/sci/ - Science & Math

1

It doesn't work.

>>5433442
How do you know?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive

I believe science disagrees with you.

I mean hell, we have the technology TODAY to build this drive. Our only weak link is power generation, and the only present source of this amount of power is anti-matter. The problem with anti-matter is as follows:
#1: It is incredibly difficult and time consuming to create. Currently, you need to put as much power into creating anti-matter as it will produce.
#2: to create the amount we need to get us to Andromeda would take almost 1,500 years
#3: The power we need to simply contain anti-matter and not have it annihilate normal matter is incredible. A small nuclear reactor could do the job, but coolant issues become a huge issue in space as the most efficient way to disperse heat in a vacuum is by emitting high-energy radiation instead of simply putting a heat-sink on the outside of the ship.

It's an incredibly complex problem, and while we do have the tech to do it today, we need pretty much as much power as the human race has output in it's entire existence and multiply that by a factor of a hundred.

There is no theoretical way to build one. So, that's a pretty big problem.

The latest calculations for the Alcubierre drive indicate that it COULD operate on as little as 1600 lbs of fuel. The BIG Problem with it is that a starship would create a blast of horribly all annihilating radiation in a cone directly in front of it as it comes out of warp drive. cleansing the planet it was planning on visiting of all life

>>5433604
>I mean hell, we have the technology TODAY to build this drive

No we most certainly do not, as the Wikipedia article you linked to makes perfectly clear.

1) It requires negative energy density, which probably does not exist.
2) There is no conceivable means by which a warp bubble could be created if it didn't already exist.

exotic matter requirements

>>5433604
ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?
you know nothing.

>>5433438
problems:

>energy needed
we need as much energy on start up as is used by the entire world in 1 year.

>materials:
it needs negative mass matter, which we dont have (unless the 5D GR theory NASA is testing works out, then this isnt a problem)

>structure:
in order to make this work, you need a 1 atom thick shell of this negative mass material around your ship. we have no way to even theoretically do this at the moment.

>Radiation:
if you are planning to goat or over the speed of light the ship will be bathed in su much radiation it will instantly be destroyed.

>Causality:
using such a device above light speed would cause paradoxes (even with its "no time dilation" condition) and we dont know how nature deals with it (all currently theoretically possible paradoxes are somehow prevented by nature).

>Steering:
you have no way of telling the warp drive to stop from inside the ship, so you need structures at the end point to tell it to stop, meaning we have to travel the the location with other technology anyway.

I think that covers it.

>>5433676
>implying only using warp drive in an effort to travel ftl

>>5433676
Don't reply to this tripfag. He's a well known shitposter.

>>5433604
>I mean hell, we have the technology TODAY to build this drive.
>mfw /sci/ actually believes this

>>5433604
Here

It's sad that I have to be half retarded to try and spur conversation on this topic for someone who doesn't know and is interested in learning about the subject.

The more you prove me wrong, the more I'm going to investigate this shit. Keep fucking posting so we can learn a little bit.

>>5433687
>where did i imply that?

>>5433719
>radiation
>causality

>>5433438

There are no problems. The math says it can work. Now give me a negative-positive energy separator and I'll build you a ward drive.

>>5433438
Over 9000

>>5433719
>if you are planning to

>>5433724
>ward drive

>>5433783
>ward drive
>Warp identities