universe- why is it here?

quote:

---

Are you saying that Star Trek ever has anything but good science? Why I oughta...

---

Actually i'm pretty certain that most of the major things in star trek have at least been hypothesized as being possible. For example teleportation, its a real phenomenon and has been performed in a lab.

Heh, way ahead of you, happy; I posted the link for this some time back in this message.

WOAH! YOU JUST EXCITED ME TO THE 77th power dude! GIVE ME THE LINK TO THAT LABRATORY TELEPORTATION ARTICLE. WE CAME SO FAR IN TECHNOLIGY. YOU BETTER NO BE LIEN

Have you been living under a rock? Anyone with the least interest in science should know about this for a long time now.

---

The Laminator

We are the bog. Resistance is voltage over current.

For goodness's sake, please vote Democrat this November!

You've been asked not to do that.

It also makes you look rather childish.

Guidosoft writes: GIVE ME THE LINK TO THAT LABRATORY TELEPORTATION ARTICLE.

You can find it at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3811785.stm

I would imagine that there would be more up-to-date information on this by now, but I haven't checked up on it for a while. I'll take a look around some time and see if I can find anything more recent. Until then, hopefully, that link will suffice. For what it's worth, there it is. Enjoy!

teleportation, its a real phenomenon and has been performed in a lab.

Yeaah, but the scientist got his head swapped with a fly! Talk about your bugs, bet you never saw that happen on Star Trek. You won't find me teleporting. I don't want to end up being sucked dry by some spider.

lfen

i was lucky enough to give a presentation on teleportation at university when I was doing my physics degree. It took a bit of persuading my group though, they actually wanted to talk about global warming instead! lol

quote:

---

Haven't read it since 4th Grade so a lot of details have slipped. Still, it's not my kind of book; mainly because there was way too much dawdling around before they actually got to the thing.

---

That "dawdling" is called "character development", and "storyline building".

happy_atheist writes: i was lucky enough to give a presentation on teleportation at university...

Outstanding! Was it based on the same quantum entanglement principle that was used (so I understand) in the link I gave?

happy_atheist writes: ...when I was doing my physics degree.

Good stuff! So do you actually have formal qualifications in physics (or any field within physics)? Just curious...I hope you don't mind my asking.

happy_atheist writes: It took a bit of persuading my group though, they actually wanted to talk about global warming instead! lol

Oh jeez, there's a tough decision; global warming or teleportation? Don't make me choose!

Yes, teleportation is based on the quantum entanglement principles Its amazing how limited our macroscopic views of the universe are. And yes I have a physics degree, but I don't profess to be any good at physics. I didn't do as well as i'd have liked. I've since moved on to do a masters in computer science which is going much better though

happy_atheist writes: Yes, teleportation is based on the quantum entanglement principles

Heh, I know that teleportation is based on quantum entanglement. I was talking specifically about your presentation.

happy_atheist writes: Its amazing how limited our macroscopic views of the universe are.

Indeed. The further down we go, the less clearly defined everything seems to be. Ultimately, it all becomes a probabilistic "haze" at the smallest levels.

Out of curiosity (hope you don't mind my questions), did your physics degree require an in-depth understanding of quantum theory? Because it is definitely one of the more difficult physical concepts to wrap your mind around.

happy_atheist writes: And yes I have a physics degree, but I don't profess to be any good at physics. I didn't do as well as i'd have liked.

Perhaps not but to have received a degree you must surely have a pretty good understanding of it. They don't just hand those things out. Well, they don't at *cough* accredited universities anyway. In any case, I know how hard physics gets and I tip my hat to anyone who has earned a university level degree in the subject.

happy_atheist writes: I've since moved on to do a masters in computer science which is going much better though

Glad to hear it.

I had a mate who did similar; studied physics (becoming quite proficient, too) but majored in computer science, even doing an extra year by honours.

quote:

---

Heh, I know that teleportation is based on quantum entanglement. I was talking specifically about your presentation.

---

Yes, we did our best to explain entanglement. Not the easiest of things to get your head around hehe.

quote:

---

Out of curiosity (hope you don't mind my questions), did your physics degree require an in-depth understanding of quantum theory? Because it is definitely one of the more difficult physical concepts to wrap your mind around.

---

We had two courses in quantum physics, one in the second year and one in the third year. Apart from the straight quantum physics courses we also had a course in statistical mechanics in the third year. That uses quantum mechanics to derive thermodynamic principles. We also had a course in atomic physics that used a lot of quantum mechanics. Pretty much the only place it didn't pop up in was relativity.

happy_atheist writes: Yes, we did our best to explain entanglement. Not the easiest of things to get your head around hehe.

Indeed. Depends on your audience as well, I would imagine. Some concepts are harder than others to "dumb down".

happy_atheist writes: We also had a course in atomic physics that used a lot of quantum mechanics.

I know I keep plugging my own thread but we're already way off topic here (sorry admins) and you may be interested in some of the questions I asked. For example, the concept of the "curled up" microscopic dimensions came up, at one point, and I asked a few questions you may be knowledgeable on, if you are familiar with things on that level.

happy_atheist writes: Pretty much the only place it didn't pop up in was relativity.

Ah yes, I understand there is something of a contention between them. They both explain things very well on their respective levels but can't be unified into a single theory of gravity, or something to that effect?

quote:

---

Ah yes, I understand there is something of a contention between them. They both explain things very well on their respective levels but can't be unified into a single theory of gravity, or something to that effect?

---

Thats right, quantum mechanics and relativity are like oil and water. They just refuse to mix. I don't know if that means either of them is wrong or that there's something more fundamental we're missing that would explain both of them.