Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Warp Drives Feasible in our life-time

Warp Drives Feasible in our life-time

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
combusinesscollaborationcode-review
111 Posts 37 Posters 1 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • L lewax00

    I've always been interested in the idea of real warp drives (for example this one[^]). One thing I've always liked about Star Trek is that the science is mostly plausible (the details aren't always right, but the main ideas are usually close). I've also seen a few articles recently about how Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle isn't holding any more, one of the key scientific ideas making transporters impossible. I think this comic[^] sums up my feelings pretty well.

    J Offline
    J Offline
    Jan Holst Jensen2
    wrote on last edited by
    #43

    > how Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle isn't holding any more Ah, sorry, no :) . http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=heisenbergs-uncertainty-principle-is-not-dead&WT.mc_id=SA_CAT_physics_20120309[^] "Heisenberg would be pleased that the limitation we can know about the world, which he aimed to expressed, was this time clearly revealed with the new rigorous, experimentally verified formulation. The new uncertainty relation between measurement error and disturbance is no more just conjecture, but physical law." What the experiments have shown is that Heisenbergs formula still holds, but you can perform measurements on a system without introducing (much) extra uncertainty. Previously it was believed that most, if not all, of the uncertainty was introduced by the act of measurement. What the new experiments show is that the Heisenberg uncertainty is a fundamental fact of the laws of physics. At least that is as far as I have understood it.

    L 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • L Lost User

      Warp drones still suck IMO. While cheaper than a full ship with live support and such, they can't be cheap. And you'd have a limited number of them - producing more of them (forcing you to take a whole warp drive factory with you) does not seem realistic (yes I really just used that word) to me.

      L Offline
      L Offline
      Lost User
      wrote on last edited by
      #44

      harold aptroot wrote:

      While cheaper than a full ship with live support and such, they can't be cheap. And you'd have a limited number of them - producing more of them (forcing you to take a whole warp drive factory with you) does not seem realistic (yes I really just used that word) to me.

      Not sure about that. Its not like the "drone" needs warp capability actually. Just the launcher does. The only thing that need be launched is the message itself. We tend to think "message in a bottle" and in this case it seems the bottle is the warp bubble. The message is the pure data or communication. For example a RF transmission. Once the warp bubble reaches its destination the RF signal propagates as it would have if there was no warp bubble, but it is then at its destination so only interpretation is left.

      Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.

      L E 2 Replies Last reply
      0
      • L Lost User

        harold aptroot wrote:

        While cheaper than a full ship with live support and such, they can't be cheap. And you'd have a limited number of them - producing more of them (forcing you to take a whole warp drive factory with you) does not seem realistic (yes I really just used that word) to me.

        Not sure about that. Its not like the "drone" needs warp capability actually. Just the launcher does. The only thing that need be launched is the message itself. We tend to think "message in a bottle" and in this case it seems the bottle is the warp bubble. The message is the pure data or communication. For example a RF transmission. Once the warp bubble reaches its destination the RF signal propagates as it would have if there was no warp bubble, but it is then at its destination so only interpretation is left.

        Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.

        L Offline
        L Offline
        Lost User
        wrote on last edited by
        #45

        Ok I guess I don't understand this warp drive..

        L 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • L Lost User

          Maybe someone is really against warp travel and holds dearly that anyone that speaks about it is a demon that shall be burned at the stake via 1 votes.... Or I just ticked off the usual crowd again (hmm guess they would be the same though ;P )

          Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.

          L Offline
          L Offline
          loctrice
          wrote on last edited by
          #46

          Collin Jasnoch wrote:

          really against warp travel and holds dearly that anyone that speaks about it is a demon that shall be burned at the stake

          :thumbsup:

          If it moves, compile it

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • L Lost User

            Ok I guess I don't understand this warp drive..

            L Offline
            L Offline
            Lost User
            wrote on last edited by
            #47

            Well sense it does not yet exist you are not alone :laugh: Using an actually "Messaging Ship" ( like a postal service ), maybe would be the first crack at it. Who knows right? But I would think the same tech that launches the probes and then people to other solar systems would be the same tech used to communicate with the launches systems... On a smaller scale (drones or just messages in a bubble).

            Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • A Andy Brummer

              Collin Jasnoch wrote:

              First off generating 500Kg is actually realistic...

              I think what the article says is that carrying 500kg is realistic. We don't even know if the stuff exists so creating 500kg is just as hard as creating a planet of it is just as hard at this point. :laugh:

              Curvature of the Mind now with 3D

              L Offline
              L Offline
              Lost User
              wrote on last edited by
              #48

              We have about as much certainty of it existing as the Higgs particle (99.996%). But you do have a point. The idea was it is unrealistic to carry it... I would disagree about the creation though. It may be theoretical science, but that does not mean physics does not apply.

              Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.

              A 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • L Lost User

                Mark Wallace wrote:

                they're not sure what the "exotic matter" is or how to find or fabricate it

                Haven't looked into the white papers yet but I would assume the exotic material is the "Dark Matter" that is also being researched. http://news.discovery.com/space/new-study-re-confirms-evidence-for-dark-energy-120912.html[^] As for the warp bubbles... http://dvice.com/archives/2012/09/nasa-warp-drive.php[^] It's not like they are just assuming they exist and will show up. It is also an active area. While I don't know the details nor pretend to think I can even understand most of it, I for one am glad there are such great scientists out there that can take theoretical science and turn it into solid fields of study. While your point is valid, if we all just went through the motions to cash a pay check we would not progress very fast.

                Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.

                M Offline
                M Offline
                Mark_Wallace
                wrote on last edited by
                #49

                Dark matter is just stuff that doesn't give off the gigawatts of electromagnetic energy required for it to be seen with telescopes from Earth -- mainly rocks, dust, etc. (basically, anything that isn't a star). "Dark energy" is essentially the gravitational effect of all this stuff we can't see with telescopes, which has been given a cool name, because otherwise it's deathly boring, and shouldn't really be called an "energy" at all. Warp field theories all rely on "exotic matter", which is something that no-one has found, no-one knows what its properties are, and no-one knows anything about, really -- except that this miraculous, non-existent stuff can be used to allow us to go places quicker than we would be able to by actually travelling according to the laws of Physics. The stuff doesn't exist, so no-one can argue that you've got its properties wrong,and you can come up with all manner of weird and wonderful theories on what it will allow us to do -- turn water to wine, make cats talk, be used to form warp bubbles, etc. Other things like "exotic matter" have been conjectured in the past, like stuff for turning lead into gold, and stuff to weave into carpets to make them fly, and none of them have been any less credible than "exotic matter". Of course, if you're spending all your time on postulating what could be done with magical materials, you're not doing any actual science, and you're not advancing anything, but if your theories get out on the Internet, you'll get a lot of attention, no matter how idiotic the cr@p you spiel is -- if you can't become famous for actually discovering something, then try to become famous for having *Great* *Ideas*, no? Harry Potter would be so proud. When Physicists start basing their academic careers on postulating what we could do if we could find magic charms, I start thinking about how much of my tax money is paying for it.

                I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!

                L A 2 Replies Last reply
                0
                • C Chris Meech

                  Funny, I searched but could not find any mention of di-lithium crystals. Thought they were a critical component. :)

                  Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra] posting about Crystal Reports here is like discussing gay marriage on a catholic church’s website.[Nishant Sivakumar]

                  B Offline
                  B Offline
                  Bassam Abdul Baki
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #50

                  It's the matter/anti-matter containment field that's most important.

