/sci/ - Science & Math

File: 121 KB, 900x588, warp-drive-starship.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 11:50:14 2012 No.5065649 [Reply] [Original]

Warp Drives are now more feasible to attain than ever.

> http://www.space.com/17628-warp-drive-possible-interstellar-spaceflight.html

what say you /sci/?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 11:52:30 2012 No.5065657 Things aren't really feasible when exotic matter is a requirement.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 11:54:29 2012 No.5065661 >>5065657 he said feesible, not cheap. h-bomgs are feesible, guns are cheap. which you choose depends on the scenario.

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 11:57:44 2012 No.5065674

>>5065661

Except exotic matter refers to hypothetical matter with exotic properties. One example is negative mass, or imaginary mass. The type of matter required is unobserved or unpredicted. At this point, it's like saying, "We can make this if only we had some magic."

>>	Carl Mon Sep 17 11:59:00 2012 No.5065677 >>5065661 good analogy, except that h-bomgs [sic] actually exist. could you tell us how to make exotic matter in a shell 1 atom thick?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 11:59:14 2012 No.5065678 >>5065661 you not committing a typo is feasible as well. but not probable.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 12:03:00 2012 No.5065689 >>5065674 If we invent magic there is no way I'm wasting it on FTL.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 12:04:59 2012 No.5065692 >>5065677 it can be larger and still hurt

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 12:08:45 2012 No.5065706

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20110015936_2011016932.pdf

Here's the guy's description of what he's doing in the lab. I haven't read it yet, but seeing he's actually trying to test it and actually got funding for it, it's not as obviously impossible as ye skeptics make it out to be.

Carl Mon Sep 17 12:14:29 2012 No.5065730
File: 292 KB, 750x590, qthruster3.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5065706
its a 1cm model just to test the effect, nothing is going to go FTL in this. its way below whats needed for FTL. and could someone tell me how a capacitor is going to be used for in stead of exotic matter?

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 12:38:59 2012 No.5065801

Just read the article, you need the same amount off mass as the ship in negative mass, you need thousands of kgs of negative mass for this to work. and ive jet to see a casimer effect device that weights less than the absolute value of the negative energy it makes.

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 12:59:14 2012 No.5065843

There are more than a few problems with making one of these. The first is exotic matter, who cares how much you need when it's never been observed. There would be no way to control the spacecraft so it could only work on set out paths otherwise you would never stop. And hawking radiation would destroy anything inside.

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:20:15 2012 No.5065902

"The Eagleworks team has discovered that the energy requirements are much lower than previously thought. If they optimize the warp bubble thickness and "oscillate its intensity to reduce the stiffness of space time," they would be able to reduce the amount of fuel to manageable amount: instead of a Jupiter-sized ball of exotic matter, you will only need 500 kilograms to "send a 10-meter bubble (32.8 feet) at an effective velocity of 10c."

I just saw this article as well online and I'd like to hear more knowledgeable folks refute or back it before /sci/ turns into a shitstorm.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:25:14 2012 No.5065912 >>5065902 The fuel doesn't appear to exist and there are other problems out lined before: >>5065843

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:25:45 2012 No.5065914

>we can't do this with current technology
>therefore we shouldn't investigate technology that would make it possible
/sci/ logic.

The guy doing the experiments made it pretty clear that he didn't expect to get anything applicable out of his tests, he's just exploring ways of warping spacetime.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:26:01 2012 No.5065915 >>5065843 Baby steps. And if you actually paid attention you would have read that they're actually going to test a subluminal (0.0004c) prototype (without mass in it).

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:31:14 2012 No.5065925 >>5065915 did you actually read the paper on how it will work? its no were near something that can be called a warp drive. this is in no way practical at the moment.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:32:29 2012 No.5065929 >>5065914 no, we are saying that the statement that its now practical is wrong.

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:33:14 2012 No.5065932

>>5065902
The mathematics of the Alcubierre drive are sound, and I imagine the calculations this team did for its modification of those mathematics are also sound.

The process by which the supposed drive would operate is the same you're simply reducing the energy cost from 10^44 joules to about 10^20 joules.

Of course... that's still about 600 times the total energy from the Sun that hits the Earth every second. It also ignores the fact that while the raw math for the Alcubierre drive works, we have no model for a physical means of generating a 'warp bubble', let alone what kind of apparatus or materials would be necessary to do so.

So yes... it could work... it just requires a field of physics that doesn't exist yet, and technology, materials, and means of generating massive amount of power which haven't been invented yet.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:34:44 2012 No.5065936 >>5065929 Where did it say that? Was it in the article? I sort of filter out everything but the direct quotes in science "journalism".

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:34:59 2012 No.5065938 >>5065915 weve built a device, the size of a house, that can make a force field around a 10cm3 object. does it now mean force fields are practical?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:35:45 2012 No.5065939 File: 3 KB, 127x127, 1299192993679.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >mfw when I knew of this already because of next big future

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:36:44 2012 No.5065943 >>5065940 plausible != practical

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:36:59 2012 No.5065940 >>5065936 im guessing >The findings I presented today change it from impractical to plausible and worth further investigation

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:38:44 2012 No.5065952 >>5065943 >autism "plausible" in that context can be seen to be used as the opposite of "impractical". meaning "practical"

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:40:14 2012 No.5065956

>>5065938
Yes... yes it does.

It just means that force fields will have very specific uses... simple, practical stuff...

... like containing the galaxy's deadliest criminals in a massive prison that uses the geothermal energy of the entire planet to power the forcefields of its cells.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:41:30 2012 No.5065959 >>5065915 And if you understood it you'd know it doesn't work this way.

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:41:44 2012 No.5065960

I don't think FTL travel will ever be possible since it would violate causality. If you could go faster than light you could travel ahead, then turn around and return to your origin before you left. Or you could send information of events before they occurred, resulting in their original cause to be potentially prevented. It would effectively be time travel.

