Zrjydtj

pgfplots: How to draw exponential graph with 60° start angle?

What do you call someone who asks many questions?

Is there a hemisphere-neutral way of specifying a season?

Assassin's bullet with mercury

How do I deal with an unproductive colleague in a small company?

What type of content (depth/breadth) is expected for a short presentation for Asst Professor interview in the UK?

If human space travel is limited by the G force vulnerability, is there a way to counter G forces?

What method can I use to design a dungeon difficult enough that the PCs can't make it through without killing them?

How can I deal with my CEO asking me to hire someone with a higher salary than me, a co-founder?

How to compactly explain secondary and tertiary characters without resorting to stereotypes?

What is the idiomatic way to say "clothing fits"?

Madden-Julian Oscillation (MJO) - How to interpret the index?

Short story with a alien planet, government officials must wear exploding medallions

How painful is tzara'at

How can saying a song's name be a copyright violation?

How does having to sign to support someone for elections fit with having a secret ballot?

What killed these X2 caps?

How seriously should I take size and weight limits of hand luggage?

How to properly check if the given string is empty in a POSIX shell script?

Can my sorcerer use a spellbook only to collect spells and scribe scrolls, not cast?

How do conventional missiles fly?

Is it logically or scientifically possible to artificially send energy to the body?

Calculating entropy change: reversible vs irreversible process

Should I tell management that I intend to leave due to bad software development practices?

Can mass be shunted off into hyperspace, but the matter remains?

How much energy does this sun crushing ship, the CrushSun, use?How to build a telescope using gravitational lensing?Could black holes be a better source of energy than stars?Physical laws for a multiverse with white holes?Would immovable rods have infinite mass?What would happen if you could remove the event horizon from Sgr A*?How do I create the largest possible space habitat for humans?Almost realistic way to beat entropyWhat is the “fullest” the universe could be in terms of living space?The mass of an economically feasible non-microscopic traversable wormhole

3

$begingroup$

My question is this: can excess mass be bled off into hyperspace (the large and compact extra dimensions, not the Star Wars-esque swirling vortex), yet the matter remains in our universe?

Is mass too fundamentally tied to matter for this to happen, or is it possible to condense a galaxy into a "small" area, but shunt off mass so it doesn't collapse into a black hole?

science-based physics spacetime-dimensions

share|improve this question

edited 2 hours ago

Cyn

10.9k12350

asked 3 hours ago

UshumgalluUshumgallu

1258

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I can clarify and edit the question if needed.
  $endgroup$
  – Ushumgallu
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  3
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  What is "excess mass"? Would the matter, after shedding that "excess mass", remain normal matter or it has to become "exotic"? This is outside the realm of known science, by the way.
  $endgroup$
  – Alexander
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I'm not sure if this question is answerable. Just the existence of hyperspace or "large and compact extra dimensions" is purely theoretical. It's pretty hard to give a science-based answer to a question which is asking about things that haven't been experimentally verified in any way.
  $endgroup$
  – Gryphon
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Mass is the energy intrinsic to holding a particle together. The energy allowing the particle to exist is its mass. You can't take the mass away from the particle. That's like taking the speed away from a moving train, without stopping it.
  $endgroup$
  – Adrian Hall
  2 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  My understanding was that the Higgs boson gave particles mass. But then I learned about a phenomena called vacuum decay, which could happen if you changed the Higgs field, and so yeah, its a bad idea to change the mass.
  $endgroup$
  – Ushumgallu
  2 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 1 more comment

3

$begingroup$

My question is this: can excess mass be bled off into hyperspace (the large and compact extra dimensions, not the Star Wars-esque swirling vortex), yet the matter remains in our universe?

Is mass too fundamentally tied to matter for this to happen, or is it possible to condense a galaxy into a "small" area, but shunt off mass so it doesn't collapse into a black hole?

science-based physics spacetime-dimensions

share|improve this question

edited 2 hours ago

Cyn

10.9k12350

asked 3 hours ago

UshumgalluUshumgallu

1258

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I can clarify and edit the question if needed.
  $endgroup$
  – Ushumgallu
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  3
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  What is "excess mass"? Would the matter, after shedding that "excess mass", remain normal matter or it has to become "exotic"? This is outside the realm of known science, by the way.
  $endgroup$
  – Alexander
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I'm not sure if this question is answerable. Just the existence of hyperspace or "large and compact extra dimensions" is purely theoretical. It's pretty hard to give a science-based answer to a question which is asking about things that haven't been experimentally verified in any way.
  $endgroup$
  – Gryphon
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Mass is the energy intrinsic to holding a particle together. The energy allowing the particle to exist is its mass. You can't take the mass away from the particle. That's like taking the speed away from a moving train, without stopping it.
  $endgroup$
  – Adrian Hall
  2 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  My understanding was that the Higgs boson gave particles mass. But then I learned about a phenomena called vacuum decay, which could happen if you changed the Higgs field, and so yeah, its a bad idea to change the mass.
  $endgroup$
  – Ushumgallu
  2 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 1 more comment

$begingroup$

My question is this: can excess mass be bled off into hyperspace (the large and compact extra dimensions, not the Star Wars-esque swirling vortex), yet the matter remains in our universe?

