"IS WARP DRIVE POSSIBLE?" - A discussion

[CorporalCaptain]

If your warp bubble is travelling faster than c, you can't scan ahead of it. However, perhaps some forms of warp bubbles could skitter on top of actual spacetime in a sort of Leidenfrost effect and avoid interacting with objects in it. It would make navigation very difficult.

Assuming that scanning is needed to solve the problem of how to avoid collisions with macroscopic objects such as meteoroids or even larger objects, then scout drones with their own warp bubbles might suffice and would be the logical "first thing" to try to develop. The basic idea is that they would scout ahead to detect objects on collision courses with the mothership and on discovery report back by physically returning to the mothership's warp bubble, so that the mothership could make course corrections.

There would be many problems to solve, such as how to keep the drone cloud in formation with the mothership and with each other and such as how to keep everything in the entire formation situationally aware. Not least among the problems is that each drone, being in essence a starship itself, would cost a sizeable fraction of the whole mothership. Significantly also, drone attrition could be a problem and one that might indicate the presence of a threat.

Active scout drones that could destroy objects without even reporting back in advance would be another possibility with its own slew of issues, not least of which is that it could involve the risk of destroying something that the mission exists to locate, such as evidence of intelligent life.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

I'm not even sure that energy in the form of photons can pass in or out of a warp bubble. If it can, it might be subject to severe temporal distortion. Communication with a drone cloud might be subject to this problem. In any case, the drones would not be able to warn of a potential threat faster than c, although I suppose they could scan a region and then travel faster than c to attempt a rendezvous with the mothership to transfer the results.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I'm not even sure that energy in the form of photons can pass in or out of a warp bubble. If it can, it might be subject to severe temporal distortion. Communication with a drone cloud might be subject to this problem.

I said:

report back by physically returning to the mothership's warp bubble

What I mean is that the drones would reenter the mothership's warp bubble and communicate with the mothership from inside it. If the drones can't reenter the warp bubble and still remain operational while it is active, then that creates a problem, obviously, and similar remarks apply to their being unable to depart from the mothership's warp bubble as well. What kind of problem it would be would depend upon the nature of the inability to pass through. For example, if the problem is due to tidal forces, then the problem relates to how small the pieces would be that the object would be broken down into.

If this type of problem exists, one way it might be solved is to periodically deactivate the warp drive to rendezvous with the drones and plan the next leg.

Similarly, if the problem exists, then that might indicate that the warp bubble itself could provide some form of protection against collision with meteoroids, etc.

In any case, the drones would not be able to warn of a potential threat faster than c, although I suppose they could scan a region and then travel faster than c to attempt a rendezvous with the mothership to transfer the results.

Yes. That's what I was getting at.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

I suspect a Leidenfrost-type warp bubble, while protected from collision with objects in the physical universe, could potentially become lost amongst infinite branes and alternate realities. Potentially, it could never return to its original reality? There's also the problem of emerging back into the physical universe without intersecting with a physcial object.

 

[Deks]

Sometimes I forget how amazing the time is now. The capabilities of scientists and engineers are increasing every day. Service satellites, gas stations in orbit, trips to the Moon and Mars still seem fantastic to me. But this is reality.

You also might be forgetting one thing that contributes heavily to exponential developments and returns:
Automation.
Had we automated as much as possible decades ago (used algorithms for R&D) as opposed to just now starting to use them in a comprehensive manner, we could have advanced faster.

 

[Dryson]

What about using the process that accelerated Oumuamua to faster velocities as the asteroid passed by the Sun?

From what I have read, the Sun caused ice to melt on the surface of the asteroid that created propulsive thrust that was faster than the asteroid was initially travelling.

If a stargate was developed to replicate the amount of sunlight interacting with chemicals on the surface of a spacecraft that created additional acceleration without having to use stored liquid or chemical propellents, the space craft should be greatly accelerated, just like Ohm was.

The big challenge would be getting the angle of solar intetaction, the type of chemicals and entry velocity of the space craft correct in order to create the thrust.


The really interesting question is, if a star can increase the acceleration of an asteroid, such as what took place with Oumuamua that was passing by, how much acceleration could be achieved by an asteroid passing close to a black hole but doesn't become trapped in the black holes gravity?

Basically the asteroid would come in at an angle, the heat interacts with the ice on the asteroids surface that then causes an increase in accelerarion of the asteroid that then allows the asteroid to escape the gravity of the black hole.

 

[Dryson]

I suspect a Leidenfrost-type warp bubble, while protected from collision with objects in the physical universe, could potentially become lost amongst infinite branes and alternate realities. Potentially, it could never return to its original reality? There's also the problem of emerging back into the physical universe without intersecting with a physcial object.

Negative, alternate realities do not exist because they have not been proven to exist and would therefore have no effect on the Leidenfrost warp bubble.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

Something does not exist because it has not be proven to exist? That's some warped logic but at least we now know that God does not exist.

 

[Deks]

What about using the process that accelerated Oumuamua to faster velocities as the asteroid passed by the Sun?

From what I have read, the Sun caused ice to melt on the surface of the asteroid that created propulsive thrust that was faster than the asteroid was initially travelling.

If a stargate was developed to replicate the amount of sunlight interacting with chemicals on the surface of a spacecraft that created additional acceleration without having to use stored liquid or chemical propellents, the space craft should be greatly accelerated, just like Ohm was.