Also if FTL travel was possible there would be aliens fucking everywhere as it'd be trivial to get anywhere in the galaxy.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:43:14 2012 No.5065966 >>5065940 >The finding presented change it from being implausible, impractical and impossible to plausible, impractical and impossible

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:43:59 2012 No.5065965 >>5065938 Horrible analogy, they are a long way from there yet.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:44:59 2012 No.5065968 >>5065938 Imagine if you adopted the same type of thinking with the Wright Flyer, the first transmission of electricity, the first combustion engine, computer etc etc etc.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:44:59 2012 No.5065969 >>5065960 >implying there aren't aliens fucking every Do you even Contact?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:47:00 2012 No.5065973 >>5065969 Contact is a work of a fiction bro.

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:47:00 2012 No.5065974

>>5065960
.... how exactly do we know there aren't aliens everywhere? Space is pretty fucking huge, and we have absolutely no way to detect intelligent life on planets outside our solar system. Hell, we can barely detect PLANETS outside our solar system.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:49:29 2012 No.5065977 >>5065968 The core physics associated with flight, transmission of electricity, combustion, and computing did not have to dramatically change in order for us to make advancements in those fields.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:49:45 2012 No.5065978 File: 7 KB, 251x237, happy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >Interstellar travel will be technologically possible in your lifetime

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:49:59 2012 No.5065980 >>5065968 >we just flew 30 feet! we now know that it is practical to fly 300 people 20 000 km in 6h!

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:50:30 2012 No.5065981 >>5065965 from what?

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:50:45 2012 No.5065983

>>5065974
I said it as an afterthought to the core of why faster than light travel is impossible. Namely, it violates causality.

However if FTL were possible then aliens could travel anywhere in the galaxy. Specifically places like Earth. Considering our own exponential growth pattern, if aliens could travel FTL their populations would have completely colonized the entire galaxy in a very short amount of time.

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 13:55:15 2012 No.5065992

http://www.icarusinterstellar.org/daydreaming-beyond-the-solar-system-with-warp-field-mechanics/

>The loopholes, amazingly, can be found in mathematical equations. Those equations are tested using an instrument called the White-Juday Warp Field Interferometer. At JSC, Eagleworks has initiated an interferometer test bed that will try to generate and detect a microscopic instance of a little warp bubble. Although this is just a tiny instance of the phenomena, it will be existence proof for the idea of perturbing space time—a “Chicago pile” moment, as it were.

The experiment referred to in the OP is an attempt at a proof-of-concept for small man-made space-time distortions similar to those needed by a true "warp engine". If these experiments find that it is technologically possible to create such bubbles without exotic matter then that would be very exiting indeed.

Nuka-Cola Mon Sep 17 13:55:59 2012 No.5065991

needs exotic matter (which probably doesn't exist, to be honest) with rather silly requirements on its size and thickness.
also, the interior of the bubble will be bathed in hawking radiation at speeds past C relative to a stationary outside observer. like, enough to vaporize any known material easily

it's a neat idea but don't look forward to it

>>	The ALPHABETA Juices of Lemons Mon Sep 17 14:03:15 2012 No.5066004 >>5065692 That's what she said

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 14:17:14 2012 No.5066034

>>5065983
>if aliens could travel FTL their populations would have completely colonized the entire galaxy in a very short amount of time.

That assumes it is even possible to colonize other planets. If FTL is easier than previously thought then the level of technology of your aliens would be a lot lower than you might suppose.

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 14:21:59 2012 No.5066042

>>5066034
>Alien population explodes on their home planet in anticipation for the supposed colonization of the stars.
>FTL drive hailed as an invention of world peace.

>Terraforming takes centuries.
>Minor colonies on very remote worlds.
>Home world drained of resources, massive infighting as population attempts to stabilize.

>FTL destroys civilization.

YOU JUST WATCH.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 15:07:44 2012 No.5066174 For this experiment, i hope universe works in their favour. Brilliant engineers backed with capitalism will do the rest.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 15:07:59 2012 No.5066169 For this experiment, i hope universe works for their favour. Brilliant engineers backed with capitalism will do the rest.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 15:24:46 2012 No.5066230 how do you pronounce that Mexican physicist name?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 15:26:14 2012 No.5066235 >>5065649 No matter how you pull FTL, you get: 1- go back in time machines, or 2- a preferred inertial frame (very weird), or 3- even weirder restrictions on the FTL device. In short, FTL is probably not possible.

>>	Carl Mon Sep 17 15:35:29 2012 No.5066253 >>5066235 what if the first time traveling event freezes its frame of reference as the absolute frame, but only for time traveling. what if this already happened naturally but we cant see it because its perpendicular to our space?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 15:43:15 2012 No.5066279 >>5066253 Yes, if you want to postulate that an active FTL device sets the preferred frame for everyone else, then you might be able to avoid time paradoxes. I put that under "3- even weirder restrictions on the FTL device."

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 15:46:29 2012 No.5066284 >>5066230 It's Spanish so probably Al-koo-be-air or Al-su-be-air Depending on the dialect.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 15:47:44 2012 No.5066288 File: 32 KB, 420x281, superjail5.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5065956

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 15:56:14 2012 No.5066310 >>5066284 >Alcubierre al-koo-bee-AIR-ray with the R rolled

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 16:04:14 2012 No.5066328 >>5066253 > the first According to whose frame of reference? >>5066235 You can't get back into your own lightcone with FTL only, right? So while some observers will see you travel back in time, there are no paradoxes, right?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 16:23:59 2012 No.5066402 >>5066328 You can get back in your own light cone with FTL only. Take a short hop in FTL according to some reference inertial frame. Stop, turn around, and take a short FTL hop back from another inertial frame. Voila, you're back before you left.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 16:26:44 2012 No.5066418 >>5066402 Here's an example whipped up via google. Looks right. http://www.theculture.org/rich/sharpblue/archives/000089.html Note it doesn't matter if you use warp drive, wormholes, teleportation, whatever, the same problem arises.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 16:29:44 2012 No.5066429 >>5066328 > According to whose frame of reference? The first one's obviously. Next question.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 16:31:59 2012 No.5066439 >yfw some random guy in a lab accidentally obtains warp speed and we are seemingly "randomly" met with spacefaring alien diplomats the same day and no one knows what the fuck is going on

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 16:37:14 2012 No.5066471 File: 48 KB, 568x742, a.aaa-Warp-Speed.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] i told you faggots. stop saying everythings impossible.

