WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

Austin Stanley · 2007-09-20 09:04:23

Antigravity itself might lead to FTL travel. If antigravity existed, what would Einstein's theory say about it?

Neither special or general relativity specific percludes anti-gravity, though it does produce some minor (not fundamental violations) in general relativity, which assumes that energy and mass are positive.

Of course as you point out to generate such anti-graivty under general relativity it is necessary to invoke exotic matter, specificly matter with negative mass. No evidence for such matter exists, even if theory does not specificly preclude it.

My personal belief is that this is an example of over application of matmatical models to the universe. Its important to rember that in the end that math only presents a model of the universe, but is not actualy the universe itself. Many mathmatical concepts may simply not apply to the actual universe. Particularly negative and imaginary numbers. These are mathmatical concepts that simply do not exist in reality. You can't measure a string to be sqrt(-1) long or hand me -1 apples. In reality everything comes down to absolute real numbers.

Though I think we'd be lucky to produce enough antigravity to get us off Earth's surface, much less cause reverse time dialation for those within. Since the only known method of generating a gravity field is with mass, antigravity would require anti-mass, and the energy-mass equivelence formula being what it is: E = mc^2, if mass is negative then so must the energy it is equivalent to. The Casimir effect might be employed to produce negative energy, though getting enough negative energy to produce anti-mass particles would be a formidable challenge and getting enough anti-mass particles together to generate an antigravity field would be orders of magnitude harder still. getting enough matter together and achieving sufficient density to produce significant gravity without a planet's worth of material is currently beyond us at the moment.

Well no if you COULD generate negative mass, all sorts of weird stuff could be possible. A mix of normal gas and negative gas would increase in temperature without limit, and many other weird effects would be possible. But again I think the simplest solution to these mathmatical oddities is that they simply aren't allowed in the universe.

This is all very theoretical stuff, I think at this point, it makes very little difference whether something is very very hard to achieve or impossible. I'd rather throw in a few coins to keep a few theorists thinking about these matters, because who knows what they may come up with. I think as far as government waste is concerned, it certainly is cheaper to pay a few scientists salaries than to build a "bridge to nowhere" in Alaska.

Well without any evidence or proof, Senator Ted Stevens (Senior Republican Senator BTW), bridge seems to make a lot more sense to me. Spending money on the bridge will certianly give some concreat results.

When someone flatly says something is impossible, I tend to keep an open mind about it and suppose it might just be very very difficult instead. Most of the so-called "time machines" usually require feats of engineering and mass manipulation achievable only by a supercivilization orders of magitude more advanced than ourselves, so it really is only of academic interest to me, as I don't think there is a chance that someone will invent an "antigravity" drive in the near future, but I don't discount the possibility entirely, so throw a few "crackpots" some chump change, so long as their theories are sufficiently plausible so as not to be obviously flat out wrong. Make the "crackpots" work hard to produce plausible theories though, not just any "crackpot" will do.

Hey if they have an actual test for their theories, I'm all for it. The problem is, most impossible theories also tend to be impossible to test.

Tom Kalbfus · 2007-09-20 11:46:31

Untestable theories are a waste of time. What we need are crackpots who make testable theories, if they are testable then they can be dispensed with quickly or not. The reason we have a breakthrough science division, may be because some testable theories are not tested because they aren't taken seriously. If a crackpot proposes a theory that is not testable, he is wasting time and money and so should not be employed, if he proposes something like a spinning superconductor that generates antigravity, maybe NASA should build such a device and test to see whether it generates antigravity. There is certainly no harm in such experiments and they only cost a little money. If it doesn't work, then the crackpot loses some of his reputation and NASA spends some money, if it does work there could be a big payoff. If the crackpot is actually not a crackpot, then this is actually a second chance for him to establish his reputation. I believe the scientist Nicola Tesla had some theories that would classify him as a crackpot, but some of what he said about the properties of electricity and magnetic fields were valid, but other things he proposed were either impossible or not practical.

dryson · 2007-09-24 19:13:09

No.
Gravity is a fundamental property of matter, and (aside from a few very small relativistic effects) has nothing to do with rotating objects. Einstein's theories hold everywhere, not just in atmospheres. Gravity exists everywhere. And physical laws are no different in space than they are here on Earth.
You're right that mass is a fundamental property measured in kilograms, it "increases" when traveling at relativistic speeds, density is mass/volume, and w=mg gives a good approximation of gravity at sea level, which is measured in newtons. There's no kind way to say this, so I'm being blunt: Everything else in your post is nonsense. Go read a book or something on physics. I recommend the MIT video lectures.

