Instead of using rockets or thrusters, a craft equipped with warp drive would move by distorting space.
Posted 04.01.2013 at 12:08 pm
23 Comments
The Warp Drive
Kris Holland, based on Enterprise Design by Matt Jeffries
The warp drive proposed by Miguel Alcubierre would achieve faster-than-light speeds by distorting space-time. The device would generate a field of negative energy that would squeeze or stretch space-time, creating a bubble. The bubble would ride the distortions like a surfer on a wave. As evidenced in the big bang, space-time can expand so quickly that objects move faster than the speed of light.
1) The vertical dimension represents how much a given volume of space-time expands or contracts in Alcubierre's model. Positive values [red] imply an expansion. When space-time expands behind a craft, it propels the ship forward.
2) Inside the warp bubble, neutral space-time would leave the ship undisturbed. Passengers would experience a gravitationally calm zero-G environment.
3) Negative values [blue] imply a contraction in space-time. The contraction balances the expansion of space-time as the bubble moves forward.
THE OBSTACLES
Negative Energy: Creating a warp drive requires negative energy—a mysterious form of matter that repels rather than attracts. While predicted to exist, it has never been measured in a laboratory, and known methods for creating it are extremely limited; they would generate so much positive (normal) energy that any negative energy effects would likely be drowned out.
Faster-Than-Light Limitation: If scientists could generate a powerful field of negative energy, they would need to position some of it in front of the craft. “The problem,” says Alcubierre, “is that you wouldn’t be able to make this field reach the region you need.” In other words, to get the energy in front of the craft, it would need to move at faster-than-light speeds, which is impossible.
Destabilization: Even if scientists could generate and position a field of negative energy, there is little reason to think the integrity of the field would hold. A group of Spanish and Italian researchers wrote a paper in 2010 arguing that quantum mechanical radiation, analogous to the Hawking radiation that appears at the event horizon of black holes, would show up and “inevitably lead to [the warp bubble’s] destabilization whenever superluminal speeds are attained.”
Watching Warp: If a ship with warp drive zipped past a stationary observer, according to a simulation by German researchers, he or she would see the drive’s effect on space, pinching as it approached [top], transitioning as it passed [middle], and dilating as the ship moved away [bottom]. Courtesy Thomas Müller and Daniel Weiskopf, based on Milky Way Panorama by ESO/S Brunier
Read the Popular Science profile of NASA engineer Harold "Sonny" White and his research into warp drives here, from the April 2013 issue of the magazine.
23 Comments
To comment, please Login.
Today on PopSci.com
Copyright © 2012 Popular Science
A Bonnier Corporation Company. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
Well, it seems to me that if you have some of this 'stuff' that radiates in the negative, then positioning some at the front of the bubble is going to be problematic if the material has to be in front of, or outside, the bubble. It seems to me that it must be a diamagnetic material, rather than paramagnetic. So, a ball of protons in a nice bismuth crystal...nah. Proton plasma shell-double layered, electrons outside. Electrons that it would pick up from space. Better. Bismuth is interesting though...I wonder; if it has this very low electron affinity, might it like protons better?
Wait. A craft would certainly be possible, and it seems like it would want to have extreme V potential, but in my model, if it were based around a proton shell, and the electron shell reaches close to C, then they'd fuse, right? Becoming a neutron shell that is oscillating or vibrating at that extreme?
Wait. A craft would certainly be possible, and it seems like it would want to have extreme V potential, but in my model, if it were based around a proton shell, and the electron shell reaches close to C, then they'd fuse, right? Becoming a neutron shell that is oscillating or vibrating at that extreme? Would ion and electron deflection cease at some point, with equilibrium or overmatching of any available power source?
If it were to become a neutron shell at that frequency, would the neutrons then, not being able to compress, blow outward? I'd hate to get stuck inside a neutron ball. That might be very bad, even if you have fissile material and equipment inside. Would a high frequency neutron ball most likely find a way to collapse? Extra neutrons make people suck whether they want to have a milkshake or not.
Still gotta like bismuth; gotta be able to expel electromagnetics. But. It needs to be able to control a layer of them as well, on the inner shell of electrons surfacing the craft, to protect it, so why not dip the whole thing in a good nylon? Get the nonconductance plus the hydrostatics. The electrons being many orders of magnitude less in charge than those on the outer energy shell, especially if you utilize something like magnetic microfibering through the 'metal' bismuth portion of the hull (grow a crystal layer of bismuth as well?) and can thereby suck or push all the charge you have in overage in the inner field; keeping electrons to excite to whatever power levels the craft can take in raw. If enough of these preventively used electron layers can be created-and controlled-it can easily withstand extremely high power levels. So just re dip the whole thing between each layer, and microfiber again? This thing is going to have a lot of layers, around a specifically placed source component, yes? For something approximating full spectrum passive protection? So always offset the variables presented by the various layer materials, keep up with a proportion always dictated by another bismuth layer, for a base in passive control that is compatible with the longitudinal control aspects the -DL- phenomena.
You know, this is what I do every day when I stretch. I push space away from myself to give me more space inside the space I'm inside of so that the space inside of me is at east approximating equilibrium, plus hopefully some supply of energy to apply to keep it all from crashing back in on me or blowing up the universe as we know it.
So, it wouldn't be able to turn into a pure neutron shell because that direction supposedly only happens inside of an atom, but under these conditions I wouldn't want to go on the first test flight at near C because I just can't figger out whether this thing would have a traditional layered field structure that the strong force would assemble outside the -DL-. Maybe supersymmetry would occur?
