Micro-Warp Drive

reply to post by chr0naut


This is why I stated that in order to generate the Energy Requirements...it must be done in a Matter/Antimatter Cascade of access to Multiple Divergent Universal Realities for such Energy to exist. The Craft would be Folding Space/Time or Falling into or toward a Warp of Space/Time...but still...this must be accomplished in a One Dimensional State which pierces Universal Realities Membrane between Alternate Divergent Universal States.
Split Infinity

reply to post by Kashai

This is the problem with traveling at high velocity in normal Space/Time...the faster you go...mass heads toward infinite. Traveling outside of Space/Time via warping or folding space is effectively traveling without moving.

Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity


Take the issue of red shift, what exactly is the consequence of that? Of course distance is a factor but could distance imply an observable variance in electron spin? At least from our perspective? I submit that increasing electron spin would not result in the destruction of the atom. Rather the atom would relocate to a place in the Universe where matter was consistent with electron spin that would fit in with 10 to 50 % that of light.

Any thoughts?

reply to post by Kashai

Since an Electron is a Quantum Particle that also acts as a wave...how do you propose to increase Electron Spin and since an Electron Orbits an Atoms Nucleus in a quasi-reality state...are you referring to entanglement...because if you are...Navigation would be subject to many variables. Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity


I am not arguing navigation, that is another story.

In so far as increasing electron spin in a solid object? I feel that causing a sphere, who's weight is about 10 grams to spin and more than 75% speed of light (perhaps with a nuclear reactor). Could in fact cause an effect where that object could be "lost in space", at distances equivalent to the effect of red shift

Any thoughts?

reply to post by Kashai

Honestly...I don't know.
Split Infinity

Originally posted by Kashai
Agreed, from the context to scale. Say for example one has an object who's weight on Earth is about 10 grams. In order to achieve beyond te speed of light (according to Einsteins theory) that object would somehow exceed, infinite density.

Clearly infinite density is related to electron spin...in the case of matter, electron spin, that makes something solid is anywhere between 10 to 50 % that of light.

Exceeding that speed would effectively increase density, say for example in the context of a sphere.

Given the example, of an object (as above) that spun beyond 50% of light, that object could effectively go beyond that of light...considering electron spin as a constant relative to postion and the relative issue of the
speed of light under such circumstances.


Any thoughts?

edit on 28-8-2012 by Kashai because: modifed content

edit on 28-8-2012 by Kashai because: added content

Firstly, Einsteins theory shows that objects approaching the speed of light approach infinite mass, not density.

Secondly, electron spin states are not actually related simply to the rotation of the electron, but is a measurement of the quantum state of the electron which has no equal counterpart in classical mechanics. Spin quantum numbers are unitless numbers, not velocities.

Electrons are also only one of many fundamental particles and so are insufficient as an explanation for the density of ALL matter.

Nor do electrons account for the solidity of matter. For example, metals contain a positive ionic charge, i.e: their outer electron shell is incomplete in regard to the number of electrons it can carry, in contrast, non-metals carry a negative ionic charge. Despite these polar differences, both metals and non metals can be solid, liquid or gas, depending upon conditions unrelated to the electrons involved.

It may be that what we are talking about here is being confused by the inadequacy of language and metaphor to accurately describe physics at the limits.

Originally posted by Kashai

A recent breakthrough has moved the concept of a "warp drive" another step along its path from a fictional SF prop-idea to a well founded physics concept that might one day be realized. This improvement on the Alcubierre warp drive was devised by general relativity theorist Chris Van Den Broeck of the Catholic University of Leuven in Belgium. He has eliminated seemingly insurmountable problems with the Alcubierre warp-drive scheme. His improvement employs topological gymnastics to keep the interior of the warp bubble large while making its external surface very small. But before describing Van Den Broeck’s work, I’ll summarize the Alcubierre warp drive concept itself, first featured in my column (#81) in the November-‘96 Analog.

Until 1994 a "warp drive" was one of the myths of science fiction, a rubber-science concept used principally to permit space-opera heroes to flit from one star system to another at faster-than-light speeds, moving the plot forward in the process. Those familiar with the laws of physics saw the warp drive as a flagrant violation of the principles of special relativity, conservation of energy, and physics-as-we-know-it. It was tolerated as an excessive but perhaps necessary use of literary license by SF authors.

The status of the warp drive changed dramatically in 1994, when Dr. Miguel Alcubierre published a paper entitled "The Warp Drive: hyper-fast travel within general relativity" in the journal Classical and Quantum Gravity. Alcubierre is a theoretical physicist from Mexico who in 1994 was working at the University of Wales and is now at the Albert Einstein Institute in Potsdam, Germany. Also a fan of SF, he was steeped in the SF tradition and turned his physics expertise to the task of considering how a warp drive might be constructed within the restrictions of general relativity, our present "standard model" of gravity. Alcubierre constructed a "metric", a mathematical specification of the curvature of space-time that had all the characteristics of a SF warp-drive including the capability for faster-than-light travel. Surprisingly, Alcubierre’s warp-drive metric is a solution of Einstein’s equations of general relativity and is completely consistent with them. Science fiction’s warp drive had been given a consistent theoretical and mathematical basis.

www.npl.washington.edu...