                  Web - BM - RSS - Math - LinkedIn

                  U 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • M Mark_Wallace

                    Dark matter is just stuff that doesn't give off the gigawatts of electromagnetic energy required for it to be seen with telescopes from Earth -- mainly rocks, dust, etc. (basically, anything that isn't a star). "Dark energy" is essentially the gravitational effect of all this stuff we can't see with telescopes, which has been given a cool name, because otherwise it's deathly boring, and shouldn't really be called an "energy" at all. Warp field theories all rely on "exotic matter", which is something that no-one has found, no-one knows what its properties are, and no-one knows anything about, really -- except that this miraculous, non-existent stuff can be used to allow us to go places quicker than we would be able to by actually travelling according to the laws of Physics. The stuff doesn't exist, so no-one can argue that you've got its properties wrong,and you can come up with all manner of weird and wonderful theories on what it will allow us to do -- turn water to wine, make cats talk, be used to form warp bubbles, etc. Other things like "exotic matter" have been conjectured in the past, like stuff for turning lead into gold, and stuff to weave into carpets to make them fly, and none of them have been any less credible than "exotic matter". Of course, if you're spending all your time on postulating what could be done with magical materials, you're not doing any actual science, and you're not advancing anything, but if your theories get out on the Internet, you'll get a lot of attention, no matter how idiotic the cr@p you spiel is -- if you can't become famous for actually discovering something, then try to become famous for having *Great* *Ideas*, no? Harry Potter would be so proud. When Physicists start basing their academic careers on postulating what we could do if we could find magic charms, I start thinking about how much of my tax money is paying for it.

                    I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!

                    L Offline
                    L Offline
                    Lost User
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #51

                    Mark Wallace wrote:

                    turn water to wine

                    Is that how he did that?

                    Mark Wallace wrote:

                    Of course, if you're spending all your time on postulating what could be done with magical materials, you're not doing any actual science, and you're not advancing anything

                    I understand your logic but simply disagree. Using working theories that it exists allow advancements that are applicable to other fields of research and also allow the targeted field to continue to progress. You do not find the concept of a Warp Field Interfermeter intriguing?

                    Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.

                    M 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • J Jan Holst Jensen2

                      > how Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle isn't holding any more Ah, sorry, no :) . http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=heisenbergs-uncertainty-principle-is-not-dead&WT.mc_id=SA_CAT_physics_20120309[^] "Heisenberg would be pleased that the limitation we can know about the world, which he aimed to expressed, was this time clearly revealed with the new rigorous, experimentally verified formulation. The new uncertainty relation between measurement error and disturbance is no more just conjecture, but physical law." What the experiments have shown is that Heisenbergs formula still holds, but you can perform measurements on a system without introducing (much) extra uncertainty. Previously it was believed that most, if not all, of the uncertainty was introduced by the act of measurement. What the new experiments show is that the Heisenberg uncertainty is a fundamental fact of the laws of physics. At least that is as far as I have understood it.

                      L Offline
                      L Offline
                      lewax00
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #52

                      Quote:

                      Hasegawa's team is the first to have demonstrated the violation of Heisenberg's inequality and the validity of Ozawa's inequality.

                      The article quite clearly states Heisenberg's principle isn't holding up in recent experiments, but a related formula is.

                      J 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • A Andrei Straut

                        Oh my God, now what's next? Will the cat be shown to be EITHER alive or dead, but not the two at the same time? We are truly doomed... :omg: No, I am not confusing Heisenberg with Schrodinger, I am just providing an alternate example as to how things are going downhill

                        Full-fledged Java/.NET lover, full-fledged PHP hater. Full-fledged Google/Microsoft lover, full-fledged Apple hater. Full-fledged Skype lover, full-fledged YM hater.

                        F Offline
                        F Offline
                        Fabio Franco
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #53

                        There was never a cat. Everything we believe to be true is nothing more than an illusion.

                        To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson ---- Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • L Lost User

                          Mark Wallace wrote:

                          turn water to wine

                          Is that how he did that?

                          Mark Wallace wrote:

                          Of course, if you're spending all your time on postulating what could be done with magical materials, you're not doing any actual science, and you're not advancing anything

                          I understand your logic but simply disagree. Using working theories that it exists allow advancements that are applicable to other fields of research and also allow the targeted field to continue to progress. You do not find the concept of a Warp Field Interfermeter intriguing?

                          Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.

