Friday, April 03, 2009
Quantum setback for warp drives
Include quantum mechanics in the calculations and faster-than-light drives become unstable
Bad news I'm afraid -- it looks as if faster-than-light travel isn't
possible after all. That's the conclusion of a new study into how warp
drives would behave when quantum mechanics is taken into account. "Warp
drives would become rapidly unstable once superluminal speeds are
reached," say Stefano Finazzi at the International School for Advanced
Studies in Trieste, Italy, and a couple of friends.
Warp drives have been the focus of science fiction writers for
decades. But scientists kept them at arms length until 1994 when the
idea was put on a firm (ish) theoretical footing by the Mexican
physicist, Michael Alcubierre. His thinking is that while relativity
prevents faster-than-light travel relative to the fabric of space time,
it places no restriction on the speed at which regions of spacetime may
move relative to each other.
Alcubierre imagined a small volume of flat spacetime in which a
spacecraft might sit, surrounded by a highly distorted bubble of
spacetime which shrinks in the direction of travel, bringing your
destination nearer, and stretches behind you. He showed that this
shrinking and stretching could enable the bubble--and the spaceship it
contained--to move at superluminal speeds.
The conclusion is the result of classical thinking using the ideas of general relativity but physicists have long wondered what would happen if you threw quantum mechanics into the mix? Now Finazzi and pals have worked it. For a start, they say that the inside of the bubble would be
filled with Hawking radiation, making life rather uncomfortable for
any spacecraft within it.
They have also studied a property
of a quantum field called the renormalised stress-energy tensor which
should be well-behaved under normal circumstances. But in the front
wall of Alcubierre's bubble travelling at superluminal speeds, the renormalised stress-energy tensor grows
exponentially.
That strongly implies that such a bubble would be unstable. So it looks increasingly likely that, after a brief few years of excitement, Alcubierre's warp drive is impossible.
Shame really.
Ref: arxiv.org/abs/0904.0141: Semiclassical Instability of Dynamical Warp Drives
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Comments
it came to me that research into super cooled semiconductors and magnetism may provide some form of stabilization field for this warp bubble. perhaps someone skilled in quantum mechanics can study the effects of applying such a field to FTL travel?
juanhf
04/03/2009
Posts:1
smithsomian
04/03/2009
Posts:51
"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong."
kstarnes
04/03/2009
Posts:1
Do you object that Newton proves that it's impossible given the Earth Moon System for a human being al natural to jump from the Earth to the Moon (without the aid of technology, aka space ships)? I gather that you'll bring out Author's old men quote for this case too. Gravity Sucks in so many ways, and one of those ways is in keeping you firmly within the Earth's gravity well (unless you are one of the few to reach escape velocity doing the rest of us a favor).
The Fabric of Objective Reality sucks in so many ways. Not traveling faster than light is one of them.
Optimism or pessimism are both irrelevant to the Nature of Objective Reality. The Universe doesn't care about us, as it doesn't care at all about anything.
Each aspect of Nature, each Law of Nature that we learn is what is actually going on gives us insights into what is actually possible and what is impossible. Nature is the limiter not our imaginations. Clearly our imaginations run amok all the time (see Amok Time episode of Star Trek for an example of this).
When you willfully ignore hard earned scientific knowledge that can be tested, that has been tested, you might find yourself crossing into that no man's land of fantasy and delusion. You are not alone as many if not most humans live their lives in the land of delusional fantasies that simply can't be true given the harsh Laws of Nature, which are the very Laws of Nature that enable you to exist!
So be optimistic or pessimistic all you want. Nature is the final judge of what is possible and what is impossible. Not that Nature is an is. I choose to embrace Nature in all of it's beauty and horror rather than have delusional fantasies about it. I save my fantasies for entertainment (like the upcoming FTL fantasy Star Trek movie out in about a month) and private relationships.
So enjoy your invisible friend of FTL all you want, just know that no matter how much you enjoy it your enjoyment won't alter the Fabric of Nature one iota.
pwl
04/03/2009
Posts:6
Clarke was referring, in part, to the observation that paradigm shifts in science often (but not always) require that the holders of the old beliefs die out before the new becomes accepted orthodoxy.
Until experiments are done, you can argue from theory all you like but you prove nothing.
