travel along the space-time continuum which is curved around massive bodies.

Anyway, even with no mass you can only travel at the speed of light. That's what the FTL drives in ME are for, and you can use them for "short-distance" flights, like, inside planetary systems and such.
Just think, flying at the speed of light, you'd need around 30000 years to reach the center of the galaxy, let alone the other side.

For "real" interstellar travel, you must use the mass relays. They also work on mass effect principles, but nobody know how exactly.

Modifié par Lady Olivia, 19 mai 2011 - 08:12 .

[Black Raptor]

Phaedon wrote...

Photons do have mass, we know that for decades now, don't we?

Photons have 0 rest mass. 

[Phaedon]

Actually, I appear to be incorrect. I must have mistaken it with earlier theories, around the time Einstein was developing GR.

Anyway, FTL Travel =/= FTL velocities

[Black Raptor]

Bearcut wrote...

Phaedon wrote...

Photons do have mass, we know that for decades now, don't we?

Thank you.

Photons don't have mass. Special relativity wouldn't work if they did.  

[Lady Olivia]

Phaedon wrote...

Anyway, FTL Travel =/= FTL velocities

Really? What then?

Modifié par Lady Olivia, 19 mai 2011 - 08:18 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

Phaedon wrote...

Photons do have mass, we know that for decades now, don't we?

The problem lies within one how defines the word mass--that's really what the whole debate is about. Fundamentally, if photons travel at the speed of light, then their mass has to equal exactly zero. This is in according to Einstein's relativity. That being said, photons do have momentum. It's just very different from what you'd expect because we tend to think of photons as actual objects when they really are waves, and for waves classical physics breaks down. You'd have to go to the quantum level to realistically understand photon physics, and that's where all the confusion comes from.

Basically, photons have no mass, but they do share part of the properties as particles. Deep down they're waves and follow a different route of physics.