Now if there are protons inside the field, and supersymmetry occurs; wouldn't the protons, now being held much closer together than is their wont, fuse; and start forming neutrons, and then start a cascade with the presence of neutrons vibrating in that environment? That could also be slightly undesirable. Then, of course, there would be positrons in the field. I don't like where this is going. I'm destabilizing my theory about what the hell NASA could possibly be trying here.
We used to get feedback from NASA personnel on these threads sometimes.
As to putting your dense charged particles at the 'front' couldn't you just go in reverse, prepping your system, and then switch to forward once you've got enough density up front, allowing you to turn on your forward magnet to hold them there?
Quasi44, are you having fun or something? It sounds suspiciously to me like you are proposing a Neutronium shell around your warp bubble. I do believe you could forget all about any need for negative energy at that point. How much would a shell of Neutronium that large weigh? Definitely enough to generate the necessary singularity without power at any rate.
But would you be able to guarantee it wouldn't grow large enough to swallow the ship? Eh?
guys we don't need to destroy the space time continuum in order to get from point a to point b, our biggest hurdle right now in traveling faster than the speed of light is not distance or energy but is in fact time. right now the problem is that to conventionally travel faster than the speed of light we basically need more energy in one place at one time than is generally considered physically possible. that's that singularity that quasi was no doubt trying to talk about.
this has to do with space and time being connected and also has to do with simultaneity, basically when one light beam passes another light beam time gets the shaft so that from the perspective of one light the other light has never moved and from the perspective of the other light the first light never moved. but say we could fuck with this idea and we strapped a make shift time machine to one of the light beams and set it up so that it was traveling back in time from it's perspective but was still moving forward. then we would essentially have a light beam that is travelling faster than the speed of light according to the other light beam, and the proof would be that the first light beam would get to it's destination before it left.
if we take this idea and put it in the form of a rocket ship then we have the same concept, we move backwards in time by our perspective and because we are also going an appreciable fraction of the speed of light even without the time machine we end up traveling somewhere faster than the speed of light.
so i'd say my arguement is pretty solid thanks to this pseudo science, our biggest hurdle is not in fact energy, or distance, but is the manipulation of the time axis in this great plot of the universe.
to mars or bust!
So besides al lthat.. .they already have enough dilithium?
Ah yes, just need to find the right mathematic equation, then all is possible!
from Winnipeg, Manitoba
Negative Energy? You must of course be talking about Anti-Matter. However which anti-particle... Perhaps anti-photons? This is interesting.
"In particle physics, antimatter is material composed of antiparticles, which have the same mass as particles of ordinary matter but have opposite charge and quantum spin. Antiparticles bind with each other to form antimatter in the same way that normal particles bind to form normal matter. For example, a positron."-(WP)
~ You fall somewhere in the Balanced Frequency of Nature.
Someone Along the Infinite Spectrum of Life.~
not possible ? Hmmmmmmm same this cowboy's a little over a hundred years ago would say if somebody told them the technology we would have today...........something to ponder.
NOTE: The first 9 comments were posted before PopSci posted this article online.
NOTE: Today is April 1st
NOTE: That makes today April Fools Day
DarkFx,
Awesome icon, I maybe borrow it. ;)
Wttp/jaec45: "To infinity . . . and beyond."
Although it may be impossible or not likely to create a superluminal craft now or in the very near future it would be foolish to say its impossible. When they first discovered the electron they didn't think it would have a practical use, now its what makes our society possible. So maybe were on the verge of discovering negative energy and while it may appear to have no practical use or is too difficult to harness doesn't mean it won't be a widely used energy in the future. Also I believe I saw an article the other day on popular science saying that the speed of light may not be constant in a vacuum. If thats proven to be correct then I would think that would change the very foundation of physics, maybe the could make a vacuum field where they could lower the speed of light in order to position the negative energy field then allow the speed of light to return to normal allowing the ship to reach superluminal speeds. Am I talking out of my ass, well in essence yes but my point is never say anything is impossible.
" I think therefore I am"
DarkFx
Anti-matter has positive energy. If an anti-particle was negative energy there would be no release of energy when particle and anti-particle annihilate each-other. Their energies would cancel out. No boom.
Negative energy particles have negative mass, and have yet to be observed in nature. The article says they are predicted, and there are known methods of creating them, but this contradicts everything I have read on the subject. True, they don't violate the laws of physics, but that is a different thing from being predicted.
Why not try to manipulate the Higgs field to make the space in front of the craft more dense and the space behind less so?
Okay, if we create one of those then whose going to be in the thing? They could get killed for that how are they going to come back to the earth? Just to dangerous...
from Winnipeg, Manitoba
To Amun-Ra - Sorry, I made it myself :P . You may use for other forum use though.
To Democedes - Anti-Matter has been established to be very Real, and has been observed.
www.popsci.com/science/article/2011-05/cern-physicists-trap-antimatter-full-quarter-hour-eclipsing-previous-efforts
Also, the idea of using for propulsion is already underway.
www.popsci.com/technology/article/2012-09/antimatter-spaceships-could-head-outer-planets-century
@DarkFx
Yes, anti-matter has been observed and can be made. I am saying anti-matter is not negative energy. They are two different things entirely. If anti-matter had negative energy it would have different properties.