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 16:43:15 2012 No.5066497

>People saying FTL is impossible because it would mean time travel

No you fucking retards, it just means you travel faster than light.
If you're treating light as an "instant", you're being retarded.
The distance between one edge of the universe to the opposite edge is the true "instant". LIGHT doesn't even travel that fast. Are you saying the universe it traveling faster than it's existence? No, that would be stupid.

What would happen in FTL travel is instead of moving at the speed of light and being able to be observed you simply are unable to be observed while traveling FTL until we invent a FTL observation device.

There's still a hard limit on an "instance" which I already defined. So essentially information would travel faster than you could observe, but you still wouldn't be able to observe it before it's creation. You would observe it AT it's creating at very best.
example: I send you hello from the opposite end of the galaxy. You receive it as soon as I hit the send button. If we were any closer you still receive it in the same "instant" or what you perceive as the same amount of time.
But then the new problem would be transuniversal travel.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 16:56:59 2012 No.5066564 File: 11 KB, 285x230, 596.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >you will not live long enough to be able to find out if interstellar travel at superluminal speeds is possible or not

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 17:03:29 2012 No.5066593
File: 42 KB, 288x467, 130593323299.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5065960
>Also if FTL travel was possible there would be aliens fucking everywhere as it'd be trivial to get anywhere in the galaxy.

Ever heard of all those millions and millions of UFO sightings made during human history?
Why they don't land and make themself known....who knows. But they are here.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 17:07:44 2012 No.5066603 >>5066593 >mfw aliens daily visit 50 planets with life on it, only making contact with most advanced ones i guess they jumped to us, lold at our fossil fuels and jumped to another planet

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 17:30:44 2012 No.5066678 Anyone else see this? http://arxiv.org/abs/1209.3107 We CTC now

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 17:41:30 2012 No.5066702

>>5066497
No, faster than light travel means exactly time travel if by faster than light you mean "spacelike curve" as opposed to the Alcubierrie warp drive.

Travel on a spacelike curve to alpha proxima, travel on a spacelike curve back to Earth, arrive up to 8 years earlier than you left.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 17:43:00 2012 No.5066705 File: 23 KB, 921x606, picard-facepalm.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >mfw high schoolers are invading /sci/ with this bullshit learn special relativity, relativistic mechanics and electrodynamics before you spout your ignorant statements

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 17:51:15 2012 No.5066734 >>5066705 I concur.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 20:07:29 2012 No.5067103 Why do people think FTL is time travel. If you visit another galaxy and come back in one second, you wont suddenly end up in the 60's. You wont see younger yourself because you left a second ago and now you are back.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 20:20:00 2012 No.5067145 >>5066284 http://es.forvo.com/word/miguel_alcubierre/ Mee-gehl Al-koo-bi-er-re r's rolled.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 20:27:29 2012 No.5067162 File: 212 KB, 1920x1200, Night in Space.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >mfw I have the same desktop background as the site.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 20:27:29 2012 No.5067163 >>5065649 Wait...... are warp drives powered by American footballs?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 20:45:59 2012 No.5067200 SPOILER: Even with warp drives, the first missions are restricted to FTL. To travel FTL using curved spacetime, your route has to be set up in advance.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 20:48:30 2012 No.5067206 Okay, so if the thing actually works (which it apparently does at least mathematically), what happens to the causality issues? As in >>5067063

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 20:49:29 2012 No.5067212 Okay, so if the thing actually works (which it apparently does at least mathematically), what happens to the causality issues? As in >>5067130

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 20:51:59 2012 No.5067214 >>5067212 it doesn't actually go faster than light. It just warps space to make it seem that way.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 20:53:29 2012 No.5067217 >>5067214 Did you even read the linked post? That doesn't matter. Actually, that's the entire crux of the paradox--it moves while remaining in the same frame of reference as Earth.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 21:13:44 2012 No.5067270 >>5065939 Same. >not following Next Big Future

Light! hamerbro Mon Sep 17 21:15:29 2012 No.5067273

Nevertheless.

Warp drive can and will be able to travel between the amount of light and propulsion in a distinctive matter.

Formula:
c = AF

Therefore...
Warp is calculated not only through medium, but through a profligate or exponents and waves.

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 21:18:15 2012 No.5067279

>>5067217
But, wait, doesn't it matter?

The whole idea behind a warp drive is, as the name implies, that the ship itself doesn't technically move through space. Space itself moves and carries the ship with it. Therefore it's not subject to all the timey-wimey mess that kicks in when an object approaches c. Right?

That's what's attractive about a warp drive. It gives you de facto FTL without the relativistic side effects.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 21:27:00 2012 No.5067294 >ophole in the laws of physics wrong, then neutrinos loophole through physics too gay/10

>>	Nuka-Cola Mon Sep 17 21:49:45 2012 No.5067349 >>5067103 it's a consequence of special relativity

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 21:51:44 2012 No.5067354 >>5067103 It's time travel to the future.

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 21:59:30 2012 No.5067367

>>5065960
I don't understand how people are so retarded about FTL and causality.

You can't go back in time with FTL, not ever. The fastest you can reach another point is the "now" for that point. Of course the now for all points are relative and time progresses at different speeds, but it still holds true.

Besides since the past is ambiguous the past doesn't exist anyways.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 22:01:44 2012 No.5067376 File: 1.46 MB, 300x220, 1339646565082.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >niggers saying that DIS SHIT IMPOSSIBRU! >article mentions that a .0004c experimental prototype is being built

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 22:06:00 2012 No.5067386 >>5067376 POWER POWER POWER What's going to fuel it if it is physically possible? What provides enough energy within the space limits of a starship?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 22:09:45 2012 No.5067396 >>5067386 >implying you have to go >c to colonize the solar system and nearby star systems only a few lightbeers away >not just using lower power levels for sublight travel And to answer your question, nuclear power.

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 22:17:00 2012 No.5067411

>>5067396
Are you talking about the reactor you'd find in an aircraft carrier, or something more advanced?

Look, I'd fucking love if we could pull this off. I'm a huge optimist and there's nothing I'd like more than to see FTL in my lifetime. But it's all got to run off something. We can't build castles and starships out of air and fairy dust.