First off gravity is generated by very fast moving motions of atoms. Here is a little project to prove this.

If you pour colored water into a swiming pool what happens? The colored water will spread out over the rest of the pool, but if you take a stick and place it in the center of this colored water and start to stir it what happens? The colored water will maintain its cohesive bond. After you stop stirring what eventually will happen is that due to the colored water not having the centrigual force holding the colored water together at a certain rate of velocity the colored water will spread out.

All I ever hear anyone say is that Einstein is always correct. Instead of holding on to these old notions why don't people start doing expierments to see for theirself. Einsteins Laws of Physics are Earth based notions, space on the other hand is not the Earth.

There are places throughout the Universe that are void of planets and solar systems that generate gravity. Gravity does not exist everywhere.

dryson · 2007-09-24 20:04:40

What about this theory which is testable.

We know that lasers operate at light speed and use different types of gases and elements to create the laser. What if a way were found to attach to the orbitals of one laser other gas atoms that remain inert when attached to the light photon but when accelerated at light speed and are then collided with another laser that has other inert gases attached to the orbitals that when the gases collide would release energy. Now this energy since it was collided at light speed would create a fast as light speed energetic reaction, meaning if proven to work the way stated above could propel a ship to light speed or a lower sub-light speed.

Austin Stanley · 2007-09-28 19:03:20

Untestable theories are a waste of time. What we need are crackpots who make testable theories, if they are testable then they can be dispensed with quickly or not. The reason we have a breakthrough science division, may be because some testable theories are not tested because they aren't taken seriously. If a crackpot proposes a theory that is not testable, he is wasting time and money and so should not be employed, if he proposes something like a spinning superconductor that generates antigravity, maybe NASA should build such a device and test to see whether it generates antigravity. There is certainly no harm in such experiments and they only cost a little money. If it doesn't work, then the crackpot loses some of his reputation and NASA spends some money, if it does work there could be a big payoff. If the crackpot is actually not a crackpot, then this is actually a second chance for him to establish his reputation. I believe the scientist Nicola Tesla had some theories that would classify him as a crackpot, but some of what he said about the properties of electricity and magnetic fields were valid, but other things he proposed were either impossible or not practical.

I guess after all this time we have reached agreement. I do not disagree with anything in this post! Hooray!

Austin Stanley · 2007-09-29 00:51:49

First off gravity is generated by very fast moving motions of atoms. Here is a little project to prove this.
If you pour colored water into a swiming pool what happens? The colored water will spread out over the rest of the pool, but if you take a stick and place it in the center of this colored water and start to stir it what happens? The colored water will maintain its cohesive bond. After you stop stirring what eventually will happen is that due to the colored water not having the centrigual force holding the colored water together at a certain rate of velocity the colored water will spread out.

I really don't have anything to say to this accept that you are completely incorrect. Gravity is not generated by motion, it is an intrinsic property of mass. The dispersal of dye in a swimming pool is governed by Brownian motion and perhapses centrifugal force if the water is being rotated. Gravity has very little to do with it.

Try this test instead. Drop a 10 pound and a 18 pound bolling ball at the same time from the same height. They will both hit the ground at the same time. Then perform this same expirment in a car/bus/plane or anything else you might expect to generate "gravity" I think you will find that the rate of fall will be exactly the same.

All I ever hear anyone say is that Einstein is always correct. Instead of holding on to these old notions why don't people start doing expierments to see for theirself. Einsteins Laws of Physics are Earth based notions, space on the other hand is not the Earth.
There are places throughout the Universe that are void of planets and solar systems that generate gravity. Gravity does not exist everywhere.

On the contrary Einstein's laws are quite well tested, both on Earth and in Space. Every time someone uses a GPS device they are reliant upon correction made to the device due to special relativity (SR). You are right that these laws may not have been tested in far of universes or the void of cosmic space. However the observations we make from these locations are consistent with SR and one of the Axioms of science is that the laws we discover are universal, even in locations we cannot test/observe. As these locations are (by there nature and definition) unobservable/untestable we have to accept that one on faith.

