based on the theory of relativity, if we actually find a worm hole to another galaxy, Is there research going on on this topic anymore or has it been abandones as a fantasy.
131438
Yes, there's still research going on. And yes, the theory still holds that if we could find a wormhole and create enough anti-matter to widen and stabilise it, and then find a way of surving the journey, time travel might be possible.\n\nBottom line, everything that's a theory today will either be proved or disproved somewhere down the line. Some things, like wormhole time travel and single-lifetime interstellar travel are the scientific equivalent of steeplechases - races with big old obstacles in the way. They might seem impossible at the start, but once you start running, you either have to figure out how to leap over the obstacles or fall down at them. But human beings are good at steeplechasing - look at the challenges we overcame between 1899 and 1970 - we couldn't fly when the century began. By the time we were seventy years in, not only had we fought two world wars in the air, we'd successfully landed on the moon. Who knows what we'll achieve by 2070...
341183
it can be. Because blackhole has a much faster velocity than light. It is possible that we can use blackhole to travel into another galaxy or another space that we haven't know before. Or maybe we can use blackhole as a time machine. Everything can happen, one day we can find it out. I believe that
75444
There are a number of possible answers, and the subject is still being researched both by using theoretical arguments and  by looking for clues in the data we can gather from peering deep into space.   You're not crazy for asking questions like this, or, if you are, you're at least in good company.  These sorts of questions are the bread and butter of a subdiscipline of physics called cosmology.   \n\nOne common theory is the big bang theory, as others have mentioned.  This has had to be modified in a number of ways over the years as more data comes in, but many basic elements of the idea remain valid.  One is the idea that since were talking about an expansion of spacetime, there is no center to the expansion, or, alternatively, all points are equally the center.  This is hard to imagine in three dimensions, but it's easy if you consider only two.  Imagine you have a mathematically perfect balloon, that is one that can be shrunk down to a single point, and expanded to any size, and it perfectly symmetric.  If you expand this balloon, is there any point on the two dimensional skin of the balloon which can be said to be the center of this expansion?  No, all points are moving away from each other equally.  There is a center, but it occurs in a higher gemoetric dimension that the one the skin of the balloon has, so it's effectively off the map.  Our universe is expanding in much the same way, only it's a three dimensional volume and not a two dimensional sheet.\n\nAs for what was there before...  This is a difficult one to answer since we have no method for peering back beyond the start of the universe, so we need to make guesses about this.  One possibility is that the universe has existed forever, and it's cyclic, expanding, and then collapsing, and rising again, and so on.  This was a popular early idea in big bang theory, but doesn't seem likely now.  As best we can tell from observational data there isn't enough mass to pull the universe back together, and so it's expected to continue expanding and cooling, and eventually this expansion, which is actually increasing in rate due to dark energy, will achieve such a high rate that matter will be pulled apart at the subatomic level, ending in something that has been called "the big rip".  But, even if this is the case, there are mechanisms by which our universe could be the offshoot of an earlier one.  Theoretical work in string theory suggests that if compressed to a high enough degree, matter can trigger a spontaneous exapnsion of spacetime, which generates more energy as "tension" in spacetime, which can then come into exsitence as additional matter.  Some calculations of the minimum mass needed to create a universe the size of ours through this process run as low as a few tens of kilograms.  So, black holes in an earlier universe, if large enough and dense enough, can expand into their own universe, one which is disconnected spatially from the earlier one, which may or may not have enough mass to collapse again, but local areas within it can collapse to a high enough density to start the process all over again.  So, rather than a single universe pulsing in and out of existence as in the earlier oscillatory model, this model suggests something that would be rather like a tree or bush growing and branching, with each branch being a universe, and each bud which produces a new offshoot being a black hole which spawns another universe on the opposite side of it.  One universe could give rise to a great many more, and while each one is finite in the time for which it exists, each one is a branch of limited length, the entire tangle of univereses has been going on forever.
659428
you're thinking of a worm hole. a black hole will, as far as we know tear things apart to as it takes them to a different part of our universe, which doesnt make sense because nothing can escape from them. Anyway, a worm hole, which is theoretical -mostly- is like two black holes connected at their vertex's. think of the universe as a thin sheet of paper. one black hole is is on the right side, and another on the left. fold the piece of paper so that the black holes are lines up. instead of traveling from point A to point B, you just go through space in manner of speaking from point A to point B "just like that". there really isnt any just like that, but that's as best i can describe it with out actually showing you. sorry if this makes no sense.
