[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 163 KB, 804x536, original.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5560653 No.5560653 [Reply] [Original]

http://io9.com/5963263/how-nasa-will-build-its-very-first-warp-drive

So, we go with the Alcubierre drive. It works greatly. We travel to alpha centauri and back, no problems.

But what would REALLY happen? If, as most physicists believe, space is composed of atoms and not just nothing, could the expansion and shrinking of space tear a hole in space-time? If so, what do you think is on the other side? What happens?

>> No.5560688

>If, as most physicists believe, space is composed of atoms and not just nothing,
Wait, what?

>> No.5560700
File: 15 KB, 534x128, 84501main_speculat[1].gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5560700

>> No.5560710

>>5560700
It's a question. Of course it's speculation. This isn't high school physics. I'll just take this as you're too uneducated and unimaginative AND unmotivated to answer the damn question.

>> No.5560717

<span class="math"> \sqrt{x-1} +1 [/spoiler]

>> No.5560718

>>5560710
Actually, this image is from NASA's official website you retarded abomination.

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/technology/warp/warpstat_prt.htm

>> No.5560736

>without violating einstein's law of relativity.

I'm instantly skeptical of this article and the writer of it, because there is no such thing as a "law" of relativity.

>> No.5560737

>>5560710
You're an idiot.

>> No.5560761
File: 301 KB, 972x677, 442921.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5560761

it's not that simple
space-time can't curve faster than the speed of light
so you're still limited

and what is so hard to understand.... you can NOT travel faster than light
if it were possible it would break continuity and the conservation of energy

>> No.5561816

>>5560761
>space-time can't curve faster than the speed of light
citation needed

>> No.5561837

>>5560761
>>5560761
Explain how neutrinos can get from point a to point b in the universe faster than light can.

Also, I dont think there will be any coming back, at least not in the sense we now know, since you'll essentially be skipping forward in time relative to everyone else, the world will be a completely different place when you do come back.

>> No.5561843
File: 45 KB, 300x275, 0.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5561843

>>5560653
>end up in a hellish dimension
Damn, I must have taken a wrong turn with my Alcubierre...

>> No.5561846

>>5560761
>infantile cartoon

>> No.5561847
File: 63 KB, 647x344, 0.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5561847

>>5560653
any chance the thing could be powered by a LFTR Thorium Reactor?

>> No.5561848

>>5561837
>Explain how neutrinos can get from point a to point b in the universe faster than light can.
wat

>> No.5561850

>>5560653
nasa isnt building warp drives, they are testing a 5D extension of general relativity which if it turns out to be true would mean we dont need negative energy for warp drives.

space isnt made of atoms

>>5561837
they cant

>> No.5561851

>>5561837
>Explain how neutrinos can get from point a to point b in the universe faster than light can.

The speed of light is not a hard limit. It's a statistical law. Some photons are faster, some are slower. Same goes for neutrinos. Some neutrinos are definitely faster than light. But as long as the average speed of neutrinos is lower than c, everything is alright.

>> No.5561852

>>5560700
I think we are in the science part, seeing we are already at the experimental level, there.

Unless science, there mean "scientifically proven)

>> No.5561854

>>5561851
im remembering this one, thanks.

>> No.5561856

>>5561851
>The speed of light is not a hard limit. It's a statistical law.
wait what? Really? First time I have ever heard of that.

Anyway, the measured Neutrinos weren't going faster than light, they just had a problem with the measuring equipment.

>> No.5561865

>>5560761
>space-time can't curve faster than the speed of light
>so you're still limited
That has never been demonstrated. At least according to NASA:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/technology/warp/ideachev.html
"Although Special Relativity forbids objects to move faster than light within spacetime, it is unknown how fast spacetime itself can move."

>> No.5561867

>>5561865
also:
>Using the "Inflationary Universe" perspective, for example, it is thought that spacetime expanded faster than the speed of light during the early moments of the Big Bang.

>> No.5561870

Relevant: >>5560338

>> No.5561875

>>5561851
Jesus Christ... Trolls, trolls everywhere.

>> No.5561879

>>5561843
lol'd

>> No.5562162

>>5561837
the ftl neutrino thing was cause by a loose cable causing incorrect observation
neutrinos are sublight

>> No.5562265

>>5562162
I thought they were same as light.