We know that lasers operate at light speed and use different types of gases and elements to create the laser. What if a way were found to attach to the orbitals of one laser other gas atoms that remain inert when attached to the light photon but when accelerated at light speed and are then collided with another laser that has other inert gases attached to the orbitals that when the gases collide would release energy. Now this energy since it was collided at light speed would create a fast as light speed energetic reaction, meaning if proven to work the way stated above could propel a ship to light speed or a lower sub-light speed.

What is this babbling? You can't "attach" a gas atom to the orbital of another gas atom, atom can't simply swap in for electrons, even if they were somehow inert (they aren't). Nor can you attach an atom to a photon, and even if you could this wouldn't allow you to accelerate the atom to light-speed.

Remember the iron claw laws of thermodynamics. Energy into the system must equal energy out of the system. You can't get something for nothing. So in order to accelerate a ship to near light speed you must expend enough energy to get it there, there are no fancy tricks around this.

cIclops · 2007-09-30 06:19:24

Nominations are now open for Austin Stanley as the most patient poster willing to untangle and clarify chaotically confused messages.

Dayton Kitchens · 2007-10-11 07:28:01

Nominations are now open for Austin Stanley as the most patient poster willing to untangle and clarify chaotically confused messages.

Seconded

dryson · 2007-10-27 14:40:32

we have to remember that mass is the weight of an object.

We also know that in order for your bowling ball to even exist the atoms that comprise the material that makes the bowling ball must move at a certain rate of velocity to create the bowling ball. And how does the bowling ball keep its shape? Through the munipulation of how many atoms and at what rate the atoms move. If the atoms didn't move at all then the bowling ball would most likely be a gaseous state.

So gravity is created by how fast the atoms move within a particluar environment and how they interact with other atoms in this environment. Mass is just how much an atom weighs, mass does not create gravity.

Perhaps if you stopped trying to add a conatation of religion into the calculation then you would see what I mean.

dryson · 2007-10-27 14:47:08

We know that laser light travels at the speed of light. We also know that the photons travel along orbital paths. We also know that lasers use gases as a source to create the beam which contain atoms.

I will use two lasers for this theory,

Laser one: Laser one would have inert atoms attached to the photons by using nano tubing that remain inert (meaning the two atoms do not create a release of energy when joined together or come into close vicinty of each other)

Laser two:Laser two would be a mirror of laser one except for the atoms attached to the laser photons would react with the atoms attached to the photons from laser one.

These lasers would need to be aligned to such precision that
the orbital paths from each laser would collide with each other at the same time. When the photons collide with each other they should cancel each ones energy out but when the two inert atoms that have been attached to the photons collide and become active their collision in theory would release an amount of energy equal to that of the atoms used.

This release of energy would not be a light speed reaction but would be close to that of lightspeed. This is because the process of when the atoms collide would create a planck time moment where reaction would be stalled due to the restructing of the atoms colliding and then releasing their energy.

To increase the thrust yield more lasers would be used to create a more energetic release or thrust.

To decrease the thrust yield fewer lasers would be used to create a less energetic release or thrust

Who cares what Einstein says. If everyone listened to those that said a plane can't fly then this website wouldn't even exist.

Those who conform to what is a perceived norm are more likely to become un-intelligent versus those who look for new theories upon which to build the future.

SpaceNut · 2021-01-30 09:41:15

We ave all envisioned the days of star treks warp drive and maybe one day it will be reality.

tahanson43206 · 2021-01-30 09:45:10

For SpaceNut ... re #86 and topic

Thanks for bringing another "ancient" topic back into view!

It will be interesting to see if anyone has new insight to add after 13 years or so...

(th)

SpaceNut · 2021-01-30 13:19:16

Einstein field equations, which describe how space, time and energy in our Universe interact.