                          M Offline
                          M Offline
                          Mark_Wallace
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #54

                          Collin Jasnoch wrote:

                          Using working theories that it exists allow advancements that are applicable to other fields of research and also allow the targeted field to continue to progress

                          But it's Not Real. The definition of "exotic matter is "We don't know what it is, what its properties are, or what can be done with it -- but we invented the idea of it, so we'll decide what magic it can do". They can postulate any damned thing they like about such a magical substance. My theory is that exotic matter doesn't possess the properties needed to form a warp field, but it does possess properties that randomly and sporadically make pieces of coffee machines and single socks disappear. And that theory is far more credible as the warp-field theory, because pieces of coffee machines and single socks do disappear -- i.e there is actual empirical evidence to support it! (I'm gonna be RICH! Give me the grant money!) Physics is not "Oh, maybe one day we'll find a magical substance that will let us do miraculous things", it's "This is what we've got; what can we do with it?"

                          Collin Jasnoch wrote:

                          You do not find the concept of a Warp Field Interfermeter intriguing?

                          Are you kidding? There's nothing I'd like more than to see starships built -- but there are few things I like less than self-serving bullsh1t, and self-serving bullsh1t is all these "theories" are.

                          I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!

                          L R 2 Replies Last reply
                          0
                          • L lewax00

                            Quote:

                            Hasegawa's team is the first to have demonstrated the violation of Heisenberg's inequality and the validity of Ozawa's inequality.

                            The article quite clearly states Heisenberg's principle isn't holding up in recent experiments, but a related formula is.

                            J Offline
                            J Offline
                            Jan Holst Jensen2
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #55

                            lewax00 wrote:

                            The article quite clearly states Heisenberg's principle isn't holding up in recent experiments, but a related formula is.

                            Yes, I can see that I was imprecise in my wording. As I understand it Heisenbergs principle still holds, but his formula/inequality has been violated. The formula by Kennard holds, but it is still the same principle - there is a fundamental limit to the precision of the data that we can obtain about a quantum system. To add to the confusion (quoting from SciAm): "The one that physicists use in everyday research and call Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is in fact Kennard's formulation. It is universally applicable and securely grounded in quantum theory. If it were violated experimentally, the whole of quantum mechanics would break down. Heisenberg's formulation, however, was proposed as conjecture, so quantum mechanics is not shaken by its violation." So physicists apparently confuse general principles and explicit formulas/inequalities too... :)

                            L 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • M Mark_Wallace

                              Collin Jasnoch wrote:

                              Using working theories that it exists allow advancements that are applicable to other fields of research and also allow the targeted field to continue to progress

                              But it's Not Real. The definition of "exotic matter is "We don't know what it is, what its properties are, or what can be done with it -- but we invented the idea of it, so we'll decide what magic it can do". They can postulate any damned thing they like about such a magical substance. My theory is that exotic matter doesn't possess the properties needed to form a warp field, but it does possess properties that randomly and sporadically make pieces of coffee machines and single socks disappear. And that theory is far more credible as the warp-field theory, because pieces of coffee machines and single socks do disappear -- i.e there is actual empirical evidence to support it! (I'm gonna be RICH! Give me the grant money!) Physics is not "Oh, maybe one day we'll find a magical substance that will let us do miraculous things", it's "This is what we've got; what can we do with it?"

                              Collin Jasnoch wrote:

                              You do not find the concept of a Warp Field Interfermeter intriguing?

                              Are you kidding? There's nothing I'd like more than to see starships built -- but there are few things I like less than self-serving bullsh1t, and self-serving bullsh1t is all these "theories" are.

                              I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!

                              L Offline
                              L Offline
                              Lost User
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #56

                              Mark Wallace wrote:

                              They can postulate any damned thing they like about such a magical substance.

                              Right, and what is postulated is the point. They use those positions to create useful research and in many cases technology.

                              Mark Wallace wrote:

                              My theory is that exotic matter doesn't possess the properties needed to form a warp field, but it does possess properties that randomly and sporadically make pieces of coffee machines and single socks disappear.

                              Well if you have some studies on this happening and you see this being useful to the world by all means why not propose something. I will be honest on this one though.... Not seeing the usefulness. While I have had single socks disappear my theory on that is quite solid. They get stock on the out of season (or fashion) clothes and boxed up. :)

                              Mark Wallace wrote:

                              Physics is not "Oh, maybe one day we'll find a magical substance that will let us do miraculous things", it's "This is what we've got; what can we do with it?"