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 22:17:30 2012 No.5067412

Questions for any knowaledgable anons.

1. The article mentions it would be made out of "exotic" matter. what is that?
2. Why does it need to be shaped like a football?
3. Ok, we scaled the amount of energy down but isn't it still ridiculously large? like several atomic bombs large?

>>	OxyMoron Mon Sep 17 22:18:46 2012 No.5067415 What happens if the spaceship/bubble hits some microscopic particle of interstellar dust?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 22:19:15 2012 No.5067418 How would the timing work? Lets say a group of astronauts speed away and visit a system but when they come back 500 years have passed and we're all dead. what than?

>>	OxyMoron Mon Sep 17 22:19:44 2012 No.5067420 >>5067412 Its already better than blowing the bombs up for propulsion.

>>	OxyMoron Mon Sep 17 22:20:44 2012 No.5067426 >>5067418 No time dilation because magic.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 22:20:59 2012 No.5067422 >>5067396 If you are not going to go greater than c then what the hell is the point of a warp drive? We can get close to c with much simpler and more practical tech

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 22:21:45 2012 No.5067430 >>5067418 The fact that space is what's moving, instead of the ship THROUGH space, takes care of the time dilation, right?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 22:25:14 2012 No.5067438 >>5067430 >>5067426 ok, the article says a speed 10 times faster than the light is possible. i would imagine that the people inside the ship would be safe so how fast could we go? I mean this is the speed of light here.

>>	Nuka-Cola Mon Sep 17 22:30:45 2012 No.5067452 >>5067438 they would not be safe; see the virtual particle radiation. it'd be fun to find some way to convert the radiation into electrical energy for the ship, but that would operate using mechanisms that are not even hypothetically possible yet

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 22:30:59 2012 No.5067451 >>5067422 It takes 3 months to 2 years to reach Mars by conventional rockets. At lightspeed you can reach Mars in two hours or less. At sublight speeds it will be a couple days to weeks. >why take an airplane when you could just take a boat/car?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 22:32:14 2012 No.5067454 >>5067415 The particles either get stuck in the forward bubble of the drive or they get slowed down and moved aside. Its actually safer.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 22:37:29 2012 No.5067458 >>5067452 As long as we're talking about a warp drive, we might as well talk about energy shields too.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 22:40:14 2012 No.5067463 is this that thing that curves space-time allowing FTL? or is that something else from every hollywood movie

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 22:51:30 2012 No.5067482 can someone explain a wormhole to me in retard terms just doesnt seem real or possible.

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 22:56:29 2012 No.5067494

Maybe we never see aliens because we don't have the technology. Maybe when the human race invents FTL travel we will also invent the technology to detect it, thus accidentally exposing other intelligent life forms using similar technology we weren't able to detect.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 22:58:29 2012 No.5067499 File: 29 KB, 600x600, 125c1d9cca15205d397beafaf6e648e85c14a4e0_large.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5067482 take a flat piece of paper, bend the paper, stick a pencil from one side of the paper threw the void and out the other side.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 17 23:00:14 2012 No.5067502 >>5067494 The drive builds up gamma rays from its operation that are released when the drive field is collapsed. That might be a way to detect its use. Of course discerning FTL gamma bursts from natural sources isn't simple.

Anonymous Mon Sep 17 23:12:14 2012 No.5067532
File: 207 KB, 640x424, qthruster.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5065730
Well supposedly from the math white did in "The Alcubierre Warp Drive in Higher Dimensional
Spacetime," predicts that a toroid of positive energy density will produce a sphere of negative pressure.

And that's where you're getting your exotic matter.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 00:33:19 2012 No.5067725 File: 82 KB, 640x451, 1346115856730.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Bump for cutting edge physics.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 00:36:20 2012 No.5067736
File: 222 KB, 351x563, smoke_and_mirrors_by_desolee-d4bu4ih.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

my 2 cents

We must first explore plasma thrusters and get us reliable solar system taxi. We can and MUST do it now. Than we can enter a new industrial expansion age. The age this stupid human race lives but doesn't realize that it run out out places to expand industrially.

Before, a moto was
>get cash to build ships
>to get cash
>to build ships

Now it has to be
>Get resources[MASSIVE AMOUNTS]
>to build star-ships
>to get resources
>to build StarShips

Billions of people employed, fuck all you want[over population wut?]. Now its true that we had extra motivation to get cash to bang hoes and smoke crack and opium BUT, now we can replace it with "see weird shit, be hero, fuck bitches!".

So yeah in conclusion => Plasma Thruster equipped ships. Or Q-Thrusters IF they can do it right. Than while we do this, we'll have shipyards, crap ton of resources and labor to build FTL travel and ball like a boss across the milky-way.

We got the window of opportunity [finally got agriculture some what under control, china mining resources like crazy, have the brains to make this shit happen.], we just need to push this. FAST.

Sry didn't want to be political, but lets face it, who else am I gonna talk politics with? /pol/? Fuck those inbred KKK faggots.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 00:40:04 2012 No.5067750 File: 20 KB, 300x360, Spy Troll.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5067736 also, by the by. Q-Thrusters is what really intrigued me. Using Virtual Matter as propellant? Fucking genius!

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 00:50:35 2012 No.5067771

>>5067736
Need cheap energy on Earth first. That's the only way things are going to move enough for this to happen.

Gotta get fusion figured out, or somehow make thorium work. Maybe cross your fingers that this graphite room temperature superconductor stuff isn't just smoke and mirrors.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 00:52:19 2012 No.5067776 File: 15 KB, 294x240, oreillycantexplain1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >Travel to star 22 Light years away >Travel at .999c, get there in 1 year >Travel at 10c, get there in 2.2 years >2011 >warping space >ISHYGDDT

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 00:56:05 2012 No.5067780 >>5067776 This is a good point to keep in mind. Though you can't downplay the 22 years that pass from the opposite reference frame at .999c

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 01:00:04 2012 No.5067787
File: 518 KB, 758x784, snowfort_by_desolee-d4e4a1s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5067771
Well for Q-Thrusters we just need but loads of electrical energy. We can get that. We just need the fucktarded international treaty about "no nukez evar on orbitz!" smashed against faces of people who wrote it. *seriously, USA has Thor and Re-entry vehicle has been around for 3 decades, what safe space are they smoking?*

Than we get few portable plants on orbit, build battery blocks [super caps are great]. Than off we go!

this needs crap loads of man power and material. We got both. Just no balls to put them together..

