Gravity and Black Globes

>      1)  Can a ship in a black globe be detected by a densitometer?

	Well, my understanding was that a black globe sucked up all
	incident "energy".  Apparently, this is all energy in the form
	of electromagnetic radiation.  Less understandably, the Black
	Globe affects the manueverability of the craft inside.  I have
	assumed that this is because as well as absorbing the
	electromagnetic force (photons), it absorbs gravity too
	(gravitons), rendering reactionless thrustors and gravitic drives
	useless.

	This leaves the strong and weak nuclear forces
	which it apparently doesn't affect.  I don't know if it can
	affect the strong force; this might make it capable of
	disintegrating the nuclei of matter which passes through it,
	which would liberate a lot of energy and make it a very bad idea
	to let the black globe touch any matter.

	As the black globe absorbs gravitons, it shields the ship inside
	from the gravitational effects of the outside.  Hence, while the
	black globe is "on", the ship would not appear on a
	densitometer, which indicates in which direction large sources
	of gravitons exist.

	But, the black globe "prevents any transit" of matter across its
	boundary.  How it accomplishes this is a mystery to me.  My
	guess is that it appears to be matter to matter striking it,
	meaning that it has an electronic/nuclear structure that
	resembles matter.  To prevent degenerate forms of matter from
	bursting through the field, the black globe would need to appear
	as dense as neutronium, while maintaining its masslessness.
	Perhaps this is achievable by weaving a web of nearly
	impenetrable strong nuclear force over the surface of the globe.
	I would suppose that if someone sent an ultradense kinetic
	weapon moving near the speed of light, it would be possible to
	rupture the black globe's integrity until it was turned back on.
	Somebody help me out; this concept is starting to become very
	difficult to explore.

>      2)  Can a ship in a black globe be affected by a repulsor or
>  tractor?

	A repulsor or tractor creates a directed (anti-) gravity field,
	or conceptually, a stream of (anti-) gravitons, to affect its
	target.  I would think that the black globe would render a
	degree of immunity from gravity weapons similar to its immunity
	from densitometer detection.

Now, since a black globe is flickering, the ship should emit and absorb
gravitons any time the block globe is off.  For stealth, the globe ought
to be set to flicker at a rate which makes the ship appear to be
invisible.  For protection from gravitic weapon fire, the black globe
should be on as much as possible.

I would think that combining gravitic and electromagnetic sensors would
make detecting a stealthy black-globe-equipped ship much simpler, since
the black globe has two desriable flicker rates: one which makes it
blend into the electromagnetic background, and one which makes it blend
into the gravitic background.  If these two flicker rates are quite
different, the ship will have to choose to hide from a particular type
of sensor and will be visible (to some degree) with the other.  The
greater the disparity in desirable flicker rates, the more obvious the
ship is.  Considering the sensitivity of sensors, I would choose to
always flicker the black globe for electromagnetic stealth; the gravitic
sensors tend to be less sensitive for locating an object, and less able
to indicate the type/configuration of a object that is only visible
gravitcally.

>      Mass is related to momemtum (the faster you go the heavier you get).
>      If a ship has momemtum it has mass (as far as I know, at least according
> to Einstein's theories).  However, I don't know if it has the mass that could
> be detected by a densitometer (I don't believe densitometers measure mass as
> such).  Maybe WILSON can pass this onto USENET (there might be more technical
> people there, ie. some people who know more physics than we do, to give us a
> better answer).  If the globe has mass, it might probably be affected by a
> tractor or repulsor.

Ah, but photons have MOMENTUM, but are MASSLESS!  I think the key is in
interpreting densitometers as graviton counters.  I also think that the
globe itself need not mass anything, instead taking the form of a
multi-force field matrix (electromagnetic, strong, gravitic) bound into a
limited region of space (a sphere), with siphons to redirect energy flow
into appropriate collectors, which absorb the energy and store it as
stored electric potential in capacitors.

James

> 	Here is some stuff which a friend of mine has ask me to repost.
>
>      1)  Can a ship in a black globe be detected by a densitometer?
>      2)  Can a ship in a black globe be affected by a repulsor or
>  tractor?

	I'm neither particularly knowledgable about physics nor traveller,
but the impression I seemed to get from reading about Black Globes was that
they weren't so much mass as energy of a sort... or to be more specific,
lack of energy.  I suppose that the simplest way to think of them is that
they generate a field of some sort that then conducts energy directed at
it into some storage medium hooked up to the field generator.  Since energy
cannot escape from the Black Globe, it would seem reasonable that the
densitometer cannot detect the mass of the ship within it... then again,
if the densitometer works not by detecting gravitic energy, but by sensing
the changes in the "shape of space" caused by mass, it would be reasonable
to assume that it CAN detect the ship.  Too many unknowns, I suppose.

>      Mass is related to momemtum (the faster you go the heavier you get).

	Uh, not quite... it's sort of the other way around.  Just because
there is a Mass ==> Momentum relationship doesn't mean that there is a
Momentum ==> Mass relationship.

>      If a ship has momemtum it has mass (as far as I know, at least
> according to Einstein's theories).

	If a ship has mass and is moving, it has momentum (same disclaimer).

> However, I don't know if it has the mass that could be detected by a
> densitometer (I don't believe densitometers measure mass as such).

	Same problem as above... I'm not really sure how densitometers
could detect gravity...

Steven J. Owens  		| "Twist ye, twine ye!  Even so,
[email removed]  		|  Mingled shades of joy and woe,
[email removed]                	|  Hope and fear, and joy, and strife,
[email removed]            	|  In the thread of human life."

> Why does the Black Globe have to act like a *barrier* to solid, high-speed
> objects?  More likely is that it absorbs all types of energy impinging on
> it, including kinetic energy.

> Result:  that salvo of missiles was just stopped dead in its tracks at the
> edge of the field, within whatever common reference frame you happen to be
> using for the combat.  There is nothing to prevent them entering the field
> thereafter if, for example, the ship using the globe moves toward them.

> Am I making sense?
> 8 )

Since I can't conceive of how a "real" black globe could possibly be
engineered, your suggestion makes as much sense as any other.

If we assume your suggestion is correct, then it would be easy to blow
up a ship by throwing enough mass at a high enough speed at the black
globe.  Shoot a heavy piece of ordinance at .9c at the black globe, and
watch the sparks fly!

Alternatively, you could keep the Black Globe installation on a ship a
secret.  Then, as the opponent brings his fighter or boarding ship in
for the kill, you wait for them to get closer, closer, closer, and turn
on the shield at the last minute.  WHAM! It's as if they just crashed
into an asteroid.  Hope your capacitors can handle the kinetic energy
and resultant fuel explosions aboard the incoming craft.

I would tend to think that letting a mass with large kinetic energy
strike the black globe is almost as useful as letting it strike the hull
of your ship.  CRUNCH!  Only it's worse because having the capacitors
explode is an internal explosion, whereas hull damage is external
damage.

If we really wanted to get carried away, we could assume "all energy"
means kinetic, radiant (E-M, Gravity, Nuclear) and potential energy.
This would mean that the binding energy of molecules, atoms, and
subamtomic particles is absorbed by the field.  Unfortunately, this
would cause everything that struck the field to act as if it were a
nuclear explosion, and the matter would disintegrate.  This doesn't seem
to match the intended game balance.

I'm getting tired of theorizing.  Does anybody have "The Mote in God's
Eye" by Pournelle and Niven (I think those were the authors)?  I would
sure appreciate someone searching for an explanation of what the original
black globe was.

James