80069
Astronomers are always right except some theories. Because they are doing more than research for this every minute. And i believe that they are right about the black holes.\nBut to make sure that thing they need more research on this.
487124
Eather is debunked idea proven to not exist experimentally. Michelson-Morley experiment showed eather can't exists. I think dark matter is really something else. But it comes into play some role in Einstein's struggle to deal with expanding universe which he originally believed was static and unchanging.\n\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson-Morley_experiment
614337
You watched Event Horizon huh? \n\nto travel great distances, in faster than speed of light speeds.. the idea is to warp the space time dimension and create a wormhole that would move you from one side to the other.. things we need to work on.. \n\nTo do list;\n\n- how to create a worm hole?\n- how to bend space-time\n- how to know the point you are going to end up\n\nmy guess.. wont be done in 100 years
284919
yes it do.\n\nIn physics, a wormhole (also known as Abbreviated Space) is a hypothetical topological feature of spacetime that is essentially a "shortcut" or "abbreviation" through space and time. A wormhole has at least two mouths which are connected to a single throat. If the wormhole is traversable, matter can 'travel' from one mouth to the other by passing through the throat.\n\nThe name "wormhole" comes from an analogy used to explain the phenomenon. If a worm is travelling over the skin of an apple, then the worm could take a shortcut to the opposite side of the apple's skin by burrowing through its center, rather than travelling the entire distance around, just as a wormhole traveller could take a shortcut to the opposite side of the universe through a hole in higher-dimensional space.\n\nThere is a compact region of spacetime whose boundary is topologically trivial but whose interior is not simply connected. Formalizing this idea leads to definitions such as the following, taken from Matt Visser's Lorentzian Wormholes:\n\nIf a Lorentzian spacetime contains a compact region Ω, and if the topology of Ω is of the form Ω ~ R x Σ, where Σ is a three-manifold of nontrivial topology, whose boundary has topology of the form dΣ ~ S², and if furthermore the hypersurfaces Σ are all spacelike, then the region Ω contains a quasipermanent intra-universe wormhole. \nCharacterizing inter-universe wormholes is more difficult. For example, one can imagine a 'baby' universe connected to its 'parent' by a narrow 'umbilicus'. One might like to regard the umbilicus as the throat of a wormhole, but the spacetime is simply connected.\n\n\n\nIntra-universe wormholes connect one location of a universe to another location of the same universe(in the same present time). A wormhole should be able to connect distant locations in the universe by bending spacetime, allowing travel between them that is faster than it would take light to make the journey through normal space. See the image above. Inter-universe wormholes connect one universe with another [1], [2]. This gives rise to the speculation that such wormholes could be used to travel from one parallel universe to another. A wormhole which connects (usually closed) universes is often called a Schwarzschild wormhole. Another application of a wormhole might be time travel. In that case it is a shortcut from one point in space and time to another. In string theory a wormhole has been envisioned to connect two D-branes, where the mouths are attached to the branes and are connected by a flux tube [3]. Finally, wormholes are believed to be a part of spacetime foam [4]. There are two main types of wormholes: Lorentzian wormholes and Euclidean wormholes. Lorentzian wormholes are mainly studied in semiclassical gravity and Euclidean wormholes are studied in particle physics. Traversable wormholes are a special kind of Lorentzian wormholes which would allow a human to travel from one side of the wormhole to the other. Sergey Krasnikov tossed the term spacetime shortcut as a more general term for (traversable) wormholes and propulsion systems like the Alcubierre drive and the Krasnikov tube to indicate hyperfast interstellar travel.
664265
Yes........more or less. A Black hole is a small view of what the universe as a whole will be like billions of years from now.
474799
You wanted a serious answer so here goes.\n\nWhat you ask is impossible to put into practise. It is impossible under Einsteins theory for anyone to travel at the speed of light.\n\nSimply put I will try to explain why,, as you approach the speed of light matter expands or rather the mass does. According to the research , the speed of light would produce infinite mass so it is impossible to travel at that speed.\n\nThat's were the theory of worm holes came about, by creating a rip through space you can jump if you like from one point to another, crossing several light years of travel in an instant. But as you have made use of a warp in space itself you don't actually go the speed of light.\n\nSo basically, you cannot answer your question,, I can see were you get this idea from though as it is true that the faster an objects velocity is, the slower time passes for that object.\n\nThis was proven some 50 years ago by use of atomic clocks on a plane, one flew round the world while the other remained in London. When they were brought together it was noted that time passed slower for the moving clock.\n\nHope this helps.
