Warp Drive? NASA Thinks Maybe...

[IndyColtsFan]

So Paratus, out of curiosity, how close do these guys think they are to having something ready to deploy to a test space vehicle? Are we talking 20 years?

 

[Paratus]

The catch is getting this to work doesn't just mean a more expensive rechargeable battery, it means the ability to mine the moon, planets, it means an end to practically every resource deficiency other than fossil fuels. So there's tons of money to be made off of this if they can get it to work.

Even just the quantum vacuum plasma thruster could significantly reduce the expense of space craft since there's no need to launch and carry your propellant with you.

It would also seriously mitigate the health effects of radiation and zero G since overall travel times would be significantly reduced.

Of course we'd have to be able to launch a nuclear reactor to derive the most benefit.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

For now. 110 years ago, we didn't think flight would be possible because we did not think anything more dense than air would be able to fly. Welp, guess we were wrong.

These kinds of arguments are retarded. We dreamed of flight because we could clearly see brids and such fly.

Also the scientific method has come a LONG way since then. We have never even seen an inkling of evidence that negative mass exists. Just because the math says its possible doesn't mean that its possible in real life.

IE. String theory. Math is elegant and exists, literally impossible to test for it because we don't have the capability to build a partical accelerator the size of the orbit of Neptune powered by the fury of a thousand suns.

 

[z1ggy]

These kinds of arguments are retarded. We dreamed of flight because we could clearly see brids and such fly.

Also the scientific method has come a LONG way since then. We have never even seen an inkling of evidence that negative mass exists. Just because the math says its possible doesn't mean that its possible in real life.

IE. String theory. Math is elegant and exists, literally impossible to test for it because we don't have the capability to build a partical accelerator the size of the orbit of Neptune powered by the fury of a thousand suns.

Birds have wings and are meant to fly. Yes, it's so trivial that a big hunking mass of metal/wood will be able to fly.

What we humans think is unable to be validated today, may end up being trivial dozens or hundreds of years from now.

Your type of thinking is what would end up hindering human beings from becoming greater than what we currently can achieve today. "Oh well because I can't see it/validate it today, it must not be possible!!"

50 years ago, a computer was the size of a large car or more. Now, it fits in my pocket. Imagine what things could be like another 50, 500, 5000 years from now (if we don't blow ourselves up first...).

 

[BUTCH1]

NASA is a dog and pony show for the public. I couldn't care less what they are doing.

The secret space program is where it's at. They have tech that's 1,000 yrs more advanced than what's shown to the public.

What's shown in sci-fi tv and movies are intentional leaks from this program.

Wow, just wow. post of the day, it's not even close :awe:

 

[Paratus]

So Paratus, out of curiosity, how close do these guys think they are to having something ready to deploy to a test space vehicle? Are we talking 20 years?

The QVPT is farther along and it's conceivable to fly a prototype in the next couple of years if it continues to check out.

The warp drive is still in the earliest stages of testing. From the video they have some slight changes in data when they turn the device on from when it's off, but it's still inconclusive as to whether it's doing what they think it's doing. So it could be in 15 years or never.

Not to mention funding is not huge.

Basically QVPT is at a 3 or maybe 4 by now
Warp drive is still at a 1 or 2.

 

[JTsyo]

So Paratus, out of curiosity, how close do these guys think they are to having something ready to deploy to a test space vehicle? Are we talking 20 years?

Even if we had a drive we wouldn't be able to power it. From what Ive seen discussed elsewhere we talking more than year's worth of the sun's energy to use the drive.

Here's why the idea is theoretical and not practical.

 

[Fritzo]

I'll just leave this here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive



Cliffs of those cliffs: This is speculative bullshit that, even in the realm of non-applied sciences, is weaksauce.

edit:


I was unaware that they gave PhD's in concept art.

edit2:
To clarify, my argument is simply that this 'scientific research' is about as valid as a spam email promising to contract the space-time in front of your cock.