Any thoughts?

The article you are referring to is around 13 years old. It's since been sperceeded by work done BY Richard Obousy & Gerald Cleaver.

If you do a simple check on here, you will find hundreds of threads delving into warp-drive &/or other forms of FTL travel.

reply to post by Kashai

Any thoughts?

The mathematics of Relativity do not represent a mechanical model of the universe - only a mathematical description.

For starters, quantum mechanics has pretty well destroyed the idea of space-time. Time does not exist in a single continuous causal chain as Relativity assumes. Since we have been able to put whole systems of hundreds of molecules into super positions - this is a highly relevant consideration to macroscopic events.

Further - while Relativity is a refinement of equations as they pertain to the observed gravitational constant - Relativity fails to actually provide a model of how gravity elicits the observed effects. In other words - we still don't know how one would go about creating 'synthetic gravity' aside from collecting mass together or spinning people around. Neither of which are going to cut it in the creation of a "warp" drive.

Personally - I'm a fan of the 'jump' drive concept, myself. Rather than trying to make amendments or special cases that allow classical motion to persist beyond the speed of light; the jump drive simply places you at a location based on the energy input and directional factors.

Now - not quite sure how to do it; particularly as initiated from a platform (like a ship) into an unknown region of space - but I think there's more plausibility there than in the classic "warp drive" concept.

Originally posted by chr0naut

Originally posted by Kashai
Agreed, from the context to scale. Say for example one has an object who's weight on Earth is about 10 grams. In order to achieve beyond te speed of light (according to Einsteins theory) that object would somehow exceed, infinite density.

Clearly infinite density is related to electron spin...in the case of matter, electron spin, that makes something solid is anywhere between 10 to 50 % that of light.

Exceeding that speed would effectively increase density, say for example in the context of a sphere.

Given the example, of an object (as above) that spun beyond 50% of light, that object could effectively go beyond that of light...considering electron spin as a constant relative to postion and the relative issue of the
speed of light under such circumstances.


Any thoughts?

edit on 28-8-2012 by Kashai because: modifed content

edit on 28-8-2012 by Kashai because: added content

Firstly, Einsteins theory shows that objects approaching the speed of light approach infinite mass, not density.

True, though mass and density are relatable.

Secondly, electron spin states are not actually related simply to the rotation of the electron, but is a measurement of the quantum state of the electron which has no equal counterpart in classical mechanics. Spin quantum numbers are unitless numbers, not velocities.

unitless (not comparable)
1.The property of a number as having no units of measurement, such as a ratio or percentage of two numbers which have the same units.

electron spin relates to angular momentum

electron spin is the electron’s
electromagnetic field angular momentum

Electrons are also only one of many fundamental particles and so are insufficient as an explanation for the density of ALL matter.

Nor do electrons account for the solidity of matter. For example, metals contain a positive ionic charge, i.e: their outer electron shell is incomplete in regard to the number of electrons it can carry, in contrast, non-metals carry a negative ionic charge. Despite these polar differences, both metals and non metals can be solid, liquid or gas, depending upon conditions unrelated to the electrons involved.

Again I understand we are discussing electromagnetic fields. As mentioned above there is the conclusion that increasing electron spin beyond that of 1/2 would cause the atom to disintegrate

I disagree with that.

It may be that what we are talking about here is being confused by the inadequacy of language and metaphor to accurately describe physics at the limits.

I do understand what electron spin is and in truth I would not be discussing it unless I did. I can understand that many persons enter forums and talk about issues they do not really understand. so its cool.

The constants apply despite that issue of of not being able to consolidate quantum mechanics with, what we observe at the macro scale.

Hoping to hear from you again.

Richard Obousy & Gerald Cleaver
Warp Drives Probably Impossible After All

Yes that was brought up in this conversation. Consideration should be given to the conclusion in respect to the PDF file...

A new approach to generating the warp bubble necessary for warp drive has been
proposed; this warp bubble would theoretically allow a spacecraft to travel at arbitrarily
high velocities. One vital aspect of future research in this area would involve studying
how to locally manipulate an extra dimension. String theory suggests that dimensions are
globally held compact by strings wrapping around them; if this is indeed the case, then
it may be possible to locally increase or decrease the string tension, or even counter the
effects of some string winding modes. This would achieve the desired effect of changing the
size of the extra dimensions, which would theoretically lead to propulsion at greater than
lightspeed.

This approach, although highly theoretical at this stage, gives us a glimpse as to how
one might address the problems associated with the vast distances involved in interstellar
travel, and also opens up exciting new avenues for future research.

Source
arxiv.org...

I am certain this subject has been discussed in this forum before

10 to the power of 45 joules is akin to turning the mass of Jupiter into energy. The problem with the first article is that it attempts to describe this in conventional terms. Perhaps in line with applying matter-anti matter interaction a vessel that holds about 1000 people.

What about a Dyson Shell? In that case the energy output of an entire star ,contemplatively the size of our sun would be applied.

en.wikipedia.org...