As for your Newtonian naked astronaut example, that experiment has been done millions of times, with no reliable reports yet of results contrary to expectation. Well, there was something about a cow...
AlastairMaye...
04/03/2009
Posts:2
Yes, the unexpressed corollary to Clarke's 3rd Law is also known as "It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you".
pwl
04/03/2009
Posts:6
gblaze44
04/03/2009
Posts:7
Well tested theories, such as Einstein's, go a long way to proving certain things impossible.
There is a huge difference between what is possible in Nature and a human scientist attempting to find out ways around what is impossible.
Sure push the limits, but don't have it be the only egg in your one basket in your science career. If it's a dead end, so potentially is your career. Unless what you learn in the process can assist you in adapting to other areas of research and you've not been socially outcast too seriously that is.
Damn social animal man is.
I say go for it. Let me know when you've got the catapult built that can toss a cow to the moon.
pwl
04/03/2009
Posts:6
HOW DARE YOU.
To proclaim we have understood EVERYTHING? RIGHT NOW? Is the height of stupidity. If I where you I would just end it now, there is no future for people like you on this planet, we can't afford to limit our survival by your kind.
End.
neoracer_xox
04/04/2009
Posts:1
Jim Klass
04/05/2009
Posts:1
jcarlisle
04/14/2009
Posts:1
...they call that religion.
I can't count how many "science-oriented" people I know who look down on religion in general, then commit exactly the same logical errors themselves when they cling to believing what they hope is true, counter to all available evidence.
I'm not saying these findings are the final word because people will most certainly investigate further and work out all the little corner cases, but evidence is evidence.
I'm sorry if your Star Trek universe just got a little bit more out of reach, but anything less than accepting the latest word (or setting about disproving it if you think you know how) is doing an enormous disservice to the scientific method everyone here claims to hold dear.
triggur
04/03/2009
Posts:1
pwl
04/04/2009
Posts:6
gblaze44
04/04/2009
Posts:7
and Dröscher and Häuser's theory concerning magnetic fields and how a spacecraft could be propelled into a multidimensional hyperspace due to gravitophotons interactions with conventional gravity to produce a repulsive anti-gravity force.
of course there is more to it than my small amount of words can fully explain...
I agree with "juanhf", and what was said..."humans have achieved unbelievable feats throughout history, this is just another challenge and we will over come this challenge through research or by chance!" :)
Yep
04/04/2009
Posts:2
and Dröscher and Häuser's theory concerning magnetic fields and how a spacecraft could be propelled into a multidimensional hyperspace due to gravitophotons interactions with conventional gravity to produce a repulsive anti-gravity force.
of course there is more to it than my small amount of words can fully explain...
I agree with "juanhf", and what was said..."humans have achieved unbelievable feats throughout history, this is just another challenge and we will over come this challenge through research or by chance!" :)
Yep
04/04/2009
Posts:2
DaveHoffman
04/05/2009
Posts:1
It's been known that the strong field gradient at the warp boundary is hazardous if matter is encountered (Halt, Held, Hoiland et al.'s 2006 paper) so the possibility of Hawking radiation isn't that much of a surprise; the question is whether it's strictly "within" the bubble (and thus confined to the "shell" of a Broek warp) or not.
The stress-tensor energy instability is another issue, and I hold out hope because it only implies bubble instability. Instability can be overcome by dynamic control of the bubble, provided that the timescale of the control mechanism is shorter than that of fluctations caused by instability.
In other words, there's still room for me to handwave away these problems in my science fiction stories (grin). And in real life, if we ever figure out a way to create a warp in the first place, we may find a way to control the instability (if it indeed exists). Might need a quantum computer, though. ;-)
AlastairMaye...
04/03/2009
Posts:2
owndao
04/04/2009
Posts:1
protn7
04/08/2009
Posts:69
And all the hope to get back.
And so on and so forth.
Titus01
05/12/2009
Posts:4
When a new technology is discovered, it's centered around other technologies and discoveries too. The Internal Combustion Engine employed electricity, which has been refined over the years and has made the engine better.
So, what I'm saying is, when we figure out (And I say WHEN, not if) how to create a warp device, other tech and breakthroughs will be along the time line enough that we might have something to combat the issues we run into.