You're not being fair and a bit judgmental.

I agree this is getting hyped, but that's good. It gets people excited about science, and it's an awesome goal. This is how things get discovered.

We've actually observed space warping around extreme gravity sources, so we have visual confirmed evidence of the phenomena. So that part of the physics is well understood. In fact, astronomers depend on warping space for observations- gravitational lensing lets us see far away objects that would otherwise be hidden or to distance to see in detail.

The biggest problem is warping space without extreme gravity is that their proposal requires exotic matter, which in this case would be matter with anti-gravity properties. We've never observed exotic matter, and we're not sure if it even exists. However, there is nothing in physics that says it doesn't exist, and from our past experiences when something can exist, it usually does.

The team looking at the possibility of a warp drive are simply doing research. They're not wasting a ton of money, but they are seeing if nature provides the correct tools to let us warp space easily. If they are able to find exotic matter (or find a way to turn regular matter exotic), it will be one of the biggest breakthroughs in human-kind. Matter with negative mass will bring about true Star Wars-like technology: hovering vehicles, the giant spaceships, and more.

So, please understand that this is just an avenue being explored. There are no breakthroughs on the horizon at this point, there are no new discoveries, it's just a think tank. You don't discover things by sitting on your hands though- all it takes is one person to see something never seen before and the entire world will change.

Even if we had a drive we wouldn't be able to power it. From what Ive seen discussed elsewhere we talking more than year's worth of the sun's energy to use the drive.

Here's why the idea is theoretical and not practical.

That article has a lot of bunk in it. Space does not have a speed limit, and it actually expanded faster than light at the beginning of the universe.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Birds have wings and are meant to fly. Yes, it's so trivial that a big hunking mass of metal/wood will be able to fly.

What we humans think is unable to be validated today, may end up being trivial dozens or hundreds of years from now.

Your type of thinking is what would end up hindering human beings from becoming greater than what we currently can achieve today. "Oh well because I can't see it/validate it today, it must not be possible!!"

50 years ago, a computer was the size of a large car or more. Now, it fits in my pocket. Imagine what things could be like another 50, 500, 5000 years from now (if we don't blow ourselves up first...).

This is a pretty insane method of thinking. You realize there is an issue of scale? Just because the Universe did it at some point doesn't mean that we can simply do it. What was it, we would need to take the entire mass-energy of jupiter in order to create a single wormhole or something like that?

You can't just say, ITS POSSIBLE BECAUSE THE UNIVERSE DID IT. We can't create easily self sustaining fusion because we don't have the advantage of several million tons of matter creating gravity on its own, we can't easily create massive black holes because we don't have the mass the feed it.

Even if we think its theoretically possible "which in this case we don't even know that" the issue of scale is going to bite us hard on the ass.

Every single thing you mention had many incremental improvements over existing technologies and also could previously be seen to work on the scale of humans. There is not a single piece of technology that this "improves" upon and nothing that indicates its possible on a human level scale. Its "we think something cool might happen and oh yeah if it does work we'll need more energy that created in the last year by the sun to power the drive"

You're not being fair and a bit judgmental.

I agree this is getting hyped, but that's good. It gets people excited about science, and it's an awesome goal. This is how things get discovered.

However, there is nothing in physics that says it doesn't exist, and from our past experiences when something can exist, it usually does.

Good god NO. This is exactly the type of shit that makes me hate people like Michio Kaku. The idea that anything is possible just because we believe it. This kind of shit only gets people excited about "Cool Sci-Fi" science, not the experiment "boring" science, which is arguably more important.

And really, "nothing in physics that says it doesn't exist?" Really? Is that what you're going with? Because there are many physists that may have an issue with that contention.

This entire experiment is basically pure conjecture. They don't even know if they expect to actually get anything out of their warp field tests. They're just kinda dicking around and seeing if they get anything.

