Quantum Setback For Warp Drives
- Thread starter Brandonv
- Start date
If that article was recently posted at arxiv.org, then it has at least 2 problems. One of which is an analysis in 1+1 dimensions not 3+1. Also it involves an accelerating warp field.
How exactly does the bubble become "unstable"
Ronald Held,
The article only assumes one dimension of space, and one dimension of time?
INRM
Ronald Held,
The article only assumes one dimension of space, and one dimension of time?
INRM
And it only mentions the bubble turns 'unstable' ... and that there is a possibility it would be 'impossible' ...
I'm actually reminded of Voyager's Slipstream issue in Timeless.
You know ... the phase variance problem they had was countered temporarily by using the Flyer in-front of the ship in order to compensate for the phase differential as it happened inside the Slipstream.
Obviously I'm not suggesting an equal solution ... but realistically, if something becomes 'unstable', wouldn't there be a possibility to try and control it with time and proper research as it always has been done in the past?
Saying it's 'impossible' simply because the bubble becomes unstable at superluminal velocities is just as bad as saying 'there ... it's not working, let's quit'.
I mean sure, test the 'impossible' aspect, invest time and research to see if you cannot really do anything to overcome it ... and if it's not doable, well THEN it would be an appropriate time to say that 'this method is not working'.
I'm actually reminded of Voyager's Slipstream issue in Timeless.
You know ... the phase variance problem they had was countered temporarily by using the Flyer in-front of the ship in order to compensate for the phase differential as it happened inside the Slipstream.
Obviously I'm not suggesting an equal solution ... but realistically, if something becomes 'unstable', wouldn't there be a possibility to try and control it with time and proper research as it always has been done in the past?
Saying it's 'impossible' simply because the bubble becomes unstable at superluminal velocities is just as bad as saying 'there ... it's not working, let's quit'.
I mean sure, test the 'impossible' aspect, invest time and research to see if you cannot really do anything to overcome it ... and if it's not doable, well THEN it would be an appropriate time to say that 'this method is not working'.
Last edited:
IIRC, there were various episodes of post-TOS Trek in which a ship couldn't go to warp at a key moment because it couldn't form a stable warp field for whatever reason...
Shit! There went my plans to visit relatives in Alpha-Centauri this summer. 
Well, from reading it briefly, it appears that our old friend Hawking radiation would fry people inside the bubble, and the usual strange instabilities at the horizon of this drive would also mess things up as well.
That said, we can probably get around it in time for 2063, at least if we intend to preserve canon. Any later than that and we're facing serious continuity issues, people.
That said, we can probably get around it in time for 2063, at least if we intend to preserve canon. Any later than that and we're facing serious continuity issues, people.
The real problem in all this is someone making sure that not only does their grandson have the name Zefram Cochrane, but also has a genetic predisposition to alcoholism.
Bad news for Zefram Cochrane.
IOW, FTL travel wasn't happening yesterday and it's not happening today. Tomorrow isn't looking good either.
What about Thursday, May 7, 2009? How does it look then?Bad news for Zefram Cochrane.
IOW, FTL travel wasn't happening yesterday and it's not happening today. Tomorrow isn't looking good either.
Around midnight, promising.
I checked the links in that article. It came from http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/23292/
I find it funny how (supposedly) smart people keep jumping to such wild conclusions using what little we know about the way the universe actually works.
RobertScorpio
Pariah
Lets ask SHELDON!!
Rob
Rob
With a theory of Quantum Gravity, it is not possible to say either way. I need to analyse that paper in detail which I have not had teh time to do.
How likely will they be sending us their results?
Even if/when we crack it in this universe, there is still a question if it will be made into a practical model and all.
Remember that we are still limited by an aspect that this society calls 'money', and that any advanced technology would likely be used by the government first and foremost compared to giving it to the general public (or even worse, to people with genuine intentions to use it properly).
The government is most likely keeping a tight lid on numerous advanced techs that are by a decade or 2 more advanced compared to what is presently out there.
It's also possible they already have a working theory for an FTL drive ... but come on, how likely are they to actually admit it or even put forward advanced techs that could actually benefit everyone into mass scale production?
In order for the government to have cracked the problem of an FTL drive, they would have to have first got an energy source a few hundred years ahead of current technology. Of course, they could sit on it but I really can't see any sense in doing so when basically, you could pretty much ensure world hegemony permanently by using these technologies.
A problem with this thing anyway is that it's basically analysing a problem with general relativity using quantum mechanics. This basically means we're never going to get the full story, as a shotgun wedding of quantum field theory and general relativity only works up to a point. The cosmological constant infuriatingly refuses to yield to our attempts to calculate using this approach, so you're going to need new quantum gravitational physics to make full sense of this thing.
And if there's one thing I know it's that a theory of quantum gravity would be very hard to sit on. At a conference, somewhere, one particularly drunk government theoretical physicist would scribble something down on a napkin as a party trick, another nicks the paper and looks at it, finds it works and publishes it as his own work. "Results theft" goes on far more than many would believe, and basically ensures that any "secret" idea will emerge into the public sphere very quickly.
A problem with this thing anyway is that it's basically analysing a problem with general relativity using quantum mechanics. This basically means we're never going to get the full story, as a shotgun wedding of quantum field theory and general relativity only works up to a point. The cosmological constant infuriatingly refuses to yield to our attempts to calculate using this approach, so you're going to need new quantum gravitational physics to make full sense of this thing.
And if there's one thing I know it's that a theory of quantum gravity would be very hard to sit on. At a conference, somewhere, one particularly drunk government theoretical physicist would scribble something down on a napkin as a party trick, another nicks the paper and looks at it, finds it works and publishes it as his own work. "Results theft" goes on far more than many would believe, and basically ensures that any "secret" idea will emerge into the public sphere very quickly.
I am one that always says, NEVER say NEVER! 
quantum fluctuations beyond the (-1)negative (1)positive (0)neutral effects of time and space matter not considering that we have anytime/place/situation/ realized in dream-scape right? and If we think really hard and tap our shoes together they might get each other a little dirty around the edges. sorta. like wow man what does that mean really. ???
lets start mapping negative realities for a moment and then we move on to mapping thought experiments in time and space (say) then we can wonder why are we doing this in the first place.,, why why why .,.,., why not now that we know we can do it right?
so on ... soon SoOn
what ever there is, is what ever there is, that is ., there now so.,
lets start mapping negative realities for a moment and then we move on to mapping thought experiments in time and space (say) then we can wonder why are we doing this in the first place.,, why why why .,.,., why not now that we know we can do it right?
so on ... soon SoOn
what ever there is, is what ever there is, that is ., there now so.,