375801
The theory of relativity is being used in Fermi lab, U.S. to "create" either energy or new matter from energy.  Newton's laws only define motion, but they do not explain why some of the mysteries of the solar sytem or the universe occur.  With Einstein's theory, however, these mysteries become clearer.  We understand more why they occur this way and can predict how much energy is being "created" by calculating for how much matter is "lost."  Fermi lab is working to create anti-matter, combine it with matter to create energy, and utilizing the energy into more matter -- it's one of their big projects.  I'm sure they're testing for more than that, but it's the overview of what they are doing.
667783
I don't think that Mr. Hawking is through with the world of theoretical astronomy just yet. About all he has is his mind and boy does he use it. A lot of his most creative work has come to us after his 40th birthday.  Keep on thinkin' Steevo!!!!
608954
The current status of the universe actually does work like that.  Technically, with gravity the universe should collapse back upon itself and the big bang would occur all over again.  However, gravity is one of the weakest forces in the universe.  With that said, it has been measured that the universe is expanding and accelerating at a rate that exceeds the gravitational forces required to initiate the "big crunch."\n\n\nThere are two schools of thought right now.  One is that the universe will continue to decelerate but never completely stop or collapse upon itself.  More recent theories have stated that the universe appears to be accelerating.\n\nAs it stands now, I would say that it is safe to say that the odds are extremely low of the universe collapsing back to a singularity.\n\nSee the link below for some more information.
528792
At least at current technology level this is impossible (to my knowledge). I'm a physicist from Finland, and I was a bit amazed when I read this question; I had never heard that scientists in Finland have claimed to have made an anti-gravity drive. So I took a quick look what Internet has to say about it (after I couldn't find an article from J Phys D, where this should have been published according to some Internet sources). This sure smells like a hoax; the paper was withdrawn, and every Finnish scientist mentioned in conjunction with this case has denied their participation; in fact nobody seems to know what this is all about. Only guy who has said anything is this one Russian guy (Dr Eugene Podkletnov), and in the end he was the one requesting the withdrawal of the paper. A whole description of the aftermath of this Sunday Telegraph article (where this was discussed) can be found from http://www.enterprisemission.com/antigrav.html (the end part, first is the article itself).\n\nSo, there's a lot of BS going on in this anti-gravity / inertialess drive field. There may be something in maybe 1% of those "studies", but I wouldn't take too seriously anything I read from the web about these things... When something happens, the scientific community will start buzzing. At least I will notice it (I have to follow journals and media about these things because of my work); there's some movement every time a new hoax appears, but that movement stops at the point where other labs try to repeat the experiment. If something new comes up, it will be heard in every media, not only in Internet.\n\nHowever, to answer your actual question, "Is it possible to create an anti-gravity drive that could be used for space propulsion?", I would say that one day it could be possible. There's research going on, and even though some people think it would contradict Einsteins general theory of relativity, I still think it could be possible.\n\nAbout alien spaceships... eh... well, I would doubt their existence. An extraterrestrial intelligence would surely show up first to all hillbillies and mutilate their cows for research? Or play around and show spectacular light shows flying around just for fun? Of course that's not impossible, but I would see it highly unlikely...\n\nDuring my quick look, I found one nice, interesting old article of wired.com: http://www.wired.com/wired/6.03/antigravity_pr.html . I think I'll read that one through...
116228
It is an interesting idea, but for the moment, only an idea. The cosmology behind black holes is pretty sound, and they have been observed now, such as in Cygnus x-1.
652197
i did a project once on black holes. i'm 15 from the U.S. you can email me at barbara_hobbs123@yahoo.com    i love black holes. they are so interesting. i'll try to remember the information on the project but i can't do it now. it was a while ago. email me and i'll tell you some stuff. and i'll be your friend!
608102
It hasn't been completely accepted, but it is widely believed to be the correct direction to go.  They are still trimming the fat, and many of the theories will never be tested as we can not experience some things that occur in the extra dimensions that we can not see, according to string theory.  (Theory is not accepted as fact, its a theory)