Eshru wrote: cmyk wrote: KarMann wrote:
thallone wrote:One problem. All of the poles are behind the current structure. She was never drawn digging in front of it. So no way to swing over the exising castle - yet.
Really? How can you be so sure of that?
The ability to draw in the foreground only exists in theory. Many artists have spent their lifetime trying to solve that problem, alas died always having to draw back-to-front. Like cold fusion or traveling at relativistic speeds, it remains indefinitely out of reach. Perhaps, impossible even.
Relativistic speeds and cold fusion are equally impossible?
In all seriousness... well, let's just say they both have plenty of theoretical physics, mathematics, thought and even a bit of research put into them (and experimentation even with CF), but it's currently agreed that both, to one degree or another, are enormous engineering/technology problems (i.e. Nature won't stop you if you can find a way to harness the energy of an entire star's lifetime to bend spacetime. But it'd love to see you try!) So, neither are necessarily impossible
in our current understandings of the Standard Model and General Relativity, only ostensibly so technically infeasible, insurmountable, and/or they depend on new breakthroughs in fundamental physics, that if I were to make a bet, I'd put my money on the very distant future. Perhaps more so for traveling at, or very close, to c.
That said, you can't really compare the two in any meaningful way. Apples and oranges in physics and engineering. One is in the realm of General Relativity (gravity and the very big — astronomic — Traveling at c
), the other in Quantum Mechanics (EM and the nuclear forces concerning the very small — subatomic — cold fusion). So far, these two pillars in fundamental physics have not been successfully/completely reconciled.
(I was j/k about foreground drawing, I hope that was obvious!)