Warp Drive – Faster Than Light Propulsion

Our theoretical description of space is the entire observable universe which extends to 13.8 Billion Lightyears (because the universe is 13.8 Billion Years old) through whichever direction we look at it (and is the same from any point of observation in the universe, since the universe is infinite). But, how much have we explored? The furthest distance reached by a machine, the voyager I, is the outskirts of our solar which is a few light hours from earth which it took 35 years to sail in empty space going at an astonishing speed of 1100 Km/sec. Humans, on the other hand have not gone further than the moon (360,000 km away from earth) and are soon planning a trip to mars. The closest star to our solar system is the Proxima Centauri System which is about 4.2 light years away which would essentially take the fastest machine ever built (The Voyager Satellite) about 76,000 years which is not an inspiring number given that the average life expectancy of a human being is around 60 to 70 years (as of now).

Scientists Are Starting to Take Warp Drives Seriously, Especially One Specific Concept]

Push a button, press a petal, and that fancy drive system – whose workings no one can explain – will send us to another location in space-time.

Is NASA Actually Working On a Warp Drive?

The space agency isn’t building an engine that can approach the speed of light—yet. In the report, advanced propulsion physicist Harold "Sonny" White, PhD, now of Limitless Space, resolves a major paradox in the leading theoretical model for superluminal (faster than the speed of light) travel, what’s known as an Alcubierre warp drive.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2021-06-01 06:58:59

Quantum communication in space moves ahead
https://www.spacewar.com/reports/Quantu … d_999.html

Quantum entanglement can be tested through the use of photons and light waves. The first experiment, designed by Einstein and his colleagues in 1935, brought up significant issues with entanglement, and he claimed it impossible, due to the physical impossibility of data moving fast than the speed of light between particles.
https://www.scalarlight.com/the-modern- … e-healing/

Superluminal communication is a hypothetical process in which information is sent at faster-than-light (FTL) speeds. The current scientific consensus is that faster-than-light communication is not possible, and to date it has not been achieved in any experiment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-th … munication

tahanson43206 · 2021-06-01 07:07:24

For Mars_B4_Moon re #89

Thank you for refreshing this topic (along with so many others!)

The question of measuring the velocity of entangled state transactions has not come up in reports about work in progress that I have seen. Apparently the main (and a significant) benefit is secure communication.

Edit#1 ... after thinking about the implications of light speed quantum entanglement for a while, since posting the above, I realized that there ** may ** be additional benefits of communications using this technology ...

At this point, I have read ** nothing ** one way or the other on this point ... is quantum entanglement independent of mass in the line between two entangled particles? If NOT (and at this point I have no way of knowing) then the Mars/Earth problem of needing relay stations at the Solar system poles would be eliminated, so the travel time for packets would be reduced to the Earth-Mars distance.

Another possibility is that the Distance Squared law may not apply .... Again, I have seen ** nothing ** one way or the other on this point, but if it turns out that the reduction of magnitude of signal strength with distance "law" is not applicable to this situation, then the problem of needing vast amounts of power to communicate over interstellar distances would be solved.

If Mars_B4_Moon is correct, that the quantum entanglement physics obeys the speed of light, then the problem of time between exchanges between distant star systems and Earth is still there, but the problem of energy needed may NOT be.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2021-06-01 18:38:29

This is based on data is created and not destroyed as it moves through a worm hole or black hole but comes out in a different time space from where it enters.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2021-12-07 13:51:24

Not sure if this should go in the 'Cosmology' topics but I'm getting stuff on feeds about 'Warp' real or a bunch of paranormal supernatural scifi nonsense?

I think there was also a discussion on how Negative Anti-Matter could possibly 'Warp' space

https://www.realclearscience.com/2021/1 … 06705.html

https://thedebrief.org/darpa-funded-res … arp-bubble

They say its a real, albeit humble, warp bubbleexploit the Casimir effect to locally change the speed of light, a toy model consisting of a 1 µm diameter sphere centrally located in a 4µm diameter cylinder was analyzed to show a three-dimensional Casimir energy density.

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2021-12-07 13:52:33)

kbd512 · 2021-12-07 18:42:02

A 1 micrometer warp bubble is still 1 micrometer larger than all the warp bubbles previously created by humans, which to my knowledge is precisely zero. Now all I need is, "More power, Captain!" Maybe we need someone else working there to invent those Di-Lithium Crystals. Don't knock it until we've tried. It worked in the movies. We have transparent metal now (ALON), and that was neat trick. We're still working on teleporters and replicators. We also have those snazzy "Tri-Corders", but we call them "smart phones" and the communicators, but we call them "smart watches", and the tablets to boot.