 

[Fritzo]

Birds have wings and are meant to fly. Yes, it's so trivial that a big hunking mass of metal/wood will be able to fly.

What we humans think is unable to be validated today, may end up being trivial dozens or hundreds of years from now.

Your type of thinking is what would end up hindering human beings from becoming greater than what we currently can achieve today. "Oh well because I can't see it/validate it today, it must not be possible!!"

50 years ago, a computer was the size of a large car or more. Now, it fits in my pocket. Imagine what things could be like another 50, 500, 5000 years from now (if we don't blow ourselves up first...).

You bring up a good point and one that is often said.

"A century ago, we thought flight was impossible, then we thought the sound barrier could never be broken....."

The problem with comparing those things to FTL travel is they're essentially "low hanging fruits". All of those abilities were able to be created on Earth using materials and energy sources readily available- we just had to discover the physical laws that allowed us to build machines to reach those goals.

In the case of FTL, it's reverse. We have a great understanding of physics, but we don't have the materials or energy sources available, and we have to get these things to work in space instead of on our comfy home planet.

When you look at it like that, it's more than a progression from flight, sound barrier, space flight, and FTL....there are about 20 or 30 more progressions that need to be made after space flight to get to the FTL level.

 

[SP33Demon]

Ain't going to happen in our lifetimes. But kudos for them trying.

 

[Paratus]

This is a pretty insane method of thinking. You realize there is an issue of scale? Just because the Universe did it at some point doesn't mean that we can simply do it. What was it, we would need to take the entire mass-energy of jupiter in order to create a single wormhole or something like that?

You can't just say, ITS POSSIBLE BECAUSE THE UNIVERSE DID IT. We can't create easily self sustaining fusion because we don't have the advantage of several million tons of matter creating gravity on its own, we can't easily create massive black holes because we don't have the mass the feed it.

Even if we think its theoretically possible "which in this case we don't even know that" the issue of scale is going to bite us hard on the ass.

Every single thing you mention had many incremental improvements over existing technologies and also could previously be seen to work on the scale of humans. There is not a single piece of technology that this "improves" upon and nothing that indicates its possible on a human level scale. Its "we think something cool might happen and oh yeah if it does work we'll need more energy that created in the last year by the sun to power the drive"


Good god NO. This is exactly the type of shit that makes me hate people like Michio Kaku. The idea that anything is possible just because we believe it. This kind of shit only gets people excited about "Cool Sci-Fi" science, not the experiment "boring" science, which is arguably more important.

And really, "nothing in physics that says it doesn't exist?" Really? Is that what you're going with? Because there are many physists that may have an issue with that contention.

So is your argument NASA should not spend money on basic advanced propulsion research?

Or is it we shouldn't be excited or find it "cool" that this research is being done?

Did you consider if they complete the experiments it may help prove which physicists are right?

 

[Fritzo]

This is a pretty insane method of thinking. You realize there is an issue of scale? Just because the Universe did it at some point doesn't mean that we can simply do it. What was it, we would need to take the entire mass-energy of jupiter in order to create a single wormhole or something like that?

You can't just say, ITS POSSIBLE BECAUSE THE UNIVERSE DID IT. We can't create easily self sustaining fusion because we don't have the advantage of several million tons of matter creating gravity on its own, we can't easily create massive black holes because we don't have the mass the feed it.

Even if we think its theoretically possible "which in this case we don't even know that" the issue of scale is going to bite us hard on the ass.

Every single thing you mention had many incremental improvements over existing technologies and also could previously be seen to work on the scale of humans. There is not a single piece of technology that this "improves" upon and nothing that indicates its possible on a human level scale. Its "we think something cool might happen and oh yeah if it does work we'll need more energy that created in the last year by the sun to power the drive"


Good god NO. This is exactly the type of shit that makes me hate people like Michio Kaku. The idea that anything is possible just because we believe it. This kind of shit only gets people excited about "Cool Sci-Fi" science, not the experiment "boring" science, which is arguably more important.