Anyways I'm out. Good luck all. Science=Future. Don't you all ever forget that!
/sci/=hope of the internet.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 01:00:35 2012 No.5067788
File: 67 KB, 682x450, Tom-Cruise-laughing.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5067776
>>5065649

>implying you need FTL travel to travel to other stars in a short amount of time

Jesus fucking christ! No one here actually knows physics? WTF~

Vega is 27 ly away, but only takes 6.6 years travel time at sublight speeds. The bottle neck of our space fairing ability is not fucking travel speed!

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/rocket.html

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 01:02:34 2012 No.5067789 File: 20 KB, 400x447, corner_dumb_ass.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5067780 >Cannot into relativity

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 01:13:20 2012 No.5067817 >>5067787 No, I mean we need cheap energy here on Earth before anyone's going to have the will to put resources into space exploration on a massive scale. We need to solve the upcoming energy crunch, THEN we can go into space.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 01:14:05 2012 No.5067819 >>5067788 Impossible without something like Q-thruster, or any other form of 'reactionless drive'.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 01:17:05 2012 No.5067826

>>5067776
>4.4 year round trip
>4.4 years passes on Earth
>vs
>2 year round trip
>44 years pass on Earth

I'm reminded of a short science fiction story I once read. This ship sets off to colonize a new world orbiting a distant star, traveling at 99.99...% c. When they finally arrive at there destination they discover a thriving colony already there. It turned out a few years after they left humans developed another means of travel and had colonized the planet in the (from their perspective) centuries that had passed since the rocket left.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 01:21:04 2012 No.5067833 >>5067826 This. The whole point of warping space to travel is that you avoid time dilation. Of course it's all going to be hard to manage if we don't also somehow develop superluminal communications.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 01:22:05 2012 No.5067838
File: 81 KB, 612x612, 1343618491226.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5067819
You actually don't know any physics do you?
You're just a science fan-boy. Please STFU. You have no fucking idea what you are talking about. Reactionless drives are neat, but not really needed for space travel.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 01:29:04 2012 No.5067852
File: 515 KB, 1920x1080, 1343497490964.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5067833
>avoid time dilation

You cannot avoid time dilation in space. This is fucking laughable. If you knew any physics at all you would realize this basic fact.

Even with Warp Drive time dilation is unavoidable. Just about every region of space is moving and rotating. No matter where you go, your clock will be skewed from that of earths. This happens even at high altitude on earth. It is impossible for any space craft to keep the same "tick rate" with that of earth, no matter what the speed.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 01:38:34 2012 No.5067869 >>5067852 Don't sperg out. It's pretty clear that they meant a Lorentz vactor ~= 1, which systems like the Alcubierre drive can allow, even if it doesn't magically make time dilation disappear.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 01:44:19 2012 No.5067878 >>5067852 >implying 1.00000000000001 isn't as good as 1 Physics is approximations. Get used to it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 01:55:19 2012 No.5067902 File: 109 KB, 500x400, retard-owls.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5067878 The time dilation isn't that small. It is going to be pretty massive.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 02:00:05 2012 No.5067906 File: 28 KB, 640x435, happy-man-looking-at-computer.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5067869 >>5067878 >Learn to special relativity The dilations gets very signifigant as soon as you leave the solar system.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 02:10:36 2012 No.5067921 File: 28 KB, 480x360, l.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >mfw FTL spacetravel

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 02:10:36 2012 No.5067922

So riddle me this... How do we preserve uniqueness of reality? The ship and Earth are moving relative to one another (the distance between them is growing), but they have the same clock. Different observers would see irreconcilably different ordering of events. Imagine a scenario where a ship, Alpha, leaves Earth at close to c, and then a year later (Earth time) a magic Star Trek ship, Beta, leaves Earth in the same direction, catching up in an arbitrarily short amount of time.

From the Earth's perspective, the first ship ages more slowly due to time dilation. So when the magic ship catches up the Beta crew is older than the Alpha crew.

But from the first ship's perspective, Earth is receding away near c, and therefore the Earth clock ticks more slowly. When an Earth year has finally ticked by, the warp drive ship speeds by with the Alpha crew obviously older than the Beta crew.

These two perspectives are equally valid, yet irreconcilable. WHAT HAS SCIENCE DONE?

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 03:10:05 2012 No.5068041 >>5065843 Hawking radiation would destroy anything inside it AT SUPERLUMINAL SPEEDS. Alcubierre drive would still be a highly useful device even when constrained to subluminal speeds.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 03:13:05 2012 No.5068050 >>5066497 You don't know what you're talking about. Again, the link provided elsethread: >>5066418 Basically, you need to learn to relativity.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 03:14:49 2012 No.5068054 >>5067367 You really need to learn some basic relativity. Links have been provided. Here it is again: >>5066418

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 03:18:49 2012 No.5068058

>>5065649
I was a bit hung up on the whole negative energy thing, but then I read this article

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/negativeenergy/negativeenergy.htm

and it turns out that it can be done in principle. So that's pretty cool I guess, maybe FTL is possible.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 03:19:04 2012 No.5068060 >>5066310 >>5066284 Heh, I always just say All-Be-Cur

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 03:23:19 2012 No.5068067 >A concept for a real-life warp drive was suggested in 1994 by Mexican physicist Miguel Alcubierre >suggested in 1994 by Mexican physicist Miguel Alcubierre >Mexican physicist >Mexican >physicist pick one.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 03:25:04 2012 No.5068072

you people are shit. I just read this thread and everyone is contradicting each other and no one seems to have any idea what they are talking about yet you people still seem to think you know enough that your opinion matters. i can only see 3 people who actually read the journal article and not just the news post.

you people also seem to have a basic misunderstanding of all the physics involved, the mechanism this works by, and the experimental setup he proposed.

you you all (except the 3 people who seem to know whats up but no one seems to pay attention to.)

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 03:34:04 2012 No.5068098 >>5068072 Dunning-kruger effect. See? psychology does have some uses!

