<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.1" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Spacedrive?</title>
	<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/01/05/spacedrive/</link>
	<description>I am an astronomer, writer, and skeptic. I likes reality the way it is, and I aims to keep it that way. My real name is Phil Plait, and I run the Bad Astronomy blog.</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 05 Jul 2009 02:17:04 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: This</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/01/05/spacedrive/#comment-181554</link>
		<dc:creator>This</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2009 05:00:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/01/05/spacedrive/#comment-181554</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;This&lt;/strong&gt;

Have you been blogging long? not martha - bacon cups is a great blog, you have a great writing style too.  Found this post last Thursday and i've been reading your blog since.  I've subscribed to your RSS feed and I am excited for more quality posts ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>This</strong></p>
<p>Have you been blogging long? not martha - bacon cups is a great blog, you have a great writing style too.  Found this post last Thursday and i&#8217;ve been reading your blog since.  I&#8217;ve subscribed to your RSS feed and I am excited for more quality posts &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stawek</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/01/05/spacedrive/#comment-143790</link>
		<dc:creator>stawek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2008 10:18:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/01/05/spacedrive/#comment-143790</guid>
		<description>Why is everyone so 'scared' of extra dimensions? They are here, they MUST be here...
Look at your computer screen. It's flat - it's 2d (if we skip time for simplicity), isn't it?
Or maybe it's not. Each pixel of the screen may take a value that represents colour. This means, that you screen is a 3d construct on a 2d plane. Just by adding colours. That is why you may play 3d games on it - the third colour dimension is used to show the depth.
Now think about our 4d spacetime. Common misconception is that human can't imagine more than 3 dimensions, cause we can't see them. A huge error I think. WE ARE the 4th dimension - just for every point in space assign a value that represents the energy that resides in that point (ie an atom of your body) and we have a 5th dimension already. Add magnetic fields, gravity fields and whatnot and you may as well end up with 12 dimensions...
This is what Heim's done (or what I understand from his work). On top of our regular 4d he added dimensions representing quantum states. Simple.
The real chellenge is quantisation of space. If you divide space into little cubes then you have either prefferred directions (it's easier - 'shorter' to move along axis than across the cubes, as diagonal of cube is longer than its side) or (if the cost of moving from one cube to another is the same no matter the direction) a circle should actually be a square (in a square the distance between midpoint and walls measured in 'tiles' is equal for each point on perimeter)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why is everyone so &#8217;scared&#8217; of extra dimensions? They are here, they MUST be here&#8230;<br />
Look at your computer screen. It&#8217;s flat - it&#8217;s 2d (if we skip time for simplicity), isn&#8217;t it?<br />
Or maybe it&#8217;s not. Each pixel of the screen may take a value that represents colour. This means, that you screen is a 3d construct on a 2d plane. Just by adding colours. That is why you may play 3d games on it - the third colour dimension is used to show the depth.<br />
Now think about our 4d spacetime. Common misconception is that human can&#8217;t imagine more than 3 dimensions, cause we can&#8217;t see them. A huge error I think. WE ARE the 4th dimension - just for every point in space assign a value that represents the energy that resides in that point (ie an atom of your body) and we have a 5th dimension already. Add magnetic fields, gravity fields and whatnot and you may as well end up with 12 dimensions&#8230;<br />
This is what Heim&#8217;s done (or what I understand from his work). On top of our regular 4d he added dimensions representing quantum states. Simple.<br />
The real chellenge is quantisation of space. If you divide space into little cubes then you have either prefferred directions (it&#8217;s easier - &#8217;shorter&#8217; to move along axis than across the cubes, as diagonal of cube is longer than its side) or (if the cost of moving from one cube to another is the same no matter the direction) a circle should actually be a square (in a square the distance between midpoint and walls measured in &#8217;tiles&#8217; is equal for each point on perimeter)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Oller</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/01/05/spacedrive/#comment-97875</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Oller</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 09:41:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/01/05/spacedrive/#comment-97875</guid>
		<description>No one mentioned the possibility of time travel.  I know that approaching the speed of light slows time, but can one travel backwards in time by exceeding the speed of light?  Can one control which past one travels to?  Perfect accuracy is unnecessary.  Might it also be possible to travel to parallel worlds, which split off from ours in the past?