                              While it is not about magical substances it is about gaining an understanding of substances we do not understand. To quote Galileo: Measure what is measurable and make measurable what is not so. What we call magic one day is known to be truth the next.

                              Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.

                              M 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • J Jan Holst Jensen2

                                lewax00 wrote:

                                The article quite clearly states Heisenberg's principle isn't holding up in recent experiments, but a related formula is.

                                Yes, I can see that I was imprecise in my wording. As I understand it Heisenbergs principle still holds, but his formula/inequality has been violated. The formula by Kennard holds, but it is still the same principle - there is a fundamental limit to the precision of the data that we can obtain about a quantum system. To add to the confusion (quoting from SciAm): "The one that physicists use in everyday research and call Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is in fact Kennard's formulation. It is universally applicable and securely grounded in quantum theory. If it were violated experimentally, the whole of quantum mechanics would break down. Heisenberg's formulation, however, was proposed as conjecture, so quantum mechanics is not shaken by its violation." So physicists apparently confuse general principles and explicit formulas/inequalities too... :)

                                L Offline
                                L Offline
                                lewax00
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #57

                                Jan Holst Jensen2 wrote:

                                So physicists apparently confuse general principles and explicit formulas/inequalities too... :)

                                Well if they can't figure it out I'm certainly not going to try to understand it! :laugh:

                                J 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • C Chris Meech

                                  Funny, I searched but could not find any mention of di-lithium crystals. Thought they were a critical component. :)

                                  Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra] posting about Crystal Reports here is like discussing gay marriage on a catholic church’s website.[Nishant Sivakumar]

                                  A Offline
                                  A Offline
                                  Alan Balkany
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #58

                                  They now do this with transparent aluminum; progress!

                                  "Microsoft -- Adding unnecessary complexity to your work since 1987!"

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • L lewax00

                                    Jan Holst Jensen2 wrote:

                                    So physicists apparently confuse general principles and explicit formulas/inequalities too... :)

                                    Well if they can't figure it out I'm certainly not going to try to understand it! :laugh:

                                    J Offline
                                    J Offline
                                    Jan Holst Jensen2
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #59

                                    Right on :laugh: .

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • L Lost User

                                      NASA starts development of real life star trek warp drive[^] Actually I Do have the power captain </ScottishAccent>

                                      Quote:

                                      The Eagleworks team has discovered that the energy requirements are much lower than previously thought. If they optimize the warp bubble thickness and "oscillate its intensity to reduce the stiffness of space time," they would be able to reduce the amount of fuel to manageable amount: instead of a Jupiter-sized ball of exotic matter, you will only need 500 kilograms to "send a 10-meter bubble (32.8 feet) at an effective velocity of 10c."

                                      Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.

                                      F Offline
                                      F Offline
                                      Fabio Franco
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #60

                                      My eyes started to shine just by imagining the possibility. Although to me it sounds too good to be actually proven possible in our lifetime, it does make me feel hopeful. I can picture for a moment, Earth's fleet protecting our borders :)

                                      To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson ---- Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • S Stefan_Lang

                                        Not tea-bags? :java:

                                        B Offline
                                        B Offline
                                        BrainiacV
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #61

                                        You're all wrong. Lasers to separate the virtual particles for vacuum energy (ZPM anyone?). http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19327-lasers-could-make-virtual-particles-real.html[^]

                                        Psychosis at 10 Film at 11 Those who do not remember the past, are doomed to repeat it. Those who do not remember the past, cannot build upon it.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • L Lost User

                                          We have about as much certainty of it existing as the Higgs particle (99.996%). But you do have a point. The idea was it is unrealistic to carry it... I would disagree about the creation though. It may be theoretical science, but that does not mean physics does not apply.

                                          Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.

                                          A Offline
                                          A Offline
                                          Andy Brummer
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #62

                                          Yeah, but the Higgs particle was predicted. All this negative energy stuff has to go on is that if you reverse the signs in some general relativity equations, you can create things like "warp bubbles". There is nothing so far that supports reversing that sign.

                                          Curvature of the Mind now with 3D

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups