so star trek is a failed concept of technology that didn't work and has been kept vague or re-worded in order to keep the futuristic show alive. Although some aspect may have been added, the ship propulsion method originally concepted is not functional to the level of the show, but the show continues by making warp drive technically vague or uses fictional wording stemming from the original concept of plasma propulsion with spatial fields. OR So I have been told... "In time, Spatial fields may come our way, but Plasma technology does not work" So the plasma failure to behave significantly enough to be a benefit "makes the ship not go"
This is a show where they have FTL telepathy, aliens from different planets with wholly different evolutionary paths can have hybrid children, and a magic teleporter which can do whatever the plot requires from week to week. It's never "worked" in a real science sense on a much more fundamental level than even what you find doesn't hold up.
I guess. Well plasma reconstituting quanta might be magnified some how, then shrunk into nano-technology for a phaser just you wait.
Well.... Alchemy ---> Newtonian Physics ---> Relativity ----> Quantum Physics ---> ??? They are all just better and better models of the universe....must be a couple steps up on the ladder by Star Trek times.
Here's what NASA says about The Science of STAR TREK: https://www.nasa.gov/topics/technology/features/star_trek.html
I suppose in the real future it will be as different from how we imagined it as it was for the way Jules Vern imagined a trip to the moon..........Oh wait not so different eh?
Past Alchemy ---> Newtonian Physics ---> Relativity ----> Quantum Physics --->Future Alchemy. Fixed it for ya.
Star Trek is about the entertaining adventures of groups of characters. All the other minutiae is just window dressing. Of course it falls apart under scrutiny. Kor
Harry Potter doesn't work either and that's popular. Trek is fantasy dressed up in sci-fi colours. Aliens won't look human with bumpy heads or pointed ears. They won't all speak English and think like we do. The galaxy isn't held together by a magical mushroom network and there's no blue floating head on a planet at the centre.
So, it has the same thing almost every future set sci-fi show has? You're telling me Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica, The Orville, Tripping the Rift, Lost in Space, Babylon 5, Farscape, or Firefly make more sense than Star Trek, all due to the propulsion theories?
Do you have a php script to just insert a negative comment to automatically select about anything? That's very efficient of you. In fairness Firefly never attempted to show FTL spaceflight, though I think they may have done so when it came to communications. We're in a period where breakthrough propulsion methods are being given very serious examinations. That doesn't mean they work and none of the realistic ones have us zipping around faster than light, but for all that, devices like the MEGAdrive, the Dipole Drive, magsail, etc, if one of them works, opens up the entire solar system and the local stellar neighborhood as well. We may actually see the first interstellar probe launched in some of our lifetimes. Fusion rocketry is going to happen, if not by John Slough's group or Franklin Chang-Diaz's, then someone else. As for FTL, there's a certain confident smugness among the mildly scientifically read that tends to close off all avenues of possibilities lately. I'd rather not look like one of those "can't be done" shouting people from centuries ago that were inherently wrong. I dont know what the future holds and i wont get to see much of it anyway, but I suspect it will be exciting. And oddly enough Trek will have inspired some of it.