As for travelling to the stars, they're awfully hot, and the planets orbiting the stars are only slightly more hospitable, but maybe we will find that they were colonized by humans billions of years ago.  Maybe we will even go on dinosaur safaris.  Don't laugh, there are hundreds of out of place artifacts (ooparts). Some date back to the paleozoic, and a beautiful pewter vase with silver inlaid flowers was blasted out of the precambrian Roxbury conglomerate in Massachussets in 1852.  Nowadays, such anomalies are usually ignored but not always.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No one mentioned the possibility of time travel.  I know that approaching the speed of light slows time, but can one travel backwards in time by exceeding the speed of light?  Can one control which past one travels to?  Perfect accuracy is unnecessary.  Might it also be possible to travel to parallel worlds, which split off from ours in the past?</p>
<p>As for travelling to the stars, they&#8217;re awfully hot, and the planets orbiting the stars are only slightly more hospitable, but maybe we will find that they were colonized by humans billions of years ago.  Maybe we will even go on dinosaur safaris.  Don&#8217;t laugh, there are hundreds of out of place artifacts (ooparts). Some date back to the paleozoic, and a beautiful pewter vase with silver inlaid flowers was blasted out of the precambrian Roxbury conglomerate in Massachussets in 1852.  Nowadays, such anomalies are usually ignored but not always.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ozzie</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/01/05/spacedrive/#comment-9508</link>
		<dc:creator>Ozzie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 14:02:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/01/05/spacedrive/#comment-9508</guid>
		<description>I'm primarily a planetary geologist, but I've taken a great interest in quantum physics, GR/Sr and such for a long time. I believe, with all your protestations of Heim and others....even if it's protestations for or against...you've all missed the point. That points being this: at one stage they thought Einstein was a crackpot and no one could understand his theories. Until they studied what he wrote, did the experiments and found he was pretty much on the ball. However, Einstein, no matter how much his physics paradigms are taken as gospel, is not the last word in physics. Regardless of the experiments and such, that have been done since his theory's publication, it doesn't mean that he is correct in all of his assumptions about what constitutes reality. Hell, he couldn't get his head around quantum physics, so what does that say about his supposed "genius".

Given that none of you are completely familiar with what Heim wrote, as are most physicists as well, don't decry his theory/theories until you've done the experimental work yourself. Or have seen and can vouch for experiments done by others. Even then, it won't necessarily discount his work because we may not have the requisite technology to fully perform any experiments to confirm/deny the theory. This was the case with Einstein for quite a number of years.