The big challenge would be getting the angle of solar intetaction, the type of chemicals and entry velocity of the space craft correct in order to create the thrust.

Oumuamua did not achieve a significant fraction of c if I'm not mistaken... and technically speaking is moving at a snail's pace.
Sure, its moving at just over a double speed than Voyager 1, but that's still painfully slow.

To get to the speeds we're suggesting here for Warp... a speed of 0.1c needs to be achieved so the Warp bubble could 'accelerate' that by 100x... or, 10x c.

0.1 c = 30 000 km/s.

Granted, even achieving 0.05 c would be 15 000 km/s, so that would allow the warp bubble to give us a theoretical increase of 5 c (would take just under a year to reach Alpha Centauri).

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

The solar system basically ran into Oumuamua as Oumuamua's speed was lower in the local standard of rest (LSR) frame (about 229 km/s as opposed to 255 km/s). In the process, Oumuamua was gravitationally accelerated and picked up a speed about equal to its apparent incoming speed plus that of the Sun's in the LSR. The speed of Oumuamua in the LSR makes some researchers believe it is very ancient and might have orbited the Galaxy several times, perhaps for hundreds of millions if not billions of years.

ʻOumuamua - Wikipedia

 

[Tenacity]

Something does not exist because it has not be proven to exist?

Prior to October 7th 1959 the far side of the moon didn't exist.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

It's very unlikely that Oumuamua has ever been near the Sun previously. Its relative speed is too great. Given that we detected such an object almost as soon as we started looking, it seems likely that we'll encounter more of them.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

Prior to October 7th 1959 the far side of the moon didn't exist.

If I'd never seen you post previously perhaps you didn't exist. The logical fallacy is not unexpected given the source.

 

[XCV330]

If you could create a small black hole, stable enough to last a long journey, and were able to contain it properly, you could use the Hawkings radiation off it, theoretically to power a "sail" and use that as a propellentless propulsion method with constant acceleration you could get to relativistic speeds. Do an about turn halfway through for the deceleration phase for arrival.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

If you could create a small black hole, stable enough to last a long journey, and were able to contain it properly, you could use the Hawkings radiation off it, theoretically to power a "sail" and use that as a propellentless propulsion method with constant acceleration you could get to relativistic speeds. Do an about turn halfway through for the deceleration phase for arrival.

What mass of black hole are you proposing given this calculator?
Viktor T. Toth - Hawking radiation calculator (vttoth.com)

Note that the minimum possible mass for a black hole is generally thought to be the Planck mass, approximately 22 micrograms (about a third of the mass of a human eyelash), although this might not be the actual minimum if additional dimensions exist that modify Planck's constant on very small scales. Without additional dimensions, a Planck mass black hole has a lifetime of 8.7x10^-40s, longer than the Planck time of 5.4x10^-44s but still very short lived. It would be expected to disintegrate altogether releasing about 2 GJ of energy as radiation (approximately equivalent to the energy released by exploding half a tonne of TNT) but the mechanism is uncertain as we don't have theories that describe what happens at the Planck scale. If smaller cured-up dimensions exist, it might persist for longer and fizzle away.

There's also the problem of how to reflect the particles being emitted. It's not propellantless as the particles are the ppropellant. You also have to accelerate the black hole as well as the ship that's using it.

 

[Ronald Held]

If you could create a small black hole, stable enough to last a long journey, and were able to contain it properly, you could use the Hawkings radiation off it, theoretically to power a "sail" and use that as a propellentless propulsion method with constant acceleration you could get to relativistic speeds. Do an about turn halfway through for the deceleration phase for arrival.

Can you cite a research grade paper about this?

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

There's the halo drive but it's not the same mechanism.

Using black holes to conquer space: The halo drive (phys.org)

ETA: This paper seems to fit the bill: [0908.1803] Are Black Hole Starships Possible (arxiv.org)

 

[Dryson]

The problem that I see with Warp Drive, is that everyone wants to get from point A to point B while closing their eyes.

The best approach to developing FTL is incremental velocity. While traveling along the incremental velocity curve to FTL, science would probably discover new means of generating incremental velocities. Velocities, that once FTL, had been achieved, could be built into a single drive to go from zero to FTL in under 100 mil kilometers.

Such an incremental drive could be built the following way.

1.Chemical booster stages gets the spacecraft into space and into a trajectory with the Sun.

2. ION engines then propel the craft and builds velocity over time allowing the space craft to enter a trajectory similar to Oumuamua that caused the slight acceleration of the asteroid.

3. The faster the space craft would be going equates to more hydrogen atoms being encountered at a faster rate. If the speed at which hydrogen atoms are ecountered can be converted into a propulsive thrust, let's say the hydrogen atoms are being encountered at 45,000 kph due to an ION engine and the same thrust potential to atom encounter velocity is achievable by converting the velocity of the atoms into thrust, then the hydrogen atoms could be used as a fuel source.

4. Resistive force would be needed, rockets at the front of the spacecraft, to create a resistance against the thrust coming from the opposite end, could then be used to create an incremental velocity.

For x resistive thrust force being exerted by the front rockets, the main engines would have to create x thrust potential to overcome the front rockets.

When the front rockets are turned off, the excess main engine thrust used to over the resistive thrust should generate significantly more forward thrust for the spacecraft.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

Well there's that and then there's actual physics.

 

[XCV330]

Can you cite a research grade paper about this?

https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015JBIS...68..105L/abstract