It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
“Star Trek” introduced the world outside of rocket science circles to the concept of warp drive – the propulsion system that allowed the starship Enterprise to travel faster than the speed of light. Warp speed is the holy grail that would let us explore the universe safely surrounded and protected by a space-distorting warp field. After watching the SpaceX rocket recently just try to land on a platform, you’d think this ability is years if not decades away. Yet the buzz on space websites is that NASA may have accidentally discovered a way to create a warp field. Wait, what?
To get around the theory of relativity, physicist Miguel Alcubierre came up with the concept of a bubble of spacetime which travels faster than the speed of light while the ship inside of it is stationary. The bubble contracts spacetime in front of the ship and expands it behind it. The warp drive would look like a football inside a flat ring. The tremendous amount of energy it would need made this idea prohibitive until Harold “Sonny” White of NASA’s Johnson Space Center calculated that making the ring into a donut shape would significant reduce the energy needs.
originally posted by: PandaLord
Anti Gravity and Warp are two different concepts no?
one uses gravity to propel a craft where the other warps space as the object stays stationary.
originally posted by: wasaka
a reply to: swanne
As Mr. Spock would say, with one eye brow raised, "Fascinating."
Some one posted a threat the other day asking if
anything would ever happen that changes our
reality in a fundamental way... this could be it.
But I dare not believe.... least I be disappointed.
originally posted by: Restricted
I don't understand how anti-gravity is different from warp. To me, they appear to be one and the same.
UFO's travel at impossible speeds, defying gravity. Is that not an argument for anti-gravity?
in theory it isn't warped space is gravitically effected space. but in practice there are normally different applications.
originally posted by: Restricted
I don't understand how anti-gravity is different from warp. To me, they appear to be one and the same.
UFO's travel at impossible speeds, defying gravity. Is that not an argument for anti-gravity?
Gravity manifests in space as a warping of space time. any gravity drive is (broadly speaking) a warp drive.
originally posted by: CrikeyMagnet
originally posted by: Restricted
I don't understand how anti-gravity is different from warp. To me, they appear to be one and the same.
UFO's travel at impossible speeds, defying gravity. Is that not an argument for anti-gravity?
I think the appearance of "anti-gravity" should be achievable through a similar compression/expansion of spacetime. When I get my home Alcubierre kit, I'm going to try it out.