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 03:59:34 2012 No.5068150 >>5067376 Our conventional spacecraft can already attain that speed.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 04:06:19 2012 No.5068158 >>5068150 So many people here sound like they would rather rot in a bucket for decades instead of using FTL even if it turned out to be possible. Nothing majestic about that. Conventional spaceflight is overrated.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 04:09:49 2012 No.5068162

>>5068067

He's from UNAM bro. It's an autonomous university in Mexico City and considered one of the top universities in the world. Crazy I know, but Mexico City is the third most populated mega city in the world at around 30 million after Seoul and Tokyo.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 04:34:20 2012 No.5068188

>>5067412

1. Matter which doesn't behave like normal matter; which isn't in the standard model, which has never been observed. Specifically in this case, it has negative mass density. The Casimir effect actually generates a small amount of quasiparticles which have negative effective mass, and that's what's being used in the experiment.

2. Because that reduces the amount of negative energy necessary to achieve FTL from the total mass of the Virgo supercluster to the total mass of Jupiter, when comparing it to a spherical drive. The current experiment achieves 0.0004c using something you can put on a counter.

3. Yes. But if we blindly extrapolate forward from the 10^-10 -fold decrease in 18 years, a fusion reactor would be enough to achieve FTL by 2050. It's a work in progress.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 04:50:20 2012 No.5068209

>>5068188

You make it seem like fission reactors would not be enough? Fusion only yields maximum of 7 times more energy, except that where current research is heading, they will never be feasible for any space craft application (tokamaks, looking at the size of those things for commercial applications).

I personally find it even more a pipe dream to put the success of all future space propulsion technologies on the assumption that fusion power will ever be feasible.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 05:12:36 2012 No.5068224

>>5068150
>tabletop reactionless drive which can quickly obtain a velocity of conventional spacecraft.
>thinks it isn't a big deal
The same people looked a Hero's steam engine and said, "Well that's fucking useless, If I wanted to spin a tiny sphere I could have done it with my fingers."

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 05:19:36 2012 No.5068229 >>5068224 So the industrial revolution could have begun in ancient Egypt if it wasn't for creationists? I wonder what the world would be like today.

>>	Gandalf !WZRD.JhIYg Tue Sep 18 05:46:22 2012 No.5068255 Instead of fitting the warp tech on ships, how about generating applicable warp bubbles using "star gates" that harvest energy from the nearest star using mega-structures?

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 05:50:36 2012 No.5068257 >>5067736 >Now its true that we had extra motivation to get cash to bang hoes and smoke crack and opium BUT, now we can replace it with "see weird shit, be hero, fuck bitches!". Best line on /sci/ right now.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 06:16:36 2012 No.5068278 >>5068255 How about we first fit warp drives on ships to allow us to do that infinitely faster? Or, how about not thinking anymore ideas on how to bankrupt our whole civilization.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 06:56:21 2012 No.5068315 Q thrusters are actually pretty badass. .1N from 1kW for a reactionless drive with expected efficiencies of at least three times that? Holy shit.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 06:59:21 2012 No.5068321

Oh wow. this is just like christians whenever someone discovers some new proof of god or they find an event that they're sure is a miracle.

There are no lazy sci fi solutions in the real universe. that's why lazy sci fi writers have to rely on their magic bullshit warp drives to get the plot to the next star system.

jesus christ just be happy that you'll die before the mass starvation that's coming in about 100 years.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 07:15:21 2012 No.5068332 >>5068321 >tfw you will never be part of 1% and see the world starve

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 07:54:05 2012 No.5068383 >>5068321 >using a 3d printer to print a bigger 3d printer to print a robot factory to assemble robots to construct a starship to explore the universe plebs

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 08:03:51 2012 No.5068395 >>5068383 it is possible with self-replicating robots. once we make a small one, we want have to make any more.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 08:08:37 2012 No.5068404

>>5068321
>There are no lazy sci fi solutions in the real universe.
There are no lazy sci fi solutions in the real universe.

What's a lazy sci fi solution? In the 15th century, using electricity to perform work and heat would be a lazy sci fi solution.
The internet to communicate all over the globe with no physical transport would be a lazy sci fi solution.
Curing lethal infections with antibiotics would be a lazy sci fi solution.
Using an internal combustion engine to farm 100 acres all by yourself would be a lazy sci fi solution.
Using flying machines with jet engines to travel anywhere on the world within a single day would be a lazy sci fi solution.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 08:24:06 2012 No.5068435 >>5065674 Isn't imaginary mass predicted by M-theory?

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 08:27:21 2012 No.5068441 >>5068435 M-theory? I think you mean M-conjecture.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 08:29:36 2012 No.5068447 File: 324 KB, 640x438, Smoky_The_Nanobot.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5068395

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 08:30:21 2012 No.5068450 >>5068441 So brave. >inb4 go back to reddit

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 08:37:06 2012 No.5068468 >>5068450 What? we can't exactly bitch about creationists saying "evolution is just a theory!!" if we throw the word around for no reason.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 08:47:21 2012 No.5068482 >>5068468 >implying the word was ever used consistently in science. >implying we should censor scientific discourse with worries about political credibility.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 08:49:50 2012 No.5068489

>>5068482
>implying the word was ever used consistently in science.
I'm calling for consistency to help deal with the "just a theory problem"

>implying we should censor scientific discourse with worries about political credibility.
I think it never hurts to not be hypocrites.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 09:02:06 2012 No.5068528

>>5068489

>it never hurts to not be hypocrites

So stop claiming that scientists use the word correctly. It's more efficient than correcting somebody for using the same term to describe a conjecture as every scientist actually working in the damned field.

>I'm calling for consistency

M-theory is consistently called M-theory. Theoretical physicists consistently call conjectural models of reality "theories".

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 09:07:51 2012 No.5068545

>>5068528
>M-theory is consistently called M-theory. Theoretical physicists consistently call conjectural models of reality "theories".
And New Earth Creationists say the bible is "fact". I don't agree with that use either.

>So stop claiming that scientists use the word correctly.
Why should the sciences tolerate being incorrect? isn't the whole point trying to be more correct in how we describe the world? why should that stop at equations?

>It's more efficient than correcting somebody for using the same term to describe a conjecture as every scientist actually working in the damned field.
Efficiency doesn't matter. Science doesn't strive to be efficient, it strives to be accurate.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 09:41:51 2012 No.5068625 File: 193 KB, 520x853, mfw.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5068383 >mfw

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 09:50:07 2012 No.5068649 >>5068625 You can scoff, but that is the way of the future. Self-replicating machines are already in the lab, and once they are de-bugged, they will replace factories and enable us to explore the cosmos.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 10:07:36 2012 No.5068688 >>5068545 If you were any more retarded I could show a picture of a peanut and you'd starve to death trying to eat if off the screen.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 10:13:07 2012 No.5068701 >>5068688 I dislike peanuts. Try an almond.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 12:39:06 2012 No.5068904 SO WHAT ABOUT CAUSALITY FOR FUCKS SAKE

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 12:41:21 2012 No.5068907 >>5068904 I can take or leave it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 12:41:36 2012 No.5068910 /sci/ - Popsci and Highschool homework

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 12:57:37 2012 No.5068931

Some idiots just don't realize how far off the deep end they have gone.

Theory of relativity is nice and all, but there's a point where it starts getting so convoluted trying to justify itself that it just ain't fucking logical anymore.

The ship USS Slower going off earlier than the USS Faster, experiencing time-dilation hijinks? Well fucking diddly doo, WHY would that happen at all? So the USS Slower spends 10 measurable weeks of Earth days in space more than the USS Faster.

SO THE USS SLOWER HAS BEEN IN SPACE FOR 10 EARTH WEEKS, USS FASTER ZERO WEEKS, AND EVERYONE GOT 10 WEEKS OLDER WAITING FOR THE USS FASTER TO LAUNCH

HOW FUCKING DIFFICULT IS IT INTO SIMPLE LOGIC

I swear, EVERYTHING is impossible because LOL RELATIVITY, GO READ THIS AND THIS ARTICLE ABOOT RELATIVITY

FUCK

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 13:18:06 2012 No.5068992 >>5068931 You must be a biologist.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 13:21:36 2012 No.5069005

>>5068931
Confirmed for not understanding basic highschool special relativity. Come back when you've made a single observation of any FTL information or lack of temporal distortions with increasing velocity so that we never have to hear from you ever again.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 13:40:36 2012 No.5069042 >>5069005 >never observed relativity on objects moving faster than light >asks for proof that relativity does not affect objects moving faster than light Theoretical physicists.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 13:45:37 2012 No.5069050 File: 474 KB, 200x200, yes.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5067502 >gamma ray MFW some of the stranger gamma ray bursts we detect are actually ships exiting FTL

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 13:49:21 2012 No.5069058 >>5069042 Please tell me how the speed of light remains constant in every frame of reference.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 14:16:21 2012 No.5069131

>>5069058

One photon travels 299792 kilometers of real distance in one second.

It is you who needs to explain how this photon somehow travels at different speeds depending on who's doing the clap-your-hands-and-observe, and that somehow looking at that photon going away as opposed to approaching has these ridiculous reality bending effects.

Of course, this is based upon the conclusion that time is based entirely upon relative observation. And that's complete bullshit someone spent too much time thinking about in the laboratory.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 14:30:06 2012 No.5069152

>>5069131
>how this photon somehow travels at different speeds
The principle of relativity holds that c and the laws of physics remain constant in every frame of reference. Anything going at the speed of light stays at the speed of light in every frame. That's it. You sound retarded.

You are clearly a 14 year old, trolling, have cognitive impairment, or a combination thereof.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 14:33:06 2012 No.5069158
File: 53 KB, 481x358, 1330912488982.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Why are you all so fascinated with the speed of light? You seem to think that it's the be-all-and-end-all.

>uh oh, I traveled faster than a photon and accidentally in the past to have sex to become my own father

It doesn't mean anything. Einstein was wrong. Tesla was right. Instantaneously traveling to the opposite side of the Galaxy does not violate anything. Your family won't suddenly become dead for 7 million years. They will still be the same the moment you left them.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 14:35:20 2012 No.5069165 >>5069152 > Anything going at the speed of light stays at the speed of light in every frame What about when you slow light down in a lab to just a few miles per hour and see it traveling through substances?

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 14:37:36 2012 No.5069174 >>5069152 I'm too tired to repeat myself at this time He will suffice >>5069158

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 14:41:07 2012 No.5069180 >>5069165 The light itself doesn't slow down at all. It's the time in between absorption/remission from the molecules that reproduces such an effect.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 14:41:07 2012 No.5069181 >>5069165 That's an electrodynamic phenomenon. The guy you're responding to was talking about general relativity.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 14:43:51 2012 No.5069186 File: 60 KB, 500x394, Helre_warp.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] http://gizmodo.com/5942634/nasa-starts-development-of-real-life-star-trek-warp-drive but its happening

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 16:38:07 2012 No.5069437

>>5068278
of we can perfect a way for machines to autonomously tow asteroids into a close sun orbit and then break them down for resources to build more machines, we only need to build one of them, and then wait for the giant solar panel array to pop up

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 17:05:21 2012 No.5069504 >>5068688 looks like it's ad-hominem time face it guy. M-theory isn't a theory. it's offers no testable hypotheses and constantly changes to suit new data. if it was a consistent theory it would be predicting new data

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 17:12:06 2012 No.5069519 i invented a time machine, the only thing's missing is a flux capacitor

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 17:23:06 2012 No.5069534
File: 296 KB, 957x1000, Spy_sunset_by_ChemicalAlia.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5068257
Thx *bows slightly*.
===========================>
*sigh*

Write your congressman about Q-Thrusters/Plasma-Thrusters/etc. Maybe if enough people do it, he will get off his fat fucking ass and may be just may be brings it to someone's attention....

And hit the books /sci/. I won't claim everyone here ate too much paint while typing this[hell I need to re-read general relativity again, hopefully in older edition and than newer again], but it never hurts to read. Remember, if you read originals of general relativity, maybe your cerebral cortex wakes up and you see other shit that is going on... On the other hand, we can all go on /v/&/s/ and get out Oxycontin levels up... Isn't it always ends this way?

*tips hat* As you were gents.

Anonymous Tue Sep 18 17:24:36 2012 No.5069536

>>5065649

Those of us in the Futurist camp knew all this already.

Science really needs to get out of its own asshole and start accepting theories in a more timely manner. You know, like a decade or something. It's 2012, and people are just realizing FTL is possible.

Nuka-Cola Tue Sep 18 17:28:36 2012 No.5069544

everyone keeps ignoring the hawking radiation problem
the only real solution would be some way to capture the decay products of the virtual particles that pop into your warp bubble and convert them into usable energy, since you probably couldn't shield your vessel from them for very long.
good luck with that(?)

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 18 17:29:36 2012 No.5069549 >>5069536 That's hindsight bias for ya. All the ridiculous things that futurists predicted that didn't come to pass get neglected, but one thing happens, and bam, the futurists were right all along.

>>	Anonymous Wed Sep 19 03:14:26 2012 No.5070968 >>5069058 How? Dunno. It just is. That's what the evidence says. How do we model it mathematically? That would take more time than I feel like. Wikipedia and math textbooks for a reason.

>>	Anonymous Wed Sep 19 03:20:27 2012 No.5070971 >>5065938 >We built a device the size of a house that can add, subtract, and multiply positive integers less than 256. Does it mean computers are practical?

Anonymous Wed Sep 19 03:25:27 2012 No.5070981

>>5065977

The fuck they didn’t. Do you think Babbage had any inkling of lambda calculus? Or that the Wright brothers knew anything about stress tensors or modern aerodynamics? I don’t recall seeing any electronically controlled fuel injected engines in the Model T. Pretty sure they didn’t have carbon canisters, positive crankcase ventilation systems, or really any emissions control technologies of any sort.

>>	Anonymous Wed Sep 19 03:27:26 2012 No.5070985 >>5070981 His point was that basic physics didn't really change. Yes, there were great insights, but no great changes to physics. We have Newtonian mechanics, and relativity and quantum mechanics. Doesn't seem likely that relativity is flat out wrong.

Anonymous Wed Sep 19 03:36:56 2012 No.5070996

If the warp bubble detector actually detects one, isn't that at least suggestive that it is possible to create this sort of thing? Natural processes that are understood tend to be repeated by artificial means fairly often.

And if a tiny warp bubble can be detected wouldn't that suggest at least that the exotic matter required to generate this sort of effect exists *somewhere?*

>>	Anonymous Wed Sep 19 03:41:41 2012 No.5071001 Question: How in the fuck is this supposed to be useful as a transport for humans? Wouldn't photons still be blue shifted towards you, turning blue light into harmful X-Rays?

>>	Nuka-Cola Wed Sep 19 03:42:11 2012 No.5071002 >>5070996 te tiny version would not rely on exotic matter.

Anonymous Wed Sep 19 03:44:26 2012 No.5071003

>>5071002

Were that the case, why doesn't that fact suggest that we may not require the exotic matter and simply need a shitload of energy? Unless I am misunderstanding and said exotic matter is simply the prerequisite energy-dense material used to fuel the ship.

>>	Nuka-Cola Wed Sep 19 07:15:12 2012 No.5071436 >>5071003 that remains to be seen, some kind of loophole that achieves a negative mass effect without the need for exotic matter would be great, since exotic matter is purely hypothetical and there's no real way to make the stuff

>>	Anonymous Wed Sep 19 14:36:58 2012 No.5072457 >>5069536 what the article is saying is that instead of Jupiter mass energy needed for warp. only a space craft size energy would be needed

>>	Anonymous Wed Sep 19 14:47:58 2012 No.5072480 The government will not allow this. >Captcha: Government ridesks

Anonymous Wed Sep 19 17:33:42 2012 No.5073023

So from Earth's frame of reference, going at near-light speed will cause more time to pass on Earth, while using space-time curvature causes a negative amount of time to pass. It'd be nice if a combination of them could somehow be used such that the ship travels back in time just about enough to cancel out how much further into the future it went, though this would probably allow for time travel form some third reference point even though it doesn't from the perspective of the ship or either of its destinations. This wouldn't be a problem if there was a way to prevent the ship from being observed by other parts of the universe during the journey, though doing so completely enough is another matter entirely.

>>	Anonymous Wed Sep 19 20:09:57 2012 No.5073469 >>5065649 Hey OP that's a football going through that ring dere

>>	Anonymous Wed Sep 19 23:24:27 2012 No.5074052 >>5071001 That's why you wear your space suit for space shit

Anonymous Wed Sep 19 23:47:42 2012 No.5074105

>>5065801
>>5068188
I know I'm insanely late to the party, but some quick, back-of-the-envelope Casimir effect calculations say that for a perfect conductor with the mass of graphene, the separation distance between plates to cancel out the mass is on the order of 10^-13 meters. Atomic separations are on the order of 10^-10.

Unless there are higher order corrections to the casimir effect, which are not predicted AFAIK, then there isn't much hope for a full sized warp drive based on that effect. It should still be sufficient to study a warp field in the lab.

>>	Anonymous Thu Sep 20 08:05:13 2012 No.5075176 >>5074105 If they get positive results, the discovery might at least attract huge amounts of people to work on making warp drive usable in real life, like a gold rush, but not for gold, but for the mankind's most important piece of applied physics.

>>	Anonymous Thu Sep 20 08:10:43 2012 No.5075184 >>5075176 Now that i remember... http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/12/metamaterials-could-amplify-casimir.html

Anonymous Thu Sep 20 08:19:28 2012 No.5075202

>>5075184
Yea, I remember that. Some dudes used metamaterials to emulate the Alcubierre Drive. Everyone at the time went batshit saying it didn't make a bit of difference because the balls were inert (would take more energy than that which existed in the universe to power anyways). Which seems to be what this new research attacks.

>>	Anonymous Thu Sep 20 08:35:28 2012 No.5075237 >>5075202 No such emulation has been performed as of yet. Only a paper on how to and what could happen.

>>	Anonymous Thu Sep 20 17:56:58 2012 No.5076693 File: 44 KB, 394x392, 1343956323453.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >mfw gettin' my own starship in my lifetime

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]