This making access to energy in relation to 10 to the power of 45 Joules plausible.

Any thoughts?

For the record Dyson Shells need not be fixed to a particular star.

Any thoughts?

reply to post by Kashai


The OP was about a warp drive.

While we discussing issues around this, i do not believe that I (or others) were in any way discussing electromagnetism as a possible solution.

All theoretical approaches that have been suggested to date do not involve electromagnetism per se but are instead concerned predominantly with the distortion of space-time via negative energy or extreme gravitation.

reply to post by chr0naut


what about a warp drive,,,, that made copies of the entire human, particle for particle,, and then thee particles were shot into space, entangled and in order,, at near light speed,,, towards an presumed inhabitable planet,, in which before they reached it there speed was somehow slowed down so that the particles would gain mass, and return into a massive human form,.,.,..,,.

I know,, sloppily, fancifully rediculous.,.,.,

but i was thinking more along the lines of encoding the structure of a human,, encoding or compressing the information and,, sending the information encoded in light over a distance,,, to be intercepted,, and downloaded and uncompressed,.,.?

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by chr0naut

 

what about a warp drive,,,, that made copies of the entire human, particle for particle,, and then thee particles were shot into space, entangled and in order,, at near light speed,,, towards an presumed inhabitable planet,, in which before they reached it there speed was somehow slowed down so that the particles would gain mass, and return into a massive human form,.,.,..,,.

I know,, sloppily, fancifully ridiculous.,.,.,

but i was thinking more along the lines of encoding the structure of a human,, encoding or compressing the information and,, sending the information encoded in light over a distance,,, to be intercepted,, and downloaded and uncompressed,.,.?

That would actually be teleportation rather than a warp drive.

The concept is perhaps not as far fetched as it may at first seem.

Teleportation has been achieved for the quantum state of many particles but this is NOT the teleportation of matter, it is teleportation of state. Here's a Wikipedia link on Quantum Teleportation which gives hints that this linking of state via quantum entanglement may permit non-relativistic data transmission over vast distances.

If you could entangle and send enough data it is theoretically possible that you could also have some sort of nano-factory that would recreate an object or person at a remote location (note that this does not necessarily mean that the source object is is moved, or is disappeared/destroyed from the source location).

At present, such supreme engineering is beyond us in all ways but the theoretical. Also, you would have to distribute the pre-entangled particles prior to being able to send any data which is a problem as it implies ultimately a slower than light distribution. The entangled state is also fragile and could easily be disturbed in transit, nullifying the ability to reliably use the data. It's also a one-off for each entangled pair as the entanglement is broken by the state observation.

Originally posted by chr0naut
reply to post by Kashai

 

The OP was about a warp drive.

While we discussing issues around this, i do not believe that I (or others) were in any way discussing electromagnetism as a possible solution.

All theoretical approaches that have been suggested to date do not involve electromagnetism per se but are instead concerned predominantly with the distortion of space-time via negative energy or extreme gravitation.

That was something I considered during the conversation. If you read back it was in relation to a "pet theory,"of mine concerning folded space. You see one conclusion is that the atom falls apart if electron spin exceeds the speed of same in an atom, I disagree with that.

The issue of polarities comes up

Any thoughts?

It actually seems kind of impossible that we are here and exist let alone are talking about warp drives. Might as well add warp drives to our list of impossible things that have been created. Heck, throw in aliens addressing the people of earth and the angels showing themselves. Any more changes you guys want to see in this reality?

Originally posted by rickymouse
It actually seems kind of impossible that we are here and exist let alone are talking about warp drives. Might as well add warp drives to our list of impossible things that have been created. Heck, throw in aliens addressing the people of earth and the angels showing themselves. Any more changes you guys want to see in this reality?

Sure what about the conclusion that traveling past 100 miles per hour,would result in death? How about that idea that flying was impossible, or the idea that the earth was flat??

What about the internal combustion engine?


Would that have been considered what 1500 years ago??

Traveling faster then light was considered possible by Einstein and in the context of Tachyons (massless particles). That particular conclusion involved a language known as math. That has verified, as a result of Quantum Teleportation, that information can be teleported.

reply to post by Kashai


My first sentence is important. "It actually seems kind of impossible that we are here and exist let alone are talking about warp drives." I was trying to say that since our existance itself is so complex that all the other things could be possible.

A matter in respect to the atom is in relation to multiverse theory, what separates the sets of electrons?

You see part of multiverse theory is in relation to the electron cloud. The various universe's in the multiverse that take up the same space, the electrons in each universe also occupy the electron cloud. There is as we understand it a separation and it is (given its existence) as exotic a material as it gets.

To be clear Hawkins recently applied multiverse theory as part of his conclusion to some of his
research. Multiverse theory was no developed by Physics but rather by Chemist so as to address
some very fundamental issues in Chemistry.

All things considered, the structural integrity of an electron cloud is supported by that which separates the various sets of electrons, could be related to the large scale structure of the multiverse.

And by increasing electron spin could have an effect upon dimensions we have not yet observed.



Any thoughts?