Is mass too fundamentally tied to matter for this to happen, or is it possible to condense a galaxy into a "small" area, but shunt off mass so it doesn't collapse into a black hole?

science-based physics spacetime-dimensions

share|improve this question

edited 2 hours ago

Cyn

10.9k12350

asked 3 hours ago

UshumgalluUshumgallu

1258

$endgroup$

share|improve this question

edited 2 hours ago

Cyn

10.9k12350

asked 3 hours ago

UshumgalluUshumgallu

1258

share|improve this question

edited 2 hours ago

Cyn

10.9k12350

asked 3 hours ago

UshumgalluUshumgallu

1258

edited 2 hours ago

Cyn

10.9k12350

edited 2 hours ago

Cyn

10.9k12350

asked 3 hours ago

UshumgalluUshumgallu

1258

asked 3 hours ago

UshumgalluUshumgallu

1258

3 Answers
3

active

oldest

votes

8

$begingroup$

From the wiki:

In classical physics and general chemistry, matter is any substance that has mass and takes up space by having volume. All everyday objects that can be touched are ultimately composed of atoms, which are made up of interacting subatomic particles, and in everyday as well as scientific usage, "matter" generally includes atoms and anything made up of them, and any particles (or combination of particles) that act as if they have both rest mass and volume. However it does not include massless particles such as photons, or other energy phenomena (...)

So no, you can't dissociate one from another, at least not according to our current understanding of science.

That does not keep authors from creating sci-fi munbo-jumbo like EA's Mass Effect, which allows for all kinds of magic. But those have no scientific basis.

share|improve this answer

edited 27 mins ago

answered 3 hours ago

RenanRenan

52.2k15119259

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Agreed, mass can be thought of in different ways: Inertial mass, active/passive gravitational mass. It is both a property of matter and measure of its resistance to acceleration.
  $endgroup$
  – Rob
  2 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @rob indeed, it is kind of a miracle that the inertial mass equals the gravitational mass -- even though the principle of equivalence requires exactly that.
  $endgroup$
  – John Dvorak
  2 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

1

$begingroup$

There are two kinds of mass. Gravitational mass, which is what keeps you stuck to the ground and makes the planets orbit and all that jazz. The other is inertial mass, which is what pushes back on us when we push on something. Currently, we think these are just two facets of the same phenomenon, but there's no solid proof. If it does turn out that these are actually different things, then it may be possible to alter one without altering the other. This is a big stretch, but if everything I've proposed here is true, you could do exactly what you propose. Reduce gravitational mass while keeping inertial mass the same, and you could make something so large it would normally become a black hole.

share|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

Ryan_LRyan_L

5,047928

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Eintein's general theory of relativity itself postulates that we have no means to distinguish. Indeed, any breakthrough on that would be huge.
  $endgroup$
  – Renan
  20 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

0

$begingroup$

What you want here is to mask the mass, not get rid of it. Antigrav is what you're after, integrated such that your system shields objects from each other while maintaining their local gravity wells (so you don't end up with the opposite problem of things spontaneously exploding as soon as gravity isn't holding them together).

share|improve this answer

answered 2 hours ago

G. B. RobinsonG. B. Robinson

2177

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f143133%2fcan-mass-be-shunted-off-into-hyperspace-but-the-matter-remains%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

8

$begingroup$

From the wiki:

In classical physics and general chemistry, matter is any substance that has mass and takes up space by having volume. All everyday objects that can be touched are ultimately composed of atoms, which are made up of interacting subatomic particles, and in everyday as well as scientific usage, "matter" generally includes atoms and anything made up of them, and any particles (or combination of particles) that act as if they have both rest mass and volume. However it does not include massless particles such as photons, or other energy phenomena (...)

So no, you can't dissociate one from another, at least not according to our current understanding of science.

That does not keep authors from creating sci-fi munbo-jumbo like EA's Mass Effect, which allows for all kinds of magic. But those have no scientific basis.

share|improve this answer

edited 27 mins ago

answered 3 hours ago

RenanRenan

52.2k15119259

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Agreed, mass can be thought of in different ways: Inertial mass, active/passive gravitational mass. It is both a property of matter and measure of its resistance to acceleration.
  $endgroup$
  – Rob
  2 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @rob indeed, it is kind of a miracle that the inertial mass equals the gravitational mass -- even though the principle of equivalence requires exactly that.
  $endgroup$
  – John Dvorak
  2 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

8

$begingroup$

From the wiki:

In classical physics and general chemistry, matter is any substance that has mass and takes up space by having volume. All everyday objects that can be touched are ultimately composed of atoms, which are made up of interacting subatomic particles, and in everyday as well as scientific usage, "matter" generally includes atoms and anything made up of them, and any particles (or combination of particles) that act as if they have both rest mass and volume. However it does not include massless particles such as photons, or other energy phenomena (...)

So no, you can't dissociate one from another, at least not according to our current understanding of science.