If that didn't make sense it's only cause I'm having trouble translating the idea to the right words to convey what I mean.
Titus01
05/12/2009
Posts:4
wetzel
04/03/2009
Posts:1
Seriously, the term "impossibility" is rather harsh. Many times, an experimental "dead end" simply results in a change in direction. If the "warp bubble" becomes unstable at hyperluminal speeds, then do what Scotty would do - find a way to make it stable!
And always multiply your repair estimates by a factor of four.
falcon7204
04/03/2009
Posts:2
jeremylichtm...
04/03/2009
Posts:1
Plus, if Hawking radiation is a result of the theoretical hyperluminal bubbles, wouldn't that seem to suggest that the whole thing could become a singularity? That would be a bad thing. A way has to be found to either reduce/eliminate the radiation, or stabilize the bubbles. And as one poster indicated earlier, if the instabilities were larger than, say, Planck time, you could "hardware" them away. Think "fly-by-wire" - the F-16 Fighting Falcon would be a jet-powered lawn dart without computer control of the flight control surfaces, which operate along with aerodynamic control laws to keep the jet in the air.
falcon7204
04/03/2009
Posts:2
gblaze44
04/03/2009
Posts:7
Of course FTL functions become unstable on a quantum level. They can't be solidified by light, which is a #2. [.]2. And gravity is a wave, ruling light. [.]3. They have to be solidified by [.] alone there, or perhaps [.]5, and ought not fall outside of [.]7. That is basically pulling out of one of the many poons of the world, and not then knowing which one you're going to refuck.
Faster than light, light cannot "possibly" [5] solidify uncertainties.
But light is not the only thing that solidifies possibilities. We will need to understand that if you make an FTL machine, you will also be making an 'interdimensional' machine. You know, like the aliens that the Disclosure Project describes?
"Desire" will come into play. Light is not the only thing that solidifies a quantum. The quantums could also be maintained in some other fashion, or destabilized, contained, and restabilized in another organization if you so choose. Also consider JohnTitor.com.
WilliamKBunk...
04/03/2009
Posts:3
A 'cosmic ray'. Or an absence. We're looking at the rack/pinion system that causes the world to organize along certain energetic quotas and boundaries. You might consider a pachinko game, and numerous probabilities.
A cosmic ray operates by trying to find something as much like itself as possible, and disregarding the concept of distance in order to acquire that other self. It's like a game of memory. This is the events occuring at atoms between electrons and protons, it's magnetism. But even that cannot cause infinite closeness, since magnetic loads of similar charge have required radii to be functional, which is obviously apparent in the spaces in an atom. Subatomic particles obey this rule as well, magnetized into the elements of an atom, and once that atom breaks, the subatomic particles restabilize from the anomalous load.
A cosmic ray is necessarily a bolt shape, then, and not a straight line, and is not actually a 'ray' but has special organizational vibrations near its origin, the 'middle' which is unsolidified and unknown until the memory pair is found, and another set near the memory pair. The portion in the middle, which is an almost straight line, is yet another pointer, and causes a cascade to occur at the ends or the middle of the cosmic ray. These serpentine bonds are weaker than normal bonds, since they have a " -|_ " shape in them and are not direct bonds. They try to replace normal bonds. This causes substantial energy loss ins systems.
They say in spiritual myths that cosmic rays are the seeds of the serpent race, Satan. No lie. Most of them come from the constellation Orion, which is also called the home planet of the serpent. Satan. Cosmic rays knock out blocks of your DNA and replace them with a an unstable magnetic field which tries to pull anything else into that slot as part of 'the memory game' organization.
Satan may think it gains strength by making other things weaker. That is a weak bond and that type of bond should be replaced with the direct bond in everything on Earth, and the serpent broken. We can do it, you can help. Take a woman with you.
WilliamKBunk...
04/03/2009
Posts:3
If you speak the geometry...
WilliamKBunk...
04/03/2009
Posts:3
We talk of the laws of physics, I think we should not forget these are written by man and in a finite sense are provisional
I wonder if Carl Sagan were alive and with the wisdom of age, he would be asking us to forget his dictum re extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary evidence ? (and as for poor old misquoted Occam !)
layman
04/03/2009
Posts:1
The "if" of human survival that you speak of has a lot to do with whether or not the majority of humans can get past (literally) their delusional beliefs about the universe and embrace the harsh beauty of the universe without their need for invisible super friends.
