Topic: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration  (Read 34960 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline KBF-Kapact

  • No matter how much Paramount and Viacom abuse and neglect and generally make a bloody mess of Trek, and despite the fact that they seem to have intentionally stuck a knife in it's belly, technically they still own it.
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 324
  • Gender: Male
  • Old enough to know better, but I just don't give a
    • What is Fantasy Trek?
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #40 on: October 18, 2005, 09:12:49 am »
Why?

What makes science theory become reality is funding.  No Bucks = No Buck Rogers, and spending money on Star Trek esque  fantasy should be left to Star Trek esque SF writers...  Scientists should stick with science...


So let's keep all our money here on Earth? Dump the space program for example? Sure.... and if we had always thought that way, the moon would have a red flag on it, and people in the gulf coast wouldn't have known they were about to have a hurricane turn their home into shredded wheat. This guy working at his computer isn't keeping someone else from looking to solve the Bird flu problem.
KBF-Kapact
IKS Ab'Qaff
"Surrender or be des-"

{sound of explosion}
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com/
http://houseabukoff.blogspot.com
http://kapactsrant.blogspot.com/
http://startrekenterprisevirtualseasons.blogspot.com/

Klingon Black Fleet
"...laughing, undefeated..."


Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #41 on: October 19, 2005, 05:10:34 pm »
Why?

What makes science theory become reality is funding.  No Bucks = No Buck Rogers, and spending money on Star Trek esque  fantasy should be left to Star Trek esque SF writers...  Scientists should stick with science...


So let's keep all our money here on Earth? Dump the space program for example? Sure.... and if we had always thought that way, the moon would have a red flag on it, and people in the gulf coast wouldn't have known they were about to have a hurricane turn their home into shredded wheat. This guy working at his computer isn't keeping someone else from looking to solve the Bird flu problem.

I'm all for space exploration, but I don't think that Governments take the need for funding seriously enough...  It was because of funding that the USA got to the moon first, although Russia did have a lot of firsts to boast of as well.  First man in space, first woman in space, first orbital space station (Salyut), first EVA...  When Jim Lovell peformed the first LOI, that turned the tables in terms of lunar exploration, but NASA took a hell of a gamble with this...  Neil Armstrong landing on the moon obviously was the nail in the coffin, and the Russians gave up after that, because there was no point in paying exhorbitant amounts of money to come second in a race that was over... 

Hell, most people are so disinterested in Space Exploration that they couldn't even tell you anything about the later missions without looking up the NET.  Skylab was another magnificent achievement that hardly anyone knows anything about now...  Before this, we never really had any reasonable data on the Sun...  Most people operate under misconceptions that the first words said on the moon were "tranquility base here the eagle has landed."  In actual fact they were "Engine Arm Off, Command Override off, 413 (to tell the AGS that the LEM was grounded) is in."

I don't much care wether the flags planted on the moon are red with a gold sickle and stars or red white and blue stripes.  As long as someone is exploring space, I'm all for it and all power to them...

What I meant by that remark was that I see no profit or reason to waste money trying to break the laws of physics...  There's real science to be investigated, but most people are far more interested in phasers and beam transporters and warp fields than they are in Pete Conrads pin point landing 200 yards from Surveyor 3 in Apollo 12...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2785
  • Gender: Male
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #42 on: October 19, 2005, 07:53:37 pm »
as i'm aware most laws of physics aren't really laws, they are still theories that try to explain somthing that happens in nature to the best of human understanding.  In fact the only real law in physics is the law of conservation of energy, the rest are theories (at least i'm pretty sure of this).  Theories which with more understanding will either be proven to be closer to the what happens in nature, correct to match what happens in nature, or be debunked all together.  so your idea on breaking laws of physics... well you can't break somthing that isn't really a law, just a theory... if you do you have just disproved said theory.  Now isn't that what good science is all about, proving/disproving theories?  could have sworn it