Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Nasa May Have Accidentally Figured Out How To Make A Warp Drive.


ContraBardus

Recommended Posts

So, this happened. It's of course only speculative, but if it's as true as it's made to sound this could be seriously amazing over the next few decades.

 

 

NASA scientists working on a project called EmDrive have accidentally stumbled upon something that will send science fiction junkies into a frenzy. The possibility of a real-life warp drive has been placed on the table thanks to readings that indicate the EmDrive’s resonance chamber sent beams traveling faster than the speed of light, which would be considered warp speed. Researchers have considered the possibility of traveling faster than the speed of light, but until the recent NASA study, the feat had never been achieved.

Mysterious Universe notes that the NASA scientists are buzzing about the discovery on the NASA Spaceflight Forums. The forums are a place for information regarding the engineering aspects of the space flight and NASA. Therefore, the discovery that laser beams may have just breached the speed of light sent the page into discussions on the long-term implications of warp speed bubbles and the possibly of future warp speed travel.

First, the researchers note that though beams that were shot into the EmDrive were recorded at speeds faster than light, there is still one more study that must be performed to determine with certainty that the light speed barrier was broken. Scientists note that the beams must be shot through the EmDrive in a vacuum environment. This will ensure that the effect was not a result of atmospheric heating.

Commenters note that the whole finding was one big accident and that researchers did not even realize that the EmDrive was replicating a well-known physicist’s theory of warp bubbles.

“I don’t think we can call this length contraction (even though it might look like it) for sure until the same results are in repeated in vacuum.”


Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/2040259/did-nasa-just-accidentally-produce-a-warp-bubble-emdrive-could-lead-to-warp-drive/#h04ojowJ3034F4lR.99
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Caution.

 

To be considered as bona fide science, any claims must be independently replicated.

 

No independent replication = no science... only hype.

 

Remember cold fusion and faster-than-light neutrinos?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read somewhere, years ago, that before telegraphy and other ways of decently fast communication were available, many newspapers had a section labeled "important if true" for stuff that may indeed be a fact but couldn't be verified yet.

 

Sometimes methinks it would be good to revive that tradition :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Caution.

 

To be considered as bona fide science, any claims must be independently replicated.

 

No independent replication = no science... only hype.

 

Remember cold fusion and faster-than-light neutrinos?

 

Just dont mix matter and antimatter cold. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Caution.

 

To be considered as bona fide science, any claims must be independently replicated.

 

No independent replication = no science... only hype.

 

Remember cold fusion and faster-than-light neutrinos?

 

Agreed. This is just an interesting article at the moment. I intentionally used language that indicated that when I posted it.

 

Even if this doesn't pan out, the EmDrive itself is pretty cool.

 

If this does work out the way it sounds like it maybe will, then our grandchildren might see mining for resources in space as a reality and possible job occupation.

 

If not, it's still might be an interesting development for space travel that might make getting around our solar system in space a little easier. Not having to store or use fuel for propulsion in space would definitely be a benefit for space travel and would help us reach further into space. It still requires an electric power source, but that can be found in space using solar energy as long as we don't get too far from the sun. If it works out as a technology, Mars gets that much closer to having human footprints on it's surface.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Caution.

 

To be considered as bona fide science, any claims must be independently replicated.

 

No independent replication = no science... only hype.

 

Remember cold fusion and faster-than-light neutrinos?

 

 

Agreed. This is just an interesting article at the moment. I intentionally used language that indicated that when I posted it.

 

Even if this doesn't pan out, the EmDrive itself is pretty cool.

 

If this does work out the way it sounds like it maybe will, then our grandchildren might see mining for resources in space as a reality and possible job occupation.

 

If not, it's still might be an interesting development for space travel that might make getting around our solar system in space a little easier. Not having to store or use fuel for propulsion in space would definitely be a benefit for space travel and would help us reach further into space. It still requires an electric power source, but that can be found in space using solar energy as long as we don't get too far from the sun. If it works out as a technology, Mars gets that much closer to having human footprints on it's surface.

Space charging stations could be setup also. Where your recharging path could be setup in a path. Kind of like skipping stones on the water. I know it would cost tons for that but just an idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Caution.

 

To be considered as bona fide science, any claims must be independently replicated.

 

No independent replication = no science... only hype.

 

Remember cold fusion and faster-than-light neutrinos?

 

Agreed. This is just an interesting article at the moment. I intentionally used language that indicated that when I posted it.

 

Even if this doesn't pan out, the EmDrive itself is pretty cool.

 

If this does work out the way it sounds like it maybe will, then our grandchildren might see mining for resources in space as a reality and possible job occupation.

 

If not, it's still might be an interesting development for space travel that might make getting around our solar system in space a little easier. Not having to store or use fuel for propulsion in space would definitely be a benefit for space travel and would help us reach further into space. It still requires an electric power source, but that can be found in space using solar energy as long as we don't get too far from the sun. If it works out as a technology, Mars gets that much closer to having human footprints on it's surface.

Space charging stations could be setup also. Where your recharging path could be setup in a path. Kind of like skipping stones on the water. I know it would cost tons for that but just an idea.

 

 

Just add solar panels to the ship to charge the batteries, it's not like they'll create drag or anything. You don't have to keep running the drive once you get up to speed, just use the travel time to charge the EmDrive again, you'll probably have plenty of time once you hit cruising speed. There shouldn't be a need for charging stations because there's likely nothing that's going to slow you down until you decelerate using the drive again.

 

Fuel works the same way. You wouldn't burn the engines the entire way there, you'd get to speed and shut them down and just cruise the rest of the way there, perhaps using short burst for course correction if needed. You just don't have to worry as much about running out of fuel and getting stranded because you over burned, miscalculated something, or sprung a fuel leak.

 

You could probably go pretty far into space even away from the sun and still be able to charge batteries for the EmDrive with solar panels given enough time. A trip to any body in our solar system is probably plenty of time to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Solar will probably not be a good option for "deep space" operations to the outer planets even with improved solar technology and material science. I still foresee that in these deep space operations the need for something like a radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG) that converts the heat released by the decay of radioactive materials into electrical energy by way of the Seebeck effect. Perhaps with improved technology we could incorporate fission reactors but in all honesty, for a self contained, non-maintained system, a RTG like system is probably going to be around for a while based on the known reliability of past and present systems. Remember, the Voyager probes that are still sending us information use RTG's and if I'm not mistaken, the New Horizons mission is also using RTG or RTG like technology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Solar will probably not be a good option for "deep space" operations to the outer planets even with improved solar technology and material science. I still foresee that in these deep space operations the need for something like a radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG) that converts the heat released by the decay of radioactive materials into electrical energy by way of the Seebeck effect. Perhaps with improved technology we could incorporate fission reactors but in all honesty, for a self contained, non-maintained system, a RTG like system is probably going to be around for a while based on the known reliability of past and present systems. Remember, the Voyager probes that are still sending us information use RTG's and if I'm not mistaken, the New Horizons mission is also using RTG or RTG like technology.

 

Agreed. I don't see us going into deep space with the EmDrive either if it doesn't lead to warp as is speculated in the article.Not without serious advances in life support and possibly human cold storage for hibernation or something.

 

I was thinking more along the lines of Mars and maybe Saturn's moons at most.

A Solar solution would work well with those kinds of distances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, certainly. I believe much of our technology on Mars is solar based?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So, this happened. It's of course only speculative, but if it's as true as it's made to sound this could be seriously amazing over the next few decades.

 

 

NASA scientists working on a project called EmDrive have accidentally stumbled upon something that will send science fiction junkies into a frenzy. The possibility of a real-life warp drive has been placed on the table thanks to readings that indicate the EmDrive’s resonance chamber sent beams traveling faster than the speed of light, which would be considered warp speed. Researchers have considered the possibility of traveling faster than the speed of light, but until the recent NASA study, the feat had never been achieved.

Mysterious Universe notes that the NASA scientists are buzzing about the discovery on the NASA Spaceflight Forums. The forums are a place for information regarding the engineering aspects of the space flight and NASA. Therefore, the discovery that laser beams may have just breached the speed of light sent the page into discussions on the long-term implications of warp speed bubbles and the possibly of future warp speed travel.

First, the researchers note that though beams that were shot into the EmDrive were recorded at speeds faster than light, there is still one more study that must be performed to determine with certainty that the light speed barrier was broken. Scientists note that the beams must be shot through the EmDrive in a vacuum environment. This will ensure that the effect was not a result of atmospheric heating.

Commenters note that the whole finding was one big accident and that researchers did not even realize that the EmDrive was replicating a well-known physicist’s theory of warp bubbles.

“I don’t think we can call this length contraction (even though it might look like it) for sure until the same results are in repeated in vacuum.”

Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/2040259/did-nasa-just-accidentally-produce-a-warp-bubble-emdrive-could-lead-to-warp-drive/#h04ojowJ3034F4lR.99

 

 

I have studied EmDrive. It is true that the present science consensus does not understand how it works. It was invented by a British engineer. It is a kind of microwave drive. Since the device has no known exhaust, conventional science cannot explain it. It is a cool invention IMO that can provide continuous thrust from microwaves along with an electrical power source of some kind such as solar power, a battery, generator device, etc. This in no ways implies that it could ever be a type of warp drive. But its continuous acceleration could enable it to reach speeds that otherwise might only be achieved by a nuclear drive of some kind.  In the next 10-20 years if perfected, it could likely IMO become a satellite drive once something is in orbit. If so it could replace ion drive. For this task they have already produced operating prototypes tested by both NASA and a Chinese team.

 

For larger heavy-lift tasks the developer believes a much larger version could be developed and used for a ground to orbital altitudes in a single stage ship about the size of a 747. All of this would be accomplished at very slow speeds however. It would take maybe a day to reach orbital heights, but it would take maybe a month for the EmDrive to reach orbital velocities, Instead it is proposed that at orbital altitudes of maybe a few hundred miles conventional rockets would take over to bring the craft to the interplanetary speeds needed. EmDrive could also decelerate crafts for entering orbits at distant planets and moons. It is believed by the developers that a trip to Mars and back could be accomplished in 1/3 the time as required by present day technologies.

 

Right now this technology is still in its beginning development stages hampered by limited funding since most scientists presently do not believe in its potential. But NASA is slowly working on it concerning its potential to replace ion drive. As I said maybe in the next 10-20 years we might see a finished product to replace ion drive, and probably longer for full sized space craft.

 

Another interesting technology is Lockheed's proposed fusion rocket. Again it is proposed to be operational within 10 years, and such an aircraft again is proposed to be no larger than a 747.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just gonna say that if this pans out and we do discover the secret to warp drive... This is probably the most human way possible to discover it.

 

By accident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the meantime I've read some about this "EmDrive" thing... cool if it turns out to work but so far the entire concept smells suspiciously like the cold fusion hype back in the days.

 

And of course, even if the drive itself works, 1. it wouldn't automatically mean that this opens up a way to do FTL travel and 2. (geek mode) it wouldn't be a warp drive at all ;)

 

Seriously, assuming that this drive works and that it indeed accelerates... something, whatever... at FTL speed... that doesn't negate the fact that the hypothetical starship we're all dreaming of propelling with it (let's be honest here my fellow geeks ;) ) will still be subject to the laws of nature. Without doing Something™ to the ship itself, I don't see it moving FTL even if the drive would perform FTL propulsion.

 

Let's wait and see what proper science has to say about it in the end ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the meantime I've read some about this "EmDrive" thing... cool if it turns out to work but so far the entire concept smells suspiciously like the cold fusion hype back in the days.

 

And of course, even if the drive itself works, 1. it wouldn't automatically mean that this opens up a way to do FTL travel and 2. (geek mode) it wouldn't be a warp drive at all wink.png

 

Seriously, assuming that this drive works and that it indeed accelerates... something, whatever... at FTL speed... that doesn't negate the fact that the hypothetical starship we're all dreaming of propelling with it (let's be honest here my fellow geeks wink.png ) will still be subject to the laws of nature. Without doing Something to the ship itself, I don't see it moving FTL even if the drive would perform FTL propulsion.

 

Let's wait and see what proper science has to say about it in the end wink.png

 

I get the impression from what I've read about it that they think that something the drive itself is doing may pave the way to creating a warp bubble.

 

The EmDrive itself isn't going to be a warp drive, no one is really suggesting that. It's one of those articles where the title doesn't really match the content of the article. It's that it may be creating an effect that with further study could lead to the possibility of building an actual warp drive further down the road. Something about the effect it may or may not be causing could point science in the right direction to achieve warp at some point in the vague future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EmDrive is an engineering creation. The testing of prototypes have shown a confirmation of operational capability. The general principles of its operation are contrary to present science theory in a number of ways. With no support coming from scientists little funding has been made available for its development. NASA in its testing has acknowledged its potential through testing of prototypes and has been given a relatively small budget to build larger and variant prototypes for further investigation of its possibilities.

 

Any craft that can provide continuous propulsion would involve continuous acceleration. Present science is generally unaware of any speed limits other than the friction and damage of impacting matter and ultimately the speed of light. Other speed limits presently unknown may exist and become apparent once we have developed and tested unmanned craft that can reach high velocities. Galactic space has more matter within it than intergalactic space so greater speeds might be more achievable outside of our galaxy.  To counteract impact possibilities shielding of some kind will be needed.

 

I expect another speed limit may exist about 1/10th the speed of light at which time the molecular structure of matter could begin to disintegrate as could any spacecraft traveling at that speed or greater in space.  Of course such a limit is still unknown to science and future high-speed craft will need to be tested very extensively to see if any such speed limits exist, contrary to present theory, before any manned craft could ever consider such speeds. Since warp drive would seem to be contrary to both Special and General Relativity, many advances in theory and science will have to someday show how it might somehow be possible before we could ever invest much time or money toward warp-drive development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I understand it a hypothetical warp drive would actually not be in violation of relativity because the matter itself ain't moving at light speed or even above that limit... space around the matter is manipulated. Like if you're walking on an escalator, thus having your own normal walking speed getting added to the machinery's speed. Even if only walking speed would be allowed for you, the added speed would make you faster (and from now on you'll check for speed limits before you ever step on an escalator again... :P ).

 

As for supposed "speed limits" at high velocities, I dunno... we can observe more and more of what's going on around Sagittarius A (the supermassive black hole at the center of the milky way). Entire stars in very close orbit around the beast reach obscene speeds and other than the gravitational torment they endure the closer they get, their matter seems to be fine.

 

I can't remember though what the highest speed is that the scientists could determine from their observations. I'm quite confident though that it was more than .1 c ;)

 

As for the EmDrive being a basically working piece of machinery... I'm not sure. As far as I could figure it out, some say it works, and honestly NASA would be a gang of fools if they wouldn't want to know for sure, but no one so far seems to be able to reliably replicate the success. That's why I compared this thing to the cold fusion hype... some claimed that they know it works (some still claim it today) but replication of that success seemed strangely impossible for pretty much all the other scientists.

 

Of course, if this thing really works, holy wow how cool would that be? Especially if it's true what its inventor supposedly estimates - that with good superconductors and such one might get as much as three fucking tons of thrust out of 1 kW power going into the drive. Imagine what we could do with a reactionless thruster of such power... :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I understand it a hypothetical warp drive would actually not be in violation of relativity because the matter itself ain't moving at light speed or even above that limit... space around the matter is manipulated. Like if you're walking on an escalator, thus having your own normal walking speed getting added to the machinery's speed. Even if only walking speed would be allowed for you, the added speed would make you faster (and from now on you'll check for speed limits before you ever step on an escalator again... tongue.png ).

 

As for supposed "speed limits" at high velocities, I dunno... we can observe more and more of what's going on around Sagittarius A (the supermassive black hole at the center of the milky way). Entire stars in very close orbit around the beast reach obscene speeds and other than the gravitational torment they endure the closer they get, their matter seems to be fine.

 

I can't remember though what the highest speed is that the scientists could determine from their observations. I'm quite confident though that it was more than .1 c wink.png

 

As for the EmDrive being a basically working piece of machinery... I'm not sure. As far as I could figure it out, some say it works, and honestly NASA would be a gang of fools if they wouldn't want to know for sure, but no one so far seems to be able to reliably replicate the success. That's why I compared this thing to the cold fusion hype... some claimed that they know it works (some still claim it today) but replication of that success seemed strangely impossible for pretty much all the other scientists.