Discounting anything, without proof positive that you're correct in your assumptions, is a very dangerous situation to get yourself into. You may never see the results come to light (as it maybe 100 years before they come in, for instance), but you may have to, metaphorically, eat your own words. You never know what's around the corner.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m primarily a planetary geologist, but I&#8217;ve taken a great interest in quantum physics, GR/Sr and such for a long time. I believe, with all your protestations of Heim and others&#8230;.even if it&#8217;s protestations for or against&#8230;you&#8217;ve all missed the point. That points being this: at one stage they thought Einstein was a crackpot and no one could understand his theories. Until they studied what he wrote, did the experiments and found he was pretty much on the ball. However, Einstein, no matter how much his physics paradigms are taken as gospel, is not the last word in physics. Regardless of the experiments and such, that have been done since his theory&#8217;s publication, it doesn&#8217;t mean that he is correct in all of his assumptions about what constitutes reality. Hell, he couldn&#8217;t get his head around quantum physics, so what does that say about his supposed &#8220;genius&#8221;.</p>
<p>Given that none of you are completely familiar with what Heim wrote, as are most physicists as well, don&#8217;t decry his theory/theories until you&#8217;ve done the experimental work yourself. Or have seen and can vouch for experiments done by others. Even then, it won&#8217;t necessarily discount his work because we may not have the requisite technology to fully perform any experiments to confirm/deny the theory. This was the case with Einstein for quite a number of years.</p>
<p>Discounting anything, without proof positive that you&#8217;re correct in your assumptions, is a very dangerous situation to get yourself into. You may never see the results come to light (as it maybe 100 years before they come in, for instance), but you may have to, metaphorically, eat your own words. You never know what&#8217;s around the corner.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joshua Perry</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/01/05/spacedrive/#comment-9507</link>
		<dc:creator>Joshua Perry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2008 23:51:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/01/05/spacedrive/#comment-9507</guid>
		<description>Remember that when you go into a black hole and reach the singularity, you'll see two dimensions of time in order for GR to remain true?  Remember that the gravitational force in a black hole is so strong light cannot escape?  So if you can't travel faster than light, why is light not fast enough to escape from the gravitational force of a black hole?  Let's step over to the event horizon over here and I will show you that Heim is right...  Oh wait that won't work very well.  So let's use a smaller example.  Let's take a big ring and spin it really fast.  Then let's apply a huge EM field inside it.  Oh no, we created a black hole and we're traveling faster than light!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Remember that when you go into a black hole and reach the singularity, you&#8217;ll see two dimensions of time in order for GR to remain true?  Remember that the gravitational force in a black hole is so strong light cannot escape?  So if you can&#8217;t travel faster than light, why is light not fast enough to escape from the gravitational force of a black hole?  Let&#8217;s step over to the event horizon over here and I will show you that Heim is right&#8230;  Oh wait that won&#8217;t work very well.  So let&#8217;s use a smaller example.  Let&#8217;s take a big ring and spin it really fast.  Then let&#8217;s apply a huge EM field inside it.  Oh no, we created a black hole and we&#8217;re traveling faster than light!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mike burkhart</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/01/05/spacedrive/#comment-9506</link>
		<dc:creator>mike burkhart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 23:13:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/01/05/spacedrive/#comment-9506</guid>
		<description>What can I say warp factor 1 engage Ithink we have another video game fan after all video game addicts have been traveling in hyperspace in arcades and home systems since atari realeased asteroids</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What can I say warp factor 1 engage Ithink we have another video game fan after all video game addicts have been traveling in hyperspace in arcades and home systems since atari realeased asteroids</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike T. Bautz</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/01/05/spacedrive/#comment-9505</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike T. Bautz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 20:46:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/01/05/spacedrive/#comment-9505</guid>
		<description>I think, there's more to this new idea of anti-gravity propulsion than most of us might assume. Here's why ...

This is about the work of the late obscure physicist Burkhard Heim, who lived, studied and worked on his Field Theory in my hometown of Goettingen, Germany. In short this guy most probably was a genius in the realm of Einstein (some tentative proof for this claim later) but was shunned by most of his contemporaries mainly because his stuff was way over their heads. Even today there's said to be only a handful of physicists worldwide who are able to grasp his work (and having to admit this is something every expert in any field really loathes).

In short (and by no means accurate because I'm a clinical psychologist by trade with just too much curiosity for other disciplines) this is what he tried and (if those who understand his work are right) even achieved: he wanted nothing less than to bridge the theoretical gap between the General Theory of Relativity and the Quantum Theory (in short he was after a Grand Unified Theory: No GUT, no Glory!). Note: he was NOT trying to devise any kind of propulsion for interstellar space travel, this is more like a by-product developed later on by the physicists DroÌˆscher &#38; HaÌˆuser.

Heim's "Field Theory" states that the principle of Quantitizing is also valid in the fabric of space-time, and that subatomic particles are the source of gravitational forces. This guy was physically handicapped after he lost 90% of his eyesight and both arms in a freak explosion in a lab in 1944 and yet he kept on working in reclusion with help from his wife for many years.

Here's an *ultra short* synopsis of what he did come up with: his postulate was that there is a "middle field" between electromagnetism and gravitation in the 6-dimensional space. This "middle field" he stated in 1957 can be used to derive gravitational from electromagnetic waves. He was soon contacted by Wernher von Braun but refused to give out more of his work
because he felt he still had a long way to go before putting any piece of it to real world use.

After being coaxed by Prof. Pasqual Jordan (an expert on GRT) in 1964 Heim set out to find a way to accurately calculate the masses of subatomic particles (something nobody else has done so far). In 1977 he published his solution in the "Zeitschrift fuÌˆr Naturforschung" of the german Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, and in 1980 he published his first book "Elementary Structure of Matter".