And really, "nothing in physics that says it doesn't exist?" Really? Is that what you're going with? Because there are many physists that may have an issue with that contention.

This entire experiment is basically pure conjecture. They don't even know if they expect to actually get anything out of their warp field tests. They're just kinda dicking around and seeing if they get anything.

I would like you to show me an argument from an expert source that says we are not able to warp space artificially or that it is impossible for exotic matter to exist. Also, the new requirements of the proposed warp drive are much less than "the entire mass of Jupiter". It was found by manipulating the geometry of the field it would reduce the mass requirements to a mere 1600 lbs- that's less than the mass of Voyager I. This makes the whole idea more feasible and is why they got NASA funding.

Ain't going to happen in our lifetimes. But kudos for them trying.

This I do agree with. It's in such an embryonic state right now that (provided research continues) I wouldn't expect to see any practical results for several decades.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

I would like you to show me an argument from an expert source that says we are not able to warp space artificially or that it is impossible for exotic matter to exist.

Classic logical fallacy.

It's impossible to prove a negative. Especially when the science in question is completely hypothetical and exists purely in a theoretical basis. Math at this level can contradict because there are many hypotheticals being tossed around. Its the exact same reason why there are 40 different variations of String Theory that are all mathematically consistant.

We have an understanding of what properties exotic particles may have, in the very specific case of current theoretical math, but we have abolustely no knowledge of if they even exist in real life, if its possible to observe them, if its possible to even create, and if its possible to harness. Nothing at all.

 

[Paratus]

Classic logical fallacy.

It's impossible to prove a negative. Especially when the science in question is completely hypothetical and exists purely in a theoretical basis. Math at this level can contradict because there are my hypotheticals being tossed around. Its the exact same reason why there are 40 different variations of String Theory that are all mathematically consistant.

We have an understanding of what properties exotic particles may have, in the very specific case of current theoretical math, but we have abolustely no knowledge of if they even exist in real life, if its possible to observe them, if its possible to even create, and if its possible to harness. Nothing at all.

If you watched the video, exotic matter may very well not be needed. And as stated in the video the power requirements are much smaller - still massive - but much smaller. Small enough that their tabletop experiment may demonstrate the effect.

So again what's your argument?

 

[Fritzo]

Classic logical fallacy.

It's impossible to prove a negative. Especially when the science in question is completely hypothetical and exists purely in a theoretical basis. Math at this level can contradict because there are my hypotheticals being tossed around. Its the exact same reason why there are 40 different variations of String Theory that are all mathematically consistant.

We have an understanding of what properties exotic particles may have, in the very specific case of current theoretical math, but we have abolustely no knowledge of if they even exist in real life, if its possible to observe them, if its possible to even create, and if its possible to harness. Nothing at all.

Exactly. We have no knowledge if exotic matter exists. There is no law that says it DOESN'T exist though. You don't seem to understand how much this narrows things down. We've used this reasoning to ultimately make discoveries of quarks, quantum entanglement, and even the Higgs boson. These all started with some guy saying "the math says these things might exist, so lets see if they do." I'm not exactly sure why you're so against someone looking for things that might help us in the future.

You can't just sit on your hands and say "stuff like that is crazy, don't even bother with it."

 

[manimal]

Way to go science!!!

what I find funny about this thread is the few who refuse to believe its possible because they cant wrap their limited minds around it.


Not to get P&Nish but these are some of the same people that deny MMCC and evolution.

Its too hard to understand so it cant be real!


intellectual humility would help you out quite a bit Phucheneh

 

[OlafSicky]

Proof? You know, when these "leaks" of super secret info gets out to the public, have you ever considered it's just propaganda to make us look much smarter/advanced than we are?

I work for a military company and some of the work is considered "Top Secret". You'd be surprised how ancient this technology still is.