Even the primitive description that we have with the currently known set of laws of science if embraced by all humans would make a huge difference towards a positive future.
Humans (well our brains and minds) are however belief making machines that don't require evidence in order to think of something as true to the point of being willing to die for it.
Fortunately some of us have embraced science and rational thought. This bodes well for us.
Yes, we have "the laws of science" and yes they are most likely but a shadow of the "the laws of Nature" however that doesn't matter as our laws of science bring us closer to Nature than any other ideas invented by humans ever have.
No that doesn't mean we stop investigating, in fact it's wise to increase our investigations of Nature with the scientific method to improve the odds of life from Earth surviving in the universe.
Newton brings us closer to understanding the limits imposed by Nature's Gravity. Einstein was more accurate and altered our perceptions and we see more clearly as a result. Others are attempting to go beyond Einstein. This is all good... yet the "provisional" Newton still works well for most engineering projects... the laws of physics seem to have many properties similar to nested wooden Russian Dolls or Nested Eggs. Each new layer must account for the successes and failures of the prior layers, each new theory must explain or account for the aspects addressed by earlier theories, even if it is to reject some of them or shift the perception of earlier misconceptions.
So to say that our laws of science are "provisional" is in a number of ways misleading. The laws of science are a map, in some cases accurate and in other cases not so much, they are not the territory and never will be. Nature is the territory and the final Judge, Jury and Executioner with regards to the laws of Nature and our existence. No suggestion of Nature as an entity is implied, in fact the opposite is to be stated, Nature is simply the impersonal non-caring inanimate processes that occur in objective reality. The word "Nature" is our placeholder in the English language for aforementioned processes.
A problem with the Sagan Principle of extraordinary claims is deciding what is ordinary and what is extraordinary... for example, belief in god is ordinary so does that mean that just ordinary evidence, such as the testimonials in bible, is sufficient. It seems to be sufficient for many people that I have spoken with. Nope, god is one of the best cases for extraordinary evidence being required since SO MANY of the well tested and well known EXISTING laws of science and of Nature would need to be violated (impossible) for god(s) to actually exist let alone for them to do anything in objective reality. (What good is a god that can't move an atom?)
Essentially I like to divide the line something like this: all that I can test on my own at home or in the back yard is "ordinary", anything else that requires that I "trust" another human being for the proof, for the evidence, requires extraordinary evidence to back it up. Fortunately science as currently practiced in some fields does provide high quality evidence of an extraordinary nature. Unfortunately we need more of that in all fields of human endeavor.
Due to the extreme time and energy requirements and hazardous conditions of actual space travel between solar systems it's likely that the only living things to leave and reach another star system from Sol-Earth will be our robots with frozen eggs and sperm cells in their care... a robotic Noah's Ark seeding and spreading our life forms across the very local neighborhood of this tiny corner of the galaxy. Maybe one story in the bible will come to be true after all.
Yes there is an Intelligent Designer and it's US! Natural processes have given rise to life (on Earth) and now it's up to us to help Nature along with our self directed intelligently designed digital evolution of our technology and our biology.
Limits of knowledge, limits of what is possible and what is not possible. Every Law of Nature that we uncover defines what is possible and what is not possible! The impossible is crucial for the survival of the human species and all life from Earth! Not only is it wise to talk of impossibilities, our future and our very existence depends upon the fact of these impossibilities.
Heck if one could jump from the Earth to the Moon al natural it's likely that many belief stricken humans would have attempted to do so and died when they realized that they couldn't breath after just a few miles up.
Often it is the acute awareness of the impossible is all that keeps us alive!
pwl
04/04/2009
Posts:6
gblaze44
04/04/2009
Posts:7
ae
04/09/2009
Posts:8
ratlas
04/03/2009
Posts:1
protn7
04/08/2009
Posts:69
Quantum setback for warp drives
When I started with the Quantum, I was instructed that the quantum was an empty space or nothing. Then we heard Dalai Lama talk of Quantum as Yoga and the sprit high away so is the soul floating in the air. However this does not convince me and I ask,” if I am on earth and I breathy and that is living, this is not anything. It is me”. Hence, I gave this for some time only to realise that Quantum was alive with different definition. I agree the failure in this does create a sad tale. It was alive
I thank you
Firozali A. Mulla
famulla
04/04/2009
Posts:11
ae
04/09/2009
Posts:8
P. S. Please don't misunderstand me, the B2 has ElectroGravitics built into it, which creates a gravity well to "assist" in its flight capabilities, through its charged hull, which aids in reducing the sonic shock wave, air friction on the hull, de-friction of enemy radar, etc.. The Military hasn't allowed it to go super-sonic, (the B2 is only rated as sub-sonic), but it could, according to Dr. Paul LaViolette, sorry no vertical take off capabilites, yet!!
Project Skyvault, is research into Microwave propulsion
grizbare
04/04/2009
Posts:4
feynman
04/04/2009
Posts:1
The argument is that because INFORMATION cannot be encoded in a on a single random particle, that even though the particle effectively “travels” faster than light, it cannot convey information faster than light. However Dr Gunter Nimtz and Dr Alfons Stahlhofen, of the University of Koblenz modulated a strong microwave beam with a piece of music by Mozart, and directed the beam at a barrier. A receptor on the other side of the barrier received a small percentage of the microwave particles, but the signal was sufficient to hear the music clearly. The particles “jumped” from one side of the barrier to the other instantaneously (as verified by interferometry). When they jumped, as an aggregate, they retained the information which had been encoded in the dimension of TIME. So three dimensional structures in space cannot go faster than light, but INFORMATION as a structure encoded in the dimension of TIME can be transmitted faster than light when quantum tunneling is employed.
So, a warp drive that can move a spaceship faster than light is probably impossible. But “faster than light” transmission of information is possible over short distances under controlled conditions because the matter/energy involved is not actually traversing the intervening space, not really “traveling” faster than light, but merely bypassing spacetime through the quantum field, and hence does not violate E=MC^2. Whether this will ever have a practical application is anybody’s guess.
Scottymatic
04/04/2009
Posts:1
The idea that "FTL travel is impossible" is ludicrous in the extreme, since the effect is observed directly through quantum physics.
The only barrier is the ignorance of those attempting the exercise, and unfortunately, modern humanity is married to a "scientific" paradigm that has no basis in the observed universe.
It is only with the assistance of enormous fudge factors that any of our scientific illusions continue to exist. In fact, there is not a single area of modern science that can actually account for observed phenomena.
To suggest that we have any real understanding of the problem or potential for solution is a testament to our immense ignorance.
stillwind
04/04/2009
Posts:1
Ah, what are you talking about? Please give details of the FTL effect you speak of.
pwl
04/04/2009
Posts:6
ae
04/09/2009
Posts:8
grizbare
04/04/2009
Posts:4
Ailuri
04/04/2009
Posts:1
blueagle
04/04/2009
Posts:1
RGM
04/05/2009
Posts:1
shadtek
04/05/2009
Posts:2
dannyhood
04/05/2009
Posts:1
shadtek
04/05/2009
Posts:2
No one is denying that it might not be possible, but FTL travel is pretty much just speculation and conjecture at this point. Our understanding of everything is still in its infancy. Give it time before rejecting it outright.
Mindrust
04/06/2009
Posts:3
Let one's imagination fly free, by all means, but remember that one is actually standing upon the Earth.
ae
04/09/2009
Posts:8
I have already stated that it still very much in the realm of speculation.
You stated that speculation = fiction. If this is so, then shouldn't this paper be disregarded since it addresses an issue for something we are just speculating about?
Mindrust
04/10/2009
Posts:3
ae
04/10/2009
Posts:8
However, I'm glad that most scientists do not share your sentiment. It seems premature to just give up on FTL travel because we have no conceivable way of testing the theory today. That kind of mind-set is detrimental to progression.
Mindrust
04/11/2009
Posts:3
Also, on what basis do you make your assertion about "most scientists"? Poll or survey?
ae
05/02/2009
Posts:8
camdaddy09
04/06/2009
Posts:37
Same thing with Einstein. We don't assume he was correct; his theories explain the universe very well, and experiments have proved the theories right, time and time again.
Physicists hold Einstein in high esteem not out of idol worship, but because he took our understanding of the universe up til then ("Newtonian physics"), tossed in the seemingly contradictory discovery that the speed of light is a constant irrespective of the observer, and, through his brilliance and his mathematics, synthesized a more sophisticated theory that takes that new fact into account.
ae
04/09/2009
Posts:8
First thought: If we allow claims for this being "the best possible universe, because it's the one where WE are", then there's probably good reason that the loopholes allowing FTL travel are so difficult to track down and make use of -- there is reason to believe that if it were trivial, we would have been (or are due any time now to be) overrun by whoever figured it out first. In which case all we can hope is that the underlying principles of FTL involve certain aspects of "quantum observation" principles, such that any tendency toward immaturity and barbarism gives you reeeally bad "traction" and slows you down. Because otherwise the whole concept of "Benevolent Elder Cultures" becomes a whistling-in-the-dark "denial" and cover-up for "well, actually there's nobody out there, and besides, you cain't get thar from 'ere"...
Second thought: I am a strong proponent for "Better Living through Engineering". Which engenders a tendency to build improved metaphors with which to get a "gut-feel" grasp of what parts of reality can actually be man-handled, wrassled and tamed. One metaphor that jumps out at me involves the assumptions people seem to make about our knowledge of unstressed metrics. Given that almost our entire edifice of "scientific and technical knowledge" has been built up in a gravitationally warped field, here at ground level, I suspect we are "stuck" until we can get "out there a ways" and research what might have been covered up by our "bottom of the gravity well" environment.
Third thought: ever tried to drive on an unfamiliar unpaved road, in the dark, with your lights off?? Did your vehicle survive?? In the absence of any predictive/projective evaluation of the bumps and potholes "ahead", you are forced to survive whatever you encounter, if you can. Given that FTL tends to imply that you are overrunning the conditions "ahead" faster than you can gather information about them, all the metaphors boil down to using a constant stream of smaller FTL devices sent "out and back", and essentially steering a course to follow those which survive conditions ahead as determined by their successful return. Unfortunately. Because what I've just described qualifies as an FTL boomerang "cannon" and the potential for misuse and abuse is beyond huge.
Another thought (I don't think we'll reach any "final thought" for some time, so don't hold your breath): the concept of "ley lines", or some form of "equipotential paths" between distant points -- turns out to be a fairly common "enabler" for FTL in many speculative fictions. Equally common is the requirement for an unstressed metric AND the ability to detect "something" indicating the presence of such a thing.
With any luck, it will turn out that the Alcubierre warp bubble becomes manageable when following one of these hypothetical "warp lines". With even greater luck, we may even find these lines are all over the place, linking between stars, leading places with some POINT in traveling...
Often enough, "luck" consists of adaptively choosing metaphors that happen to match closely enough to reality to reveal what MIGHT be there, to give us a handhold, something to work with.
In any case, it all boils down to: Worried about warp instabilities? Figure out how to detect and avoid the potholes that exceed your stability control limits.
flared0ne
04/06/2009
Posts:40
"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality". Einstein
- Inventor of Present Day Satellite Technology Arthur C. Clark "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic".
“It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity.”
Albert Einstein
Einstein Archives Online
" Imagination is more important than knowledge. "
- (A. Einstein)
"Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre minds. The latter cannot understand it when a person does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses their intelligence."
--Albert Einstein
"Today's science fiction is often tomorrow's science fact."
— (Stephen Hawking)
"Long experience has taught me this about the status of mankind with regard to matters requiring thought: the less people know and understand about them, the more positively they attempt to argue concerning them, while on the other hand to know and understand a multitude of things renders men cautious in passing judgment upon anything new."
- (Galileo)
“Once a new technology rolls over you, if you're not part of the steamroller, you're part of the road.”
Stewart Brand
"Risk strategies that proved effective in the past are no longer enough to win today. From our vantage point, we can see that the key to success is not to rely on yesterday's news, but to peer into the future and ask what could happen tomorrow."
-Dr. Ron Dembo, President & CEO, Algorithmics
"Technology cannot be defined in terms of dimensions alone. In fact, it represents a convergence of the traditional disciplines of physics, chemistry and biology at a common research frontier"
- Commissioner Busquin, Joint EC/NSF, Toulouse 2000
And Finally,
It was the late founder of the first private satellite company, Rene Anselmo, who declared, "Truth and technology will triumph over bullshit and bureaucracy."
Rene Anselmo
To say that a few folks working on a mathematical model have defined the future of space travel makes me laugh out load to such illogical lunacy.
holoman
04/06/2009
Posts:24
bigrobhollin...
04/06/2009
Posts:11
lucifer
04/11/2009
Posts:1
Science is great, theorising, testing, establishing.
But in a universe where particles can simultaneously come in and out of existance, affect each other from opposite sides of the galaxy etc. etc. there is obviously one thing we can say for certain...there are a lot of possibilities!!!
We haven't even got much of a handle on gravity yet and I agree that the opening article presents some real problems that may be solveable or not, try alternative approach.
But all of this aside I still believe in anti gravity and have little doubt in the reality of inter-dimensional travel and existance...see God.
Have fun!
alexme
04/06/2009
Posts:2
Gravity is a fact (matter attracts matter), even if our understanding of how it works isn't very good (yet). I trust that fact enough to cringe whenever I see someone free-climbing a sheer rock face: gravity is very unforgiving.
Anti-gravity is a fun idea in science fiction, but until someone can demonstrate anti-gravity in reality, it will remain only a fun idea, and no amount of belief can change that.
As for "believing in" "the reality of inter-dimensional travel and existence", well, what do those words mean, and how does believing in it make it real?
How can believing in something make it true?
ae
04/09/2009
Posts:8
gblaze44
04/07/2009
Posts:7
protn7
04/08/2009
Posts:69
gblaze44
04/08/2009
Posts:7
The idea would be that you could have a space between the outer hull and the inner hull and it'll be filled with... let's say Helium, then you put a current through it and a plasma field is generated.
I'm not very up on plasma technologies, to be honest. I'm sure there're better substances than Helium, and I'm sure there's initial problems with this idea, but with enough engineering, anything is possible!
Or, perhaps, radiation sinks?
Titus01
05/12/2009
Posts:4
artswan
04/15/2009
Posts:1
Science is the systematic study of things using theories and then tests.
A theory may die, like Quantum Mechanics and String Theory did a few times, but it can be revived!
Even Einstein didn't agree with the Quantum world.
Titus01
05/12/2009
Posts:4
Electronic companies since 1947. Does "1947" ring a bell, no ?!? Hint: New Mexico. I thought it was only a myth too.
Well this is how it works, at least as far as I understand it. They shoot a 2 gigahertz ,or higher, broad pulse microwave "probe" beam through a conjugation device, to a target, in this case the ground under the "craft", the beam may scatter, but even if the slightest part of that "probe" beam returns to the device it enters the "mixer" which locks onto the area where the probe beam came from and set up a resonance pulse. Now the "pump" pulse continues to build the resonance pulse in intensity until it becomes a "soliton" pulse which in turn creates a very strong negative bias between to "craft" and the ground and repels the two away form each other, and poof "levitation". Its self sustaining, and it uses about 1/tenth the energy of a fighter jet of equal size.
Now take that and combine it with the "electrogravitc" drive, discuss earlier, and Alfa Centaury here we come. No, not in two hundred year, or even 4.2 years ( light speed), try 5 days maybe a week if you stop to do some sightseeing, lol. I think we have two space programs, NASA, which "seems" to stumble along doing the same old crap and a Deep Black Space Program, that's doing all that "Star Trek" like stuff. Think that I'm full of "it", well maybe, but then again maybe not. So you can keep all of your quaint notions about "Quantum Mechanics" and "space warping drives" if you like, but I think "Subquantum Kinetics", RULES.
grizbare
04/18/2009
Posts:4
marty.musato...
05/06/2009
Posts:2
Gödel admits P=NP
marty.musato...
05/06/2009
Posts:2
So, in rejecting the concept of FTL travel you are condemning humanity to a worthless, pitiful existence, trapped on a single speck in the vastness of the universe, unable to grow and improve. Its people like you that keep civilization from advancing. Absolutely disgusting.
jbob25
05/23/2009
Posts:1