Now, what's really mind-boggling is that researchers of the german Electron-Synchrotron (DESY) in 1982 programmed and tested Heim's equations and found that by using them they could calculate the masses and energy states of particles with an accuracy that fell within 0.01% of the empirical values as determined by use of DESY and other accelerators/colliders. Compare this to an accuracy of only between 1% and 10% of empirical values when using calculations based on lattice quantum chromodynamics (as done in 2003).

But the problem remains that Heim's work is so complicated that even todays best physicists need to study it for at least one year before beginning to grasp its true potential (according to the DESY guys). Lately, a group of physicists devoted to Heim's theory have repeated the mass and state
calculations using a more precise value for the gravitational constant as it is known only now and they found even better accuracy compared to the empirically derived values than in the older work done by DESY. So, in short it looks like Heim was really onto something and clearly knew what he was talking about.

Now onto the practical application of his work: one of the few colleagues who actually did work with Heim during his lifetime is an austrian physicist named Walter DroÌˆscher. He found some conceptual errors in Heim's theory and helped him to work around those missteps. They both came up with the two additional dimensions which interact with our 4-dimensional world: where Heim's theory claimed that the dimensions #5 and #6 are the ones that effect gravitation, in the 8-dimensional Heim/DroÌˆscher-World dimensions #7 and #8 are the sources of a new quasi-gravitational force that is repulsive rather than attractive, called "Quintessence" (note the similarities to the new concept of Dark Energy in cosmology). Whereas photons as the bearers of the electromagnetic force result as a geometric structure by combination of the dimensions #4-#8 Heim &#38; DroÌˆscher then describe a new particle that results from a combination of the dimensions #5-#8.

And here it gets really good: DroÌˆscher and his colleague HaÌˆuser developed the theoretical (and practical) framework for an advanced propulsion system, the so-called DroÌˆscher/HaÌˆuser gravitophoton-field drive (now named Hyper-Drive). Based on Heim's theory this is what they basically say (in my
complete lay terminology): a spacecraft is able to project its own gravitational field by producing gravitophotons. To do this, the craft is fitted with a massive ring (appr. 2 tons) that is rotating inside a magnetic field (20 Tesla is said to be sufficient to constantly accelerate a spacecraft of 150 tons with the equivalent of Earth's gravity). The rotating mass inside of the
strong magnetic field will produce virtual pairs of  gravitophotons through vacuum polarization. This, according to quantum electrodynamics, is a process in which a background electromagnetic field produces virtual electron-positron pairs. In the framework of DroÌˆscher/HaÌˆuser and Heim it also produces virtual pairs of gravitophotons. Because the effect on mass
is much stronger in the case of attracting gravitophotons this kind of propulsion will result in a force (called Heim-Lorentz force) that can be used to counter the gravitational force excerted on the spacecraft by e.g. earth.

This kind of spacecraft could cover the distance Earth-Moon in appr. 4 hours. Because it always follows the resulting accelerating force the craft could perform almost all kinds of flight manouvres as well as drastic accelerations
without negatively affecting the passengers (note that this could explain the erratic flight patterns that are described in so many UFO observations).

But it gets even better: according to DroÌˆscher/HaÌˆuser it is mandatory, that after reaching a certain critical limit the spacecraft must leave 4-dimensional space and transit into a parallel or higher order space! Here's why: because repulsive gravitophotons would reduce the gravitational potential of the whole spacecraft, or its inert mass, and because energy needs to be preserved (E=mc^2) it then follows that the craft must go faster than the speed of light. Of course, in 4-dimensional space-time this cannot happen thus forcing the craft to transit into a parallel space called R4(n) in which it is actually possible to travel at n-times the speed of light.

DroÌˆscher/HaÌˆuser have calculated that it should be possible to travel to Mars in 2.5 hours and to reach the star Procyon (distance: 11.4 ligtyears) in just 80 days â€“ not too shabby, indeed! Imagine the following dialog at a breakfast table in NYC, say some 25 years from now. He: "I've got an appointment today in New Berlin (capital of Mars) at 1pm." She: "Okay! Don't forget that the Wilsons come in for dinner at 7." He: "No problem! I'll be back at 6.30 the latest ... gotta buzz now, have a nice day, honey!"

All that is needed to bring this theoretical stuff into real world usage are the will and the money to finance experiments accordingly. For more and far far better information cf. e.g. http://heim-theory.com/Contents/contents.html
Note that DroÌˆscher/HaÌˆuser have presented their framework three times since 2002 at the Annual Conference of Interstellar Spacetravel of the  American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, so I guess some people do actually listen to them ...

Also, since all this stuff has been out there for more than 20 years now it may very well be that someone has already put it into practical use without bothering to tell the public about it. You know who the usual suspects are.

I'll apologize for my german tainted english and lay man's translation of this stuff (that is also waaayyy over my poor psychologist head). I just thought it might be of interest to you.

Cheers -mike</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think, there&#8217;s more to this new idea of anti-gravity propulsion than most of us might assume. Here&#8217;s why &#8230;</p>
<p>This is about the work of the late obscure physicist Burkhard Heim, who lived, studied and worked on his Field Theory in my hometown of Goettingen, Germany. In short this guy most probably was a genius in the realm of Einstein (some tentative proof for this claim later) but was shunned by most of his contemporaries mainly because his stuff was way over their heads. Even today there&#8217;s said to be only a handful of physicists worldwide who are able to grasp his work (and having to admit this is something every expert in any field really loathes).</p>
<p>In short (and by no means accurate because I&#8217;m a clinical psychologist by trade with just too much curiosity for other disciplines) this is what he tried and (if those who understand his work are right) even achieved: he wanted nothing less than to bridge the theoretical gap between the General Theory of Relativity and the Quantum Theory (in short he was after a Grand Unified Theory: No GUT, no Glory!). Note: he was NOT trying to devise any kind of propulsion for interstellar space travel, this is more like a by-product developed later on by the physicists DroÌˆscher &amp; HaÌˆuser.</p>
<p>Heim&#8217;s &#8220;Field Theory&#8221; states that the principle of Quantitizing is also valid in the fabric of space-time, and that subatomic particles are the source of gravitational forces. This guy was physically handicapped after he lost 90% of his eyesight and both arms in a freak explosion in a lab in 1944 and yet he kept on working in reclusion with help from his wife for many years.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s an *ultra short* synopsis of what he did come up with: his postulate was that there is a &#8220;middle field&#8221; between electromagnetism and gravitation in the 6-dimensional space. This &#8220;middle field&#8221; he stated in 1957 can be used to derive gravitational from electromagnetic waves. He was soon contacted by Wernher von Braun but refused to give out more of his work<br />
because he felt he still had a long way to go before putting any piece of it to real world use.</p>
<p>After being coaxed by Prof. Pasqual Jordan (an expert on GRT) in 1964 Heim set out to find a way to accurately calculate the masses of subatomic particles (something nobody else has done so far). In 1977 he published his solution in the &#8220;Zeitschrift fuÌˆr Naturforschung&#8221; of the german Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, and in 1980 he published his first book &#8220;Elementary Structure of Matter&#8221;.</p>
<p>Now, what&#8217;s really mind-boggling is that researchers of the german Electron-Synchrotron (DESY) in 1982 programmed and tested Heim&#8217;s equations and found that by using them they could calculate the masses and energy states of particles with an accuracy that fell within 0.01% of the empirical values as determined by use of DESY and other accelerators/colliders. Compare this to an accuracy of only between 1% and 10% of empirical values when using calculations based on lattice quantum chromodynamics (as done in 2003).</p>
<p>But the problem remains that Heim&#8217;s work is so complicated that even todays best physicists need to study it for at least one year before beginning to grasp its true potential (according to the DESY guys). Lately, a group of physicists devoted to Heim&#8217;s theory have repeated the mass and state<br />
calculations using a more precise value for the gravitational constant as it is known only now and they found even better accuracy compared to the empirically derived values than in the older work done by DESY. So, in short it looks like Heim was really onto something and clearly knew what he was talking about.</p>