If we do have super secret space programs, it's probably less advanced than you think. And if it is super secret and awesome, there's a solid chance you'll never know about it.

Pleas tell us more details of your work sounds fascinating :ninja:

 

[manimal]

Pleas tell us more details of your work sounds fascinating :ninja:

Im sure he has a blog

 

[z1ggy]

Pleas tell us more details of your work sounds fascinating :ninja:

Submarines.

 

[z1ggy]

This is a pretty insane method of thinking. You realize there is an issue of scale? Just because the Universe did it at some point doesn't mean that we can simply do it. What was it, we would need to take the entire mass-energy of jupiter in order to create a single wormhole or something like that?

You can't just say, ITS POSSIBLE BECAUSE THE UNIVERSE DID IT. We can't create easily self sustaining fusion because we don't have the advantage of several million tons of matter creating gravity on its own, we can't easily create massive black holes because we don't have the mass the feed it.

Even if we think its theoretically possible "which in this case we don't even know that" the issue of scale is going to bite us hard on the ass.

Every single thing you mention had many incremental improvements over existing technologies and also could previously be seen to work on the scale of humans. There is not a single piece of technology that this "improves" upon and nothing that indicates its possible on a human level scale. Its "we think something cool might happen and oh yeah if it does work we'll need more energy that created in the last year by the sun to power the drive"

Tell me this. How did humans create nuclear reactors? Can you see atoms in front of your face? Everything starts with theory, and works it's way into a real life physical entity once the given resources are available. Did people even a few hundred years ago even know or understand what atoms were, let alone discover the fact they can split them and use the energy output to drive turbines, etc?

Imagine the things that are just theory and conjecture today, and what those theories will turn into a few generations from now.

You should really open your mind up a bit more.


For example, creating artificial black holes as a power source

 

[ImpulsE69]

Giant nuclear powered dildos - IN SPACE.

FTFY. (and added IN SPACE! because everything sounds cooler that way.)

 

[moonbogg]

Anyone who thinks this won't happen is an idiot. Also, worm holes.

As well as, big tits with 3 chicks.

 

[z1ggy]

FTFY. (and added IN SPACE! because everything sounds cooler that way.)

You mean giant BLACK dildoes in SPACE

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Tell me this. How did humans create nuclear reactors? Can you see atoms in front of your face? Everything starts with theory, and works it's way into a real life physical entity once the given resources are available. Did people even a few hundred years ago even know or understand what atoms were, let alone discover the fact they can split them and use the energy output to drive turbines, etc?

Imagine the things that are just theory and conjecture today, and what those theories will turn into a few generations from now.

You should really open your mind up a bit more.


For example, creating artificial black holes as a power source

Ignoring the fact that natural nuclear reactors exist, a nuclear reactor was based off previously existing science that showed that it was possible to transmute one element to another because a physical experiment existed that did just that.

The idea of a single indivisble piece of matter was around for a while, since the greeks actually, and it was Dalton that formed atomic theory of matter in the 1800's. Also fission reactors never had a problem of scale, shown by the fact that fission reactors exist naturally on earth time scales. Also nuclear reactons happen ALL THE TIME in real life, stuff decays and changes. That's nuclear reactions happening constantly.

The science for exotic matters and warp effects exists PURELY at a theoretical level. Nuclear Reactors were based on physical experiments that eventally were understood theoretically. And really "Open your mind?" That's a dumb argument. Haing an open mind doesn't mean blindly accepting the hypotheticals of the first scientists to come around and say they can do something.

My response is "Learn some goddamn critical thinking skills". Science isn't done by just saying "ITS ALL POSSIBLE" and blindly accepting it, its done by trying to rip apart every claim that comes its way because otherwise, you just get junk data and junk experiemnts. Shit like cold fusion has been worked on for years, and we still haven't even gotten close to achieving it, even through many people ahve claimed they got it. For people who claim to "love" science, you have a very pathetic understanding of how it works.