From: Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. (megao@sasktel.net)
Date: Sat Jul 12 2003 - 10:30:16 MDT
The concept you say might be to modulate and harness the power of a pulsar
with some much smaller force..... like a gigantic transistor
Paul Grant wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-extropians@extropy.org [mailto:owner-extropians@extropy.org]
> On Behalf Of Robert J. Bradbury
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 11:11 PM
> To: extropians@extropy.org
> Subject: Re: Sol-like system discovered...SETI new directions?
>
> On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 ABlainey@aol.com wrote:
> It is also true that to get gravity waves one has to manipulate *very*
> large masses.
>
> Me: or shutter a large mass :) like a signal fire :) Why build the fire
> when you can misdirect it using a blanket :)
>
> That is *very* expensive relative to the manipulation of photons (which
> effectively have very low masses [based on E = mc^2]).
>
> Me: Depends on how you do it :) no doubt an elegant solution is just
> waiting to be found :) At this point, I wouldn't say its
> impossible, or even improbable :) Just that more data is needed :) In
> any event, it certainly is worth examining, if nothing
> else for the questions it would raise.... As to light, generally
> coherent light is used as signaling mechanism; however, the
> same effect (a sheild) could be used for say, the light of a
> sun(star)...
>
> consider the effective size of the sun on our retina...now say I had a
> shield roughly the size of the moon (the size of the shield
> would of course, be dependant on the resolution of our telescopes versus
> the distance to the receiver.... ergo, if we were trying
> to communicate really far away, you could scale the size of the shield
> down, and place it in an orbit), I could open or shut
> it using morse code. certainly anybody looking at the sun would notice
> my attempt at communication... and you could further
> enhance said communication system, by aiming additional telescopes
> (corrected for phase), off stellar clouds of gases
> and synchronizing a shield-gate system, thus minimizing down time (where
> other stellar objects blocked the receivers view
> of the source 'light'). The main reason I don't like this as an
> approach, is that I suspect that gravity propogates
> faster :) but the same effect could be generated by skewing the
> pulse...
>
> for instance, say I have a stable stellar object which is generating
> large gravitational pulses, coded to a particular
> frequency; say I know where my receiver is; there's no reason why I
> couldn't have a significantly smaller gravitational
> force (would probably be energy-based, not matter based) skew the
> generating source frequency enough to mess up
> the receivers signal. It would be the equivalent of us agreeing on a
> stellar object, measuring its frequency, the receiver
> setting his receiver to that frequency, and us introducing a "drift"
> from the source transmitter, using the drops as a method
> of communicating information.
>
> Another really interesting question, which just occurred to me, is:
> does gravity reflect? are their materials which absorb/rebuff gravity...
> or is it all simply a matter of constructive/destructive interference
> sans reflection?
>
> anyway :) all stuff over my head in any event...for now :P
>
> omard-out
>
> omard-out
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jul 12 2003 - 11:41:50 MDT