 

Of course, if this thing really works, holy wow how cool would that be? Especially if it's true what its inventor supposedly estimates - that with good superconductors and such one might get as much as three fucking tons of thrust out of 1 kW power going into the drive. Imagine what we could do with a reactionless thruster of such power... blink.png

 

From Wiki this is the test evidence available from independent testing of EmDrive:

 

Chinese researchers from the Northwestern Polytechnical University (NWPU) in Xi'an in 2010, built and tested their own device based upon Shawyer's design, claiming to have replicated Shawyer's experiments, recording better results than Shawyer had claimed at even higher power levels, though they were also clear that their work was still preliminary. Then at the Johnson Space Center in 2014 a NASA evaluation group also claimed replication at low power levels, measuring a directional thrust level in accord with Shawyer's experiments and claims

 

 

 

As to large bodies orbiting a galactic or other black holes at or near .1C, I can find no evidence of it, but if you can find such evidence I would agree that would be an argument against such a speed limit as I suggested :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing can move faster than light. Einstein said. I believe it. That settles it. :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing can move faster than light. Einstein said. I believe it. That settles it. :)

If they can create thrusters by way of tachyon emissions...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Molecular structure breaks down at 0.1 C? Citation needed. Otherwise, there are probably more practical health physics problems to consider. Mainly, the issue of impacting Hydrogen atoms and other atoms, nuclei and particles at such high velocities. What kind of shielding would you need when dealing with the problem of hitting just Hydrogen (essentially a proton) at relativistic velocities?

 

A good "tabletop" rundown of this problem:

http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperDownload.aspx?paperID=23913

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

pantheo I checked Wikipedia on that too... my issue is with the word "claim". I dimly remember that back in the cold fusion heyday several groups around the world claimed to have replicated that fusion thing too, and we know how it eventually ended up.

 

I'd have to dig around for the recent news from Sagittarius A observations for that other thing; to be clear, I'm not 100 % positive that .1 c has been reached but the speeds observed were definitely mindblowing. Maybe I'll look for it later. smile.png

 

(Edit: Checked that and found that my memory was quite wrong on that; orbital speeds close to S A* are damn high of course but nowhere near .1 c. Oh well... shit happens :) )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No worries man. As I stated earlier, I would need to see some data regarding so called speed limits of "ordinary" molecular matter. My intuition is that practical speed limits are probably going to be much slower than even 0.1 C. I believe the fastest observed star is a star that has been ejected from our galaxy but it's speed is not 0.1C and I believe it is suspected a supernova explosion is what caused the ejection.

 

There are suspicions that so called rogue planets may be out and about and moving perhaps at several percent of C however:

http://earthsky.org/space/runaway-planets-moving-at-relativistic-speeds-are-possible

 

Edit: Perfect --> %

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Molecular structure breaks down at 0.1 C? Citation needed. Otherwise, there are probably more practical health physics problems to consider. Mainly, the issue of impacting Hydrogen atoms and other atoms, nuclei and particles at such high velocities. What kind of shielding would you need when dealing with the problem of hitting just Hydrogen (essentially a proton) at relativistic velocities?

 

A good "tabletop" rundown of this problem:

http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperDownload.aspx?paperID=23913

 

"Molecular structures break down at about .1 C."  This was not a statement of mine. My quote was: "I expect another speed limit may exist about 1/10th the speed of light at which time the molecular structure of matter could begin to disintegrate as could any spacecraft traveling at that speed or greater in space.  Of course such a limit is still unknown to science and future high-speed craft will need to be tested very extensively to see if any such speed limits exist........" (underlines added)

 

And I agree there will be a number of other considerations and a practical speed limit probably much less than .1C as you suggest.  A leading magnetically charged shield(s) might divert charged particles and nuclei. Of course this too may not be effective at a speed of .1C, and I would expect less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pantheo I checked Wikipedia on that too... my issue is with the word "claim". I dimly remember that back in the cold fusion heyday several groups around the world claimed to have replicated that fusion thing too, and we know how it eventually ended up.

 

I'd have to dig around for the recent news from Sagittarius A observations for that other thing; to be clear, I'm not 100 % positive that .1 c has been reached but the speeds observed were definitely mindblowing. Maybe I'll look for it later. smile.png

 

(Edit: Checked that and found that my memory was quite wrong on that; orbital speeds close to S A* are damn high of course but nowhere near .1 c. Oh well... shit happens smile.png

 

 

Somewhere I read that the innermost torus of black holes might reach great speeds but this is mostly dust with little or no large matter, which I believe was concluded in the article. I too will keep my eyes peeled for any source claiming speeds (relative to a nearby reference frame) of large, solid matter (or stars) exceeding .1C. If so I will post the link in this section. smile.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.