<p>Now onto the practical application of his work: one of the few colleagues who actually did work with Heim during his lifetime is an austrian physicist named Walter DroÌˆscher. He found some conceptual errors in Heim&#8217;s theory and helped him to work around those missteps. They both came up with the two additional dimensions which interact with our 4-dimensional world: where Heim&#8217;s theory claimed that the dimensions #5 and #6 are the ones that effect gravitation, in the 8-dimensional Heim/DroÌˆscher-World dimensions #7 and #8 are the sources of a new quasi-gravitational force that is repulsive rather than attractive, called &#8220;Quintessence&#8221; (note the similarities to the new concept of Dark Energy in cosmology). Whereas photons as the bearers of the electromagnetic force result as a geometric structure by combination of the dimensions #4-#8 Heim &amp; DroÌˆscher then describe a new particle that results from a combination of the dimensions #5-#8.</p>
<p>And here it gets really good: DroÌˆscher and his colleague HaÌˆuser developed the theoretical (and practical) framework for an advanced propulsion system, the so-called DroÌˆscher/HaÌˆuser gravitophoton-field drive (now named Hyper-Drive). Based on Heim&#8217;s theory this is what they basically say (in my<br />
complete lay terminology): a spacecraft is able to project its own gravitational field by producing gravitophotons. To do this, the craft is fitted with a massive ring (appr. 2 tons) that is rotating inside a magnetic field (20 Tesla is said to be sufficient to constantly accelerate a spacecraft of 150 tons with the equivalent of Earth&#8217;s gravity). The rotating mass inside of the<br />
strong magnetic field will produce virtual pairs of  gravitophotons through vacuum polarization. This, according to quantum electrodynamics, is a process in which a background electromagnetic field produces virtual electron-positron pairs. In the framework of DroÌˆscher/HaÌˆuser and Heim it also produces virtual pairs of gravitophotons. Because the effect on mass<br />
is much stronger in the case of attracting gravitophotons this kind of propulsion will result in a force (called Heim-Lorentz force) that can be used to counter the gravitational force excerted on the spacecraft by e.g. earth.</p>
<p>This kind of spacecraft could cover the distance Earth-Moon in appr. 4 hours. Because it always follows the resulting accelerating force the craft could perform almost all kinds of flight manouvres as well as drastic accelerations<br />
without negatively affecting the passengers (note that this could explain the erratic flight patterns that are described in so many UFO observations).</p>
<p>But it gets even better: according to DroÌˆscher/HaÌˆuser it is mandatory, that after reaching a certain critical limit the spacecraft must leave 4-dimensional space and transit into a parallel or higher order space! Here&#8217;s why: because repulsive gravitophotons would reduce the gravitational potential of the whole spacecraft, or its inert mass, and because energy needs to be preserved (E=mc^2) it then follows that the craft must go faster than the speed of light. Of course, in 4-dimensional space-time this cannot happen thus forcing the craft to transit into a parallel space called R4(n) in which it is actually possible to travel at n-times the speed of light.</p>
<p>DroÌˆscher/HaÌˆuser have calculated that it should be possible to travel to Mars in 2.5 hours and to reach the star Procyon (distance: 11.4 ligtyears) in just 80 days â€“ not too shabby, indeed! Imagine the following dialog at a breakfast table in NYC, say some 25 years from now. He: &#8220;I&#8217;ve got an appointment today in New Berlin (capital of Mars) at 1pm.&#8221; She: &#8220;Okay! Don&#8217;t forget that the Wilsons come in for dinner at 7.&#8221; He: &#8220;No problem! I&#8217;ll be back at 6.30 the latest &#8230; gotta buzz now, have a nice day, honey!&#8221;</p>
<p>All that is needed to bring this theoretical stuff into real world usage are the will and the money to finance experiments accordingly. For more and far far better information cf. e.g. <a href="http://heim-theory.com/Contents/contents.html" rel="nofollow">http://heim-theory.com/Contents/contents.html</a><br />
Note that DroÌˆscher/HaÌˆuser have presented their framework three times since 2002 at the Annual Conference of Interstellar Spacetravel of the  American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, so I guess some people do actually listen to them &#8230;</p>
<p>Also, since all this stuff has been out there for more than 20 years now it may very well be that someone has already put it into practical use without bothering to tell the public about it. You know who the usual suspects are.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll apologize for my german tainted english and lay man&#8217;s translation of this stuff (that is also waaayyy over my poor psychologist head). I just thought it might be of interest to you.</p>
<p>Cheers -mike</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
