Re: opposite of relativistic time contraction

On 2008-03-16, Ben Crowell <crowell07@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> AFAIK, the only way to accelerate flesh at 100g without causing
> death is to use gravitational fields.

Does this acceleration have to be *comfortable*?  ;-)

A really technologically advanced race could just disassemble the body
for transit (keeping careful track of which bits went where) and
reassemble it at the other end.  So what if it causes a tem****ary loss
of life?  ;-)

Though if it's only 100g acceleration you want, you wouldn't have to
go nearly that far.  Just build sup****ts for the bones (internally if
needed), immerse in fluid very similar in density to the body, and
fill the lungs with some denser medium than air.

It has to be easier than protecting them from the power required to
accelerate a hundred-trillion-tonne black hole.


> Hmm...10^29 W is 300 suns, and you'd have to collimate it into a beam
> with a diameter of 0.1 nm. Seems like diffraction would be a problem.

Minor engineering problem!  Getting somewhat worse if the base
generating the laser is a few light-hours away, as it will be in less
than a day.


> For the requirements of my story, I'm thinking that the magnetic-
> monopole-charged-black hole probably works best. All you need is an
> absurdly large heat engine to drive an uncrewed rocket ****p, which
> then accelerates the black hole with magnetic fields, which then
> tows the passenger module using gravitational fields.

How do you keep the rocket exhaust away from the passenger?  It seems
to be the same problem as radiation from an accretion disk.  Even
0.0000000000000000001% leakage would be easily enough to fry a human,
just a hundred metres away or so.


- Tim