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.

 

Warp Drive

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2006 @ 05:13 PM
link   
I have greatly researched this topic, so please read through the whole thing before posting.

Lately, scientists and physicists have been discussing the thery of Warp Drive. Mainly how you would do it, and what you would need.

Basically, here's what we're talking about, spacecraft wise:

It would travel faster than light by "warping" the spacetime fabrication, hence the name "warp drive". While the craft would not technically move, but it would move space itself. The ship would be inside a, well, "bubble" of negative energy, or particles that actually have negative mass, which is still a theory, although there have been experiments that prove it could exist.

Warp drive would be many times faster than chemical/nuclear propulsion, solar sails, or ion thrusters, which all are incapable of reaching even the closest star systems in the human life span. However, warp drive would cause the craft to move, and I use that word lightly (explained why later), faster than light. And yes; in theory, you might, and I say might, also be able to return before you left (time travel). General rule of thumb: If you can travel faster than light, you can travel faster than time, since time is relative. Anyway, the ship would only take roughly four years to get to Alpha Centauri, the closest sun to our own, which puts the fact into perspective that, even with warp drive, trekking across the universe still seems ridiculous.

Theoretical physicists have been working on how you would achieve warp speed, and they have come up with two key elements needed: Negative energy and Dark energy. The negative energy would be used to actually separate the craft from the known universe. This could be problematic because if the bubble gets detatched, well, you get the idea. There's no possible way that you would ever find them. The second element, or "Dark Energy", would be the means of propulsion. In order to "move" so fast, the craft would have to expand space behind it, and compress space in front of it. This is where dark energy comes in. The craft would generate a feild of dark energy bahind it, which is the mysterious force that cosmologists believe is accelerating the expansion of the universe. If created at the back of the bubble, it, in theory, would expand space, increasing the distance from the departure point. So, while in it's own universe, the ship nor it's crew would feel any affects from motion, since the craft isn't actually moving.

There are a couple huge problems with warp drive, and I've already explained a few, but here they are:

1) Braking would be nearly impossible, since the ship would be cut off from our universe, so the signal could not be sent to it, and the ship would never stop.
2) The, in effect, "sonic boom" with infinite energy created by the opening of a new universe just might be a little problematic.


There's your crash course on how to ride like Han Solo




posted on May, 19 2006 @ 06:59 PM
link   
actually you could stop it, if you programmed an onboard computer to stop at a certain point, of course since as, you state, time is relative, who knows when or where youd end up....

too many variables in this type of propulsion.



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 07:11 PM
link   
Great post iraq, but it just brings to light how far away a warp-drive is. And even if we did have one, you could count me out for riding in it. It sounds so, erm, I dont even know the word. I just wouldn't go near the thing.

And the existence of dark and anti matter is still just a theory even now, we're to scared to make it if you ask me. But I don't blame us; the stuff is so dangerous.

One thing that has always got me with this faster than light travel thing: no matter what happens, the ship is always moving through space relative to a fixed point. So what happens when it slams into a star?



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 07:15 PM
link   
Here is an interesting take on a potential(best case scenario) interstellar drive. Worst case scenario(if it works that is
The Worst Worst case scenario is that it's a Hoax and that would piss me off), a posible difinitive test of an Anti-Gravity drive.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by watch_the_rocks
One thing that has always got me with this faster than light travel thing: no matter what happens, the ship is always moving through space relative to a fixed point. So what happens when it slams into a star?


You bring up a good point that I have thought about:
The navigation system onbaord would have to be extremely precise, and be able to plot a perfectly direct course, and would have to have some type of extremely long distance radar, to be able to take into account all of the stars/planets/comets/meteorites/etc. in it's path, and their speeds, and calculate an extremely precise window of opportunity.



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 11:10 PM
link   
Well, if we travel faster than light it wont be in a state of matter as that is impossible, it will be in a state of energy which would negate colliding with objects in space.



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
Well, if we travel faster than light it wont be in a state of matter as that is impossible, it will be in a state of energy which would negate colliding with objects in space.


