Where are the interplanetary laser comms? CSC64

[MasterGwydion]

If you are had a way of keeping the particle beams required to generate those Black Holes focussed along the path of the laser beam they why would you need the Black Holes?

No idea, but particle beams in Traveller have a greater range than lasers in Traveller, so I figure they must have a way to do that.

What is a "micro" black hole. You can't get much more "Micro" than a singularity. Do you mean black holes with a microscopic Schwarzchild radius?

Yes.

Or do you mean with micro gravity (which means they won't attract anything)?

Not even sure what a "microgravity black hole" would be. Is it actually a thing?

A Black Hole in the centre of the beam would attract the light in the beam to it, and if any of it crossed the event horizon, the light itself would be unable to escape.

Yes, but the light that passes near the micro black hole would be bent inwards as the "beam" passes the black hole. Thereby reducing the overall diameter of the beam when compared to a beam that didn't pass around a micro black hole.

The closer the beam to the hole, the more it is diverted toward the hole making control extremely difficult.

I figure learning to control gravity is likely something that could be figured out in the next several thousand years.

If the black holes gravitational pull it is capable of pulling in the far edge of the beam (but not so great it will pull it all the way in) then it will still also pulling back once the light passes the singularity.

Doing what? Slowing the beam to less than lightspeed? Do we care about that? What effect would that have? Is it important? I dunno. All I was working on was narrowing the beam using gravitational lensing. We know that light can have its course altered by gravity. This is just an extension on that. Perhaps in the next several thousand years, we will figure out how to use gravitational lensing artificially. That's all I am saying. The basis for this theoretical technology exists in physics today, so it can't be just considered space magic. It has a scientific basis.

 

[Sigtrygg]

I am not saying that it would be a smart way to do it. I am just saying that, even with current knowledge,it is theoretically possible, so who knows what kind of stuff they will come up with in the next several thousand years.


Did you not read the last sentence?

"The crushing weight of constituent matter falling in from all sides compresses the dying star to a point of zero volume and infinite density called the singularity."


View attachment 6049

That is so misleading it borders on fake science.

The singularity is not a point of infinite anything, it is a point at which our maths throws out infinities and thus our laws of physics break down.

The author knows this but is using misleading emotive language...

Gravitational singularity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[MasterGwydion]

You may want to read it.
Intense gravity is not infinite.
Similarly black holes can have a range of masses, from the primordial microscopic black holes the to the several stellar mass black holes and then finally the monster black holes found at the centre of galaxies with millions of stellar masses.

But not infinite.

So wait? First you say I may want to read my own post when you clearly didn't. (As I proved with quotes from the article) Now that I showed you that you didn't read it, now it's fake science?

How hard are you trying to contort yourself to make yourself "right"? As if you didn't just look like a moron for suggesting that someone read something that you clearly did not read.

 

[Sigtrygg]

So wait? First you say I may want to read my own post when you clearly didn't.

Your logic is as faulty as your understanding of this topic.
How could I comment on the post and the link if I had not read it...
that argument is purile

(As I proved with quotes from the article)

The quotes in the article are hyperbole and miss out critical details. The mass of a blacjk hole is not infinite, the gravity of the black hole is not infiite, the infinities occur when we try to mathematically describe the energy density.
I state again, the mass is not infinite, and the gravitational interaction is not infinite, the description of the singularity is where the infinities crop up and our physics breaks.

Now that I showed you that you didn't read it, now it's fake science?

I did read it, how else could I refer to it and say it is fake science, which may be strong words but it obviously has you confused.

How hard are you trying to contort yourself to make yourself "right"?

I don't need to contort myself, I am correct. And if you went awaqy and read up a bit on the subject and lerned the sumple maths behind it you would be able to see that the author is exaggerating - hence fake science.

As if you didn't just look like a moron for suggesting that someone read something that you clearly did not read.

And now you make yourself look like a moron since the only way I could have replied is if I did read what you posted, which I did. Or as well as a moron do you want to call me a liar as well?

Go and study the subject, I even linked the wiki on what a singularity is.

 

[Fluffy Bunny Feet]

Black hole surface gravity is by definition the speed of light and NOT infinite.

 

[swordtart]

I am stepping away from the subject. I don't want to cross the forum event horizon.

 

[MarcusIII]

Black hole surface gravity is by definition the speed of light and NOT infinite.

Yes, the G level would have to be ~300,000 km/sec

 

[J. L. Brown]

MasterGwydion is obviously (and deeply) wrong about black holes; but his point about lasers at higher TLs being able to be better focused than at lower TLs is just as obviously correct. At TL-9 the civilizations of Charted Space have mastered gravity to the point of being able to manipulate it in ways that are completely beyond our understanding, and seem utterly impossible to us. At TL-12 the nuclear forces are mastered to the point of being able to manipulate them in ways that are completely beyond our understanding, and seem utterly impossible to us.

Lasers (and other electro-magnetic phenomena) should easily be mastered in similar ways; and we are already far closer to that state of mastery today than we are to the others. It doesn't matter if someone invokes quantum 'magic', or Gravitics, or solitons, or nuclear forces, or Jedi mind-tricks; the fact is that TLs higher than ours by definition exceed our current understanding.

I remember a time when there was an 'absolute limit' on details that could be resolved by microscopes -- it was called the 'Diffraction Limit', It was 'part of physical law', an 'inevitable and absolute limitation'. Now we have broken that limit.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Traveller already has grav focusing on lasers to give them the range they do, so I think that bit is moot, it it already part of the laser array.

Your point about new advanced physics is a setting trope also crops up, mastering what we today consider to be the strong and weak interactions.

Just as grav tech can explain advances in fusion tech, and then damper/meson tech lead to further fusion breakthroughs, it could well be that gravitics and then GUT breakthroughs change the nature of lasers at higher TLs.

 

[Terry Mixon]

Black hole | Definition, Formation, Types, Pictures, & Facts | Britannica

Black hole, cosmic body of extremely intense gravity from which nothing, not even light, can escape. It can be formed by the death of a massive star wherein its core gravitationally collapses inward upon itself, compressing to a point of zero volume and infinite density called the singularity.

www.britannica.com

It says infinite density, not infinite gravity.

 

[rinku]

Any micro black holes you accelerate would be subject to the same beam scattering effects as photons or ions. Although probably not as much.

Inverse Square law still applies.

In any case, it gets back to WHY ON EARTH WOULD YOU BOTHER when regular radio transmissions are perfectly capable of working at interplanetary distances?

 

[Fluffy Bunny Feet]

Any micro black holes you accelerate would be subject to the same beam scattering effects as photons or ions. Although probably not as much.

Of course the micro black hole would be a heck of a weapon.