Warp Drive-how feasible?

[Radrook]

Unless the companies backing those first few end up getting a payoff from the exploitation of resources that makes the gold shipped back to Europe from the New World look like pocket change, which is very possible.

True, if the profit is high enough then life suddenly becomes expendable.

 

[Radrook]

I hope you read the first article I gave.

Because the situation you are describing would be unlikely in reality. There's a lot of misconceptions flying around FTL theories from outdated/misleading/incomplete info. Newer theories suggests the matter is much much simpler.

Simpler in what specific way?

 

[timewerx]

Warp drive in the Star Trek sense simply will not happen. It was and is a clumsy way to ignore relativity and travel faster than light speed.

There may be other ways. Those ways may be limited to specific places or may be general. We simply won't be able to even make decent guesses until we actually go into space in a serious way and try. I can guarantee some early trials will be fatal.

Lookup "ergosphere", "frame-dragging, and "Lense-Thirring Effect". Ironically the last one have Einstein's involvement in it.

There are ways to exceed the speed of light without violating Einstein's Relativity, and we have indirect evidences of FTL speeds being reached by matter in nature at the massive black holes in the center of galaxies.

 

[timewerx]

There are always individuals with suicidal tendencies who are willing to blindly go where nobody has gone before.

BTW
I have a feeling that the baby steps which we are fearfully willing to take in personal space exploration will keep us in our solar system for maybe the next thousand years or beyond. Especially if the first brave souls wind up getting spaghettified, or unceremoniously disintegrated in the initial process.

Spaghettification - Wikipedia

Spaghettification only occurs when you're near a point source of a very strong gravity field like a black hole.

If the ship takes advantage of "frame-dragging" to cruise at FTL speed, the dangerous tidal forces would only manifest outside the ship where space-time is "separating in layers" as a sea vessel produces a visible wake when traveling through the water. It would pose no danger to the ship itself....if the ship is sensibly designed with extremely minimalist shapes.

Inside the ship where everything is traveling at the same speed, the forces would be nil as would be predicted by General Relativity.

 

[Radrook]

Spaghettification only occurs when you're near a point source of a very strong gravity field like a black hole.

If the ship takes advantage of "frame-dragging" to cruise at FTL speed, the dangerous tidal forces would only manifest outside the ship where space-time is "separating in layers" as a sea vessel produces a visible wake when traveling through the water. It would pose no danger to the ship itself....if the ship is sensibly designed with extremely minimalist shapes.

Inside the ship where everything is traveling at the same speed, the forces would be nil as would be predicted by General Relativity.

Thanks for the interesting info:

True, spaghettification is due to the strong gravity effect difference between one part of the body and the other. I referred to it when speaking of general space exploration and not in relation to warping space in order to make what might appear to be supraluminal velocity possible. Yes, I am aware that the ship using warp would theoretically be encapsulated and protected from any phenomena outside the induced warp bubble.

About Frame dragging:
General Relativistic Frame Dragging

Please explain how this makes FTL travel possible. Thanks!

 

[timewerx]

About Frame dragging:
General Relativistic Frame Dragging

Please explain how this makes FTL travel possible. Thanks!

It's strange at first but apparently, recent discoveries in astronomy may suggest the speed of light isn't the same in all places in the Universe at least from a stationary observer (although speed of light is still always constant in its local space-time)

I hope this would help, I also included Relativistic mass to enhance the effect simply by first accelerating to near the speed of light:

 

[timewerx]

Simpler in what specific way?

Strathos was talking about traveling back in time if the speed of light is exceeded.

Many scientists believe it and it has logical basis.

However, the more recently solidified Frame-Dragging principle due to recent discoveries in astronomy, it would seem it would be impossible for a non-quantum entity (anything bigger than subatomic particles) to exceed the speed of light in its local space-time.

Impossible because the space-time would break down in "layers" around the object trying to exceed the speed of light in a process described in Frame-Dragging.

Fortunately, it would allow FTL speeds without drama and in a positive time dilation. Much simpler than the dilemma of actually going FTL in local space-time.

I think it's a fail-safe in nature due to the effects of GR. If an appreciable mass (like a galaxy) was actually allowed to reach speed of light flat (or approach it really close), it could destroy a large sector of the Universe due to the incredible mass/gravity it will create due to relativity.

 

[Radrook]

It's strange at first but apparently, recent discoveries in astronomy may suggest the speed of light isn't the same in all places in the Universe.

I hope this would help, I also included Relativistic mass to enhance the effect simply by first accelerating to near the speed of light:
View attachment 189658

So as the ship increases in speed it increases in mass and when it reaches a certain mass it allows for faster than light velocity because of the great gravitational force that it produces. That is what the diagram is saying-correct?

 

[timewerx]

So as the ship increases in speed it increases in mass and when it reaches a certain mass it allows for faster than light velocity because of the great gravitational force that it produces. That is what the diagram is saying-correct?

Yes because a moving object with strong gravitation can pull or drag its local space-time with it according to Frame-Dragging.

Remember the absolute speed limit of light only exists in the local space-time....If the local space time is moving fast enough, then the light within it traveling in the same direction would appear moving faster than light if seen by an observer outside of the moving space time.

It's not simply an illusion since the light or the ship traveling within it will reach its destination sooner than light traveling in stationary space-time.

The heavier the ship the better or....it could also be done by a massive fleet of ships flying in very tight formation most definitely piloted by AI.

 

[Radrook]

Yes because a moving object with strong gravitation can pull or drag its local space-time with it according to Frame-Dragging.

Remember the absolute speed limit of light only exists in the local space-time....If the local space time is moving fast enough, then the light within it traveling in the same direction would appear moving faster than light if seen by an observer outside of the moving space time.

It's not simply an illusion since the light or the ship traveling within it will reach its destination sooner than light traveling in stationary space-time.

The heavier the ship the better or....it could also be done by a massive fleet of ships flying in very tight formation most definitely piloted by AI.

So the problem of warping seems to be easily solved by simply reaching a necessary speed. What percentage of light speed is needed for that hypothetical warping top occur and what propulsion energy is involved? I have continually read about the energy needed to reach certain velocities as being too high to be feasible. Correct?

 

[Radrook]

Yes because a moving object with strong gravitation can pull or drag its local space-time with it according to Frame-Dragging.

Remember the absolute speed limit of light only exists in the local space-time....If the local space time is moving fast enough, then the light within it traveling in the same direction would appear moving faster than light if seen by an observer outside of the moving space time.

It's not simply an illusion since the light or the ship traveling within it will reach its destination sooner than light traveling in stationary space-time.

The heavier the ship the better or....it could also be done by a massive fleet of ships flying in very tight formation most definitely piloted by AI.

So the problem of warping seems to be easily solved by simply reaching a necessary speed. What percentage of light speed is needed for that hypothetical warping top occur and what propulsion energy is involved? I have continually read about the energy needed to reach certain velocities as being too high to be feasible. Correct?

BTW
How this got to be a double post is beyond me since I only clicked once.

 

[timewerx]

So the problem of warping seems to be easily solved by simply reaching a necessary speed. What percentage of light speed is needed for that hypothetical warping top occur and what propulsion energy is involved? I have continually read about the energy needed to reach certain velocities as being too high to be feasible. Correct?

BTW
How this got to be a double post is beyond me since I only clicked once.

If you are working with negative entropy, it is possible to achieve very high energy exchange rates using very little amount of fuel energy. It solves the problem of fulfilling the energy requirements of FTL speeds.

The % speed of light required for significant Frame Dragging depends on the mass/density of the ship. I haven't done the precise calculations yet but examples in nature clearly favor heavier/more massive objects. A heavier/more dense ship means you'll reach sufficient gravitational strength at a smaller fraction of the speed of light....Consequently, a heavier ship will also accelerate faster at FTL speeds using less energy-per-unit mass.

You don't necessarily have to build one massive ship. You can have a very large number of smaller ships flying in extremely close formation and it would produce the same effect.

This is all cutting edge science required. Negative entropy is only recently seriously considered in mainstream science. The concept also rules out any Newtonian-type propulsion system which is the main concern of the advanced propulsion system I'm working on.

Of course, if we are able to invent something that can generate strong artificial gravity without involving mass and speed, then we won't be needing a very large ship. The size wouldn't matter in such scenario.

 

[Radrook]

If you are working with negative entropy, it is possible to achieve very high energy exchange rates using very little amount of fuel energy. It solves the problem of fulfilling the energy requirements of FTL speeds.

The % speed of light required for significant Frame Dragging depends on the mass/density of the ship. I haven't done the precise calculations yet but examples in nature clearly favor heavier/more massive objects. A heavier/more dense ship means you'll reach sufficient gravitational strength at a smaller fraction of the speed of light....Consequently, a heavier ship will also accelerate faster at FTL speeds using less energy-per-unit mass.

You don't necessarily have to build one massive ship. You can have a very large number of smaller ships flying in extremely close formation and it would produce the same effect.

This is all cutting edge science required. Negative entropy is only recently seriously considered in mainstream science. The concept also rules out any Newtonian-type propulsion system which is the main concern of the advanced propulsion system I'm working on.

Of course, if we are able to invent something that can generate strong artificial gravity without involving mass and speed, then we won't be needing a very large ship. The size wouldn't matter in such scenario.

So how does the decrease in entropy, or a tendency towards disorganization increase the speed of a ship? Where exactly is this entropy located relative to that speed? What exactly is undergoing lack of disorganization? The fuel? Isn't entropy or disorganization an inevitable part of the ship's propulsion system? Thanks for the explanation.
What is negative entropy?

 

[timewerx]

So how does the decrease in entropy, or a tendency towards disorganization increase the speed of a ship? Where exactly is this entropy located relative to that speed? What exactly is undergoing lack of disorganization? The fuel? Isn't entropy or disorganization an inevitable part of the ship's propulsion system? Thanks for the explanation.
What is negative entropy?

Its relation to the propulsion system remains under scrutiny.

Negative entropy is mostly utilized to save you from carrying incredible amounts of fuel for interstellar flight.

If using conventional means of propulsion and energy like a matter-antimatter rocket, would require a fuel fraction of over 90% to reach a speed close to the speed of light. That means most of the fuel would occupy the interior of the ship, not to mention, you'll be carrying an extremely dangerous cargo of antimatter onboard.

If the energy systems took advantage of negative entropy, you can either harness the energy from the quantum fluctuations of space or solar/stellar heat in a far more efficient manner than using solar cells.

Ambient energy is chaotic (disorderly) by increasing order that chaotic energy can be directed into a unified force and that force can be harnessed into usable energy. That is the point of negative entropy and with such system, you don't really have to carry a large amount of fuel onboard. A small amount of nuclear fuel for auxiliary energy and start-stop operations would suffice.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

...the speed of light isn't the same in all places in the Universe at least from a stationary observer...

Stationary relative to what?

 

[Radrook]

Stationary relative to what?

Good point since everything is indeed in motion.

 

[timewerx]

Good point since everything is indeed in motion.

It is meant to simplify solving problems related to velocities and relativity

Frame of reference - Wikipedia
Special relativity - Wikipedia

 

[Radrook]

It is meant to simplify solving problems related to velocities and relativity

Frame of reference - Wikipedia
Special relativity - Wikipedia

Yes, I understand that motions are relative to other reference points. Yet there is nothing in the universe that can be described as truly stationary in the absolute sense of the word is there? Those reference points are themselves in motion. So of course we use the term stationary not in the literal sense but in a hypothetical sort of way as you just explained. The galaxy Andromeda seems to be approaching us as we remain stationary but from the vantage point of Andromeda we are approaching it as it remains stationary.

The Andromeda Galaxy is approaching the Milky Way at about 110 kilometres per second (68 mi/s).[95] It has been measured approaching relative to our Sun at around 300 kilometres per second (190 mi/s)[1] as the Sun orbits around the center of our galaxy at a speed of approximately 225 kilometres per second (140 mi/s). This makes the Andromeda Galaxy one of about 100 observable blueshifted galaxies.[96] Andromeda Galaxy's tangential or side-ways velocity with respect to the Milky Way is relatively much smaller than the approaching velocity and therefore it is expected to directly collide with the Milky Way in about 4 billion years.
Andromeda Galaxy - Wikipedia

 

[timewerx]

Yes, I understand that motions are relative to other reference points. Yet there is nothing in the universe that can be described as truly stationary in the absolute sense of the word is there? Those reference points are themselves in motion. So of course we use the term stationary not in the literal sense but in a hypothetical sort of way as you just explained. The galaxy Andromeda seems to be approaching us as we remain stationary but from the vantage point of Andromeda we are approaching it as it remains stationary.

Yup.

Simply speaking, "stationary" means you are not in motion against a specified frame of reference. That frame of reference could be your house or the street corner.

In reality, it's impossible to find an absolute zero motion reference.

Fortunately, Special or General or Maxwell Relativity can work off any frame of reference and have clearly defined boundaries on being stationary or moving against a specified frame of reference which makes things a little bit simpler.

 

[Radrook]

Yup.

Simply speaking, "stationary" means you are not in motion against a specified frame of reference. That frame of reference could be your house or the street corner.

In reality, it's impossible to find an absolute zero motion reference.

Fortunately, Special or General or Maxwell Relativity can work off any frame of reference and have clearly defined boundaries on being stationary or moving against a specified frame of reference which makes things a little bit simpler.

Which brings up the question concerning the warping of space and it's carrying a ship via expansion from behind and contraction from ahead. True, space itself isn't restricted by the 186,000 miles per second barrier and can thus expand at far greater velocities. So I find the description of this mode of travel as being traveling without moving non-applicable. Obviously there is movement involved and the movement is of space itself. After all, we don't call riding an ocean wave as travelling without moving-do we? The wave itself is obviously in motion and its carrying us along doesn't mean that we are stationary in relation to our surroundings. We are definitely in motion. Correct?