Terraformer · 2021-12-10 13:58:41

War drives may fry their occupants if they go faster than light.

Of course, a subluminal warp drive still opens up the galaxy. And the spaces between the stars are not empty. One can imagine warp ships on decades long journeys between stars stopping off every couple of months at a settled rogue planet to resupply, trade, repair, and take on new crew (no need to sign on for life if you can catch a return trip).

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-03-09 20:08:18

CERN pauses future research collaboration with Russia at Ukrainian scientists' request

https://www.space.com/cern-stops-future … ne-protest

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-03-19 08:47:03

Scientists believe there could be an ‘anti-universe’ next to ours – where time runs backwards
|
The Independent

https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/scie … 39135.html

The concept, explained in a paper accepted for publication in the journal Annals of Physics, suggests that the reason for this universe is because there are fundamental symmetries in nature – such as charge, parity, and time. This fundamental symmetry is known as CPT symmetry.

Physical interactions generally obey these symmetries, but physicists have never observed a violation of these laws of nature simultaneously. The researchers posit that while this symmetry applies to interactions, it could also apply to the entire universe.

As such, to preserve this symmetry, there could be a mirror-image cosmos to balance our own.

The consequences to this universe existing could explain dark matter. There are currently three known types of neutrino: electron-neutrinos, muon-neutrinos and tau-neutrinos, all of which spin in the same leftwards direction. Physicists have wondered if there might be right-spinning neutrinos, but have never detected them.

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2022-03-19 08:48:02)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-04-17 10:33:32

Is the origin of dark matter gravity itself?
https://www.space.com/dark-matter-origin-gravity-theory

A new model of the very early universe proposes that the graviton, the quantum mechanical force carrier of gravity, flooded the cosmos with dark matter before normal matter
https://www.realclearscience.com/2022/0 … 26378.html

Could massive gravitons be viable dark matter candidates?
https://phys.org/news/2022-03-massive-g … dates.html

Another Fringe idea debunked CERN and FermiLab type experiment have shown that antihydrogen falls and does not emit Anti-Gravity?

'Antimatter and matter respond to gravity in the same way, experiment reveals'

https://physicsworld.com/a/antimatter-a … t-reveals/

Matter is made of baryons and leptons such as protons and electrons. According to the Standard Model, each of these particles has a corresponding antiparticle with identical mass but opposite charge. Just like protons and electrons, these antiparticles can combine to make antimatter. Indeed, physicists at CERN can make antihydrogen by combining an antiproton with an antielectron. These antiprotons are produced in large numbers at CERN in a facility dubbed the “Antimatter Factory”.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-04-23 05:06:02

New 'Helical Engine' could reach 99% the speed of light

https://www.thebrighterside.news/post/n … d-of-light

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-05-11 10:54:50

Warp speed 'Unruh effect' can finally be tested in the lab
https://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Rese … s_999.html

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-06-04 12:27:33

Quantum particles can feel the effects of gravitational fields that you never touch

https://www.scienceinter.com/2022/06/qu … ts-of.html

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#76 2007-09-20 09:04:23

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#77 2007-09-20 11:46:31

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#78 2007-09-24 19:13:09

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#79 2007-09-24 20:04:40

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#80 2007-09-28 19:03:20

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#81 2007-09-29 00:51:49

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#82 2007-09-30 06:19:24

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#83 2007-10-11 07:28:01

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#84 2007-10-27 14:40:32

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#85 2007-10-27 14:47:08

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#86 2021-01-30 09:41:15

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#87 2021-01-30 09:45:10

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#88 2021-01-30 13:19:16

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#89 2021-06-01 06:58:59

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#90 2021-06-01 07:07:24

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#91 2021-06-01 18:38:29

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#92 2021-12-07 13:51:24

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#93 2021-12-07 18:42:02

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#94 2021-12-10 13:58:41

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#95 2022-03-09 20:08:18

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#96 2022-03-19 08:47:03

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#97 2022-04-17 10:33:32

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#98 2022-04-23 05:06:02

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#99 2022-05-11 10:54:50

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

#100 2022-06-04 12:27:33

Re: WARP DRIVE, AHEM!

Board footer