That does not keep authors from creating sci-fi munbo-jumbo like EA's Mass Effect, which allows for all kinds of magic. But those have no scientific basis.

share|improve this answer

edited 27 mins ago

answered 3 hours ago

RenanRenan

52.2k15119259

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Agreed, mass can be thought of in different ways: Inertial mass, active/passive gravitational mass. It is both a property of matter and measure of its resistance to acceleration.
  $endgroup$
  – Rob
  2 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @rob indeed, it is kind of a miracle that the inertial mass equals the gravitational mass -- even though the principle of equivalence requires exactly that.
  $endgroup$
  – John Dvorak
  2 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

From the wiki:

In classical physics and general chemistry, matter is any substance that has mass and takes up space by having volume. All everyday objects that can be touched are ultimately composed of atoms, which are made up of interacting subatomic particles, and in everyday as well as scientific usage, "matter" generally includes atoms and anything made up of them, and any particles (or combination of particles) that act as if they have both rest mass and volume. However it does not include massless particles such as photons, or other energy phenomena (...)

So no, you can't dissociate one from another, at least not according to our current understanding of science.

That does not keep authors from creating sci-fi munbo-jumbo like EA's Mass Effect, which allows for all kinds of magic. But those have no scientific basis.

share|improve this answer

edited 27 mins ago

answered 3 hours ago

RenanRenan

52.2k15119259

$endgroup$

share|improve this answer

edited 27 mins ago

answered 3 hours ago

RenanRenan

52.2k15119259

answered 3 hours ago

RenanRenan

52.2k15119259

answered 3 hours ago

RenanRenan

52.2k15119259

1

$begingroup$

There are two kinds of mass. Gravitational mass, which is what keeps you stuck to the ground and makes the planets orbit and all that jazz. The other is inertial mass, which is what pushes back on us when we push on something. Currently, we think these are just two facets of the same phenomenon, but there's no solid proof. If it does turn out that these are actually different things, then it may be possible to alter one without altering the other. This is a big stretch, but if everything I've proposed here is true, you could do exactly what you propose. Reduce gravitational mass while keeping inertial mass the same, and you could make something so large it would normally become a black hole.

share|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

Ryan_LRyan_L

5,047928

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Eintein's general theory of relativity itself postulates that we have no means to distinguish. Indeed, any breakthrough on that would be huge.
  $endgroup$
  – Renan
  20 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

1

$begingroup$

There are two kinds of mass. Gravitational mass, which is what keeps you stuck to the ground and makes the planets orbit and all that jazz. The other is inertial mass, which is what pushes back on us when we push on something. Currently, we think these are just two facets of the same phenomenon, but there's no solid proof. If it does turn out that these are actually different things, then it may be possible to alter one without altering the other. This is a big stretch, but if everything I've proposed here is true, you could do exactly what you propose. Reduce gravitational mass while keeping inertial mass the same, and you could make something so large it would normally become a black hole.

share|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

Ryan_LRyan_L

5,047928

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Eintein's general theory of relativity itself postulates that we have no means to distinguish. Indeed, any breakthrough on that would be huge.
  $endgroup$
  – Renan
  20 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

There are two kinds of mass. Gravitational mass, which is what keeps you stuck to the ground and makes the planets orbit and all that jazz. The other is inertial mass, which is what pushes back on us when we push on something. Currently, we think these are just two facets of the same phenomenon, but there's no solid proof. If it does turn out that these are actually different things, then it may be possible to alter one without altering the other. This is a big stretch, but if everything I've proposed here is true, you could do exactly what you propose. Reduce gravitational mass while keeping inertial mass the same, and you could make something so large it would normally become a black hole.

share|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

Ryan_LRyan_L

5,047928

$endgroup$

share|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

Ryan_LRyan_L

5,047928

answered 1 hour ago

Ryan_LRyan_L

5,047928

answered 1 hour ago

Ryan_LRyan_L

5,047928

0

$begingroup$

What you want here is to mask the mass, not get rid of it. Antigrav is what you're after, integrated such that your system shields objects from each other while maintaining their local gravity wells (so you don't end up with the opposite problem of things spontaneously exploding as soon as gravity isn't holding them together).

share|improve this answer

answered 2 hours ago

G. B. RobinsonG. B. Robinson

2177

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

0

$begingroup$

What you want here is to mask the mass, not get rid of it. Antigrav is what you're after, integrated such that your system shields objects from each other while maintaining their local gravity wells (so you don't end up with the opposite problem of things spontaneously exploding as soon as gravity isn't holding them together).

share|improve this answer

answered 2 hours ago

G. B. RobinsonG. B. Robinson

2177

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

What you want here is to mask the mass, not get rid of it. Antigrav is what you're after, integrated such that your system shields objects from each other while maintaining their local gravity wells (so you don't end up with the opposite problem of things spontaneously exploding as soon as gravity isn't holding them together).

share|improve this answer

answered 2 hours ago

G. B. RobinsonG. B. Robinson

2177

$endgroup$

share|improve this answer

answered 2 hours ago

G. B. RobinsonG. B. Robinson

2177

answered 2 hours ago

G. B. RobinsonG. B. Robinson

2177

answered 2 hours ago

G. B. RobinsonG. B. Robinson

2177