Incorrect. No matter how fast you travel, you are still matter. Matter does not dissappear into thin air, so says the Law of Conservation of Matter.



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainIraq

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
Well, if we travel faster than light it wont be in a state of matter as that is impossible, it will be in a state of energy which would negate colliding with objects in space.


Incorrect. No matter how fast you travel, you are still matter. Matter does not dissappear into thin air, so says the Law of Conservation of Matter.


Maybe not into thin air, it is sort of concievable it could disappear into another dimension as is postulated by the theory in the thread I posted above.



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000
Maybe not into thin air, it is sort of concievable it could disappear into another dimension as is postulated by the theory in the thread I posted above.


And you hit the nail right on it's head. The basic premise on warp drive is going into another universe. So, you would not be in a state of energy, simply matter in another universe. And hitting a star would depend on if there is a star in your path in that universe you are entering.
That brings up the main navigational issue: How can you find out what is in your path in that alternate universe without actually going there?


[edit on 20-7-2006 by CaptainIraq]



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 05:09 PM
link   
i don't see how you can go faster than light unless you go through a wormhole.

merely bending space, to me, seems like it would take a certain amount of time for the space to bend to your point (especially if it is light years away), and then when released, it would take time for it to unbend back to the original point...


so it can't really be instantaneous, or at least not faster than the speed of light.



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Okay, get this...

If a craft travelling past the speed of sound, upon breaking the sound barrier, produces an audible 'sonic boom'. what happens to a craft travelling past the speed of light?

A 'visual boom'??

Just a related thought I had while reading through some threads, regarding breaking the sound barrier, and reducing, or eliminating the sonic boom.


sorry for straying a bit off-topic, but this is related, and very thought provoking.

[edit on 7/20/2006 by Mechanic 32]



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainIraq

Originally posted by sardion2000
Maybe not into thin air, it is sort of concievable it could disappear into another dimension as is postulated by the theory in the thread I posted above.


And you hit the nail right on it's head. The basic premise on warp drive is going into another universe. So, you would not be in a state of energy, simply matter in another universe. And hitting a star would depend on if there is a star in your path in that universe you are entering.
That brings up the main navigational issue: How can you find out what is in your path in that alternate universe without actually going there?


[edit on 20-7-2006 by CaptainIraq]


Well according to Heim-based "Hyperspace" theory in that thread I posted, you don't leave this universe, you just "phase" out of this 3 dimension space when you hit a certain speed and enter the other 3 dimensional space as this particular theory I'm talking about is based on a 6(7 if you include Spacetime I think) dimensional Universe. It's also supposedly testable and falsefiable with near-current technology(they need to suspend a superconducting rotating torus over a Z-Machine, supposedly the torus will achieve significant lift as a confirmation of the theory)




merely bending space, to me, seems like it would take a certain amount of time for the space to bend to your point (especially if it is light years away), and then when released, it would take time for it to unbend back to the original point...


According to the Inflationary theory the Fabric of Spacetime can achieve superluminal velocities because it already has achieved this feat during the rapid expansion period just after the theorized "Big Bang."

[edit on 20-7-2006 by sardion2000]

[edit on 20-7-2006 by sardion2000]



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 05:22 PM
link   


The navigation system onbaord would have to be extremely precise, and be able to plot a perfectly direct course, and would have to have some type of extremely long distance radar, to be able to take into account all of the stars/planets/comets/meteorites/etc. in it's path, and their speeds, and calculate an extremely precise window of opportunity.


Wouldnt the fact that we were moving faster than light mean travelling faster than the actual radar waves we needed to plot our direction?



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by thesaint


The navigation system onbaord would have to be extremely precise, and be able to plot a perfectly direct course, and would have to have some type of extremely long distance radar, to be able to take into account all of the stars/planets/comets/meteorites/etc. in it's path, and their speeds, and calculate an extremely precise window of opportunity.


Wouldnt the fact that we were moving faster than light mean travelling faster than the actual radar waves we needed to plot our direction?


We would need to use other reference points other then the ones we currently use yes. For Warp drive that is. For Inter-dimensional travel we would have to find commonalities between our space and hyperspace. Remember in Babylone 5 they were always bitching and complaining about the perils of Hyperspace because in that fictional universe, the only way to navigate hyperspace is to follow high powered beacons projecting signals into hyperspace from normal space thusly providing a point of reference with which to navigate by. We would need to relearn how to explore if such technology became available next year and the problem may take centuries to overcome for all we know.

Another way would be to calculate before the jump happens and come out of Warp/Hyperspace every so often to re-calculate the trajectory. Very interesting problem IMO.

[edit on 20-7-2006 by sardion2000]



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 05:33 PM
link   
I suppose having to pop back into the normal every short hop to replan our trajectory is better than travelling at the speeed we do now.

Bit like being back in the Army whereas we would regulary stop, get out the compass and check our bearings



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mechanic 32
Okay, get this...

If a craft travelling past the speed of sound, upon breaking the sound barrier, produces an audible 'sonic boom'. what happens to a craft travelling past the speed of light?

A 'visual boom'??

Just a related thought I had while reading through some threads, regarding breaking the sound barrier, and reducing, or eliminating the sonic boom.


sorry for straying a bit off-topic, but this is related, and very thought provoking.

[edit on 7/20/2006 by Mechanic 32]


Particles traveling faster than the speed of light in a medium other than vacuum DO in fact leave a "visual boom".

It's called "Cerenkov radiation" and it is what's responsible for that pretty blue glow around water moderated reactors.



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 06:55 PM
link   
i think before we start talking about navigation systems (which are incomprehensable to even think about at our position in technological advancement due to the computer have to think faster than the speed of light which rules optical microchips out - which are not even in development yet) we need to think about the system that will create negative energy and dark matter. We will have to create it as there is no conceivable way of capturing this energy (in referance to the string theory). This idea is so far away and probably near impossible (not impossible as this stuff does exist) and our current 'theories' are so primitive. Sorry if you think im pooping on your party but we need to think logically about this and invent new theories about the universe that can be tested rather than work from current theories that can not be tested. I mean we have no idea if there are other universes, again just theories.

I just think this subject is so interesting and there will always be questions to be asked no matter what point in time.

ps: sorry if this is a little jumbled, it's 1 o clock in the morning and im so tired from jet lag.



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 07:16 PM
link   
www.abovetopsecret.com...

According to this theory, we may be able to test this form of hypothetical within the next decade.



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tom Bedlam

Originally posted by Mechanic 32
Okay, get this...

If a craft travelling past the speed of sound, upon breaking the sound barrier, produces an audible 'sonic boom'. what happens to a craft travelling past the speed of light?

A 'visual boom'??

Just a related thought I had while reading through some threads, regarding breaking the sound barrier, and reducing, or eliminating the sonic boom.


sorry for straying a bit off-topic, but this is related, and very thought provoking.

[edit on 7/20/2006 by Mechanic 32]


Particles traveling faster than the speed of light in a medium other than vacuum DO in fact leave a "visual boom".

It's called "Cerenkov radiation" and it is what's responsible for that pretty blue glow around water moderated reactors.


um, when have any particles gone faster to the speed of light? that's news to me and quite groundbreaking if true...



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 09:26 PM
link   
The speed of light is not a constant. In a 'normal' medium other than vacuum, it is slower.

In a non-vacuum environment, particles can exceed the local speed of light. This produces Cerenkov radiation, which is very analogous to a 'sonic boom'. The math is even similar.

The speed of light in a media is proportional to the relative permeability and relative permittivity. This is what causes refraction. It used to be that any material you ran into had a minimum value of 1, the value of these constants in vacuo. However, that's no longer the case; you'll have to take it from there, ol' Tom's got an NDA in there somewhere. Mumble-mumble-mmpf-and then you can mumble-mmm-mpf and it lets you mmfmfmfm mumble.


See also:
www.physics.upenn.edu...
www.physlink.com...
curious.astro.cornell.edu...

In general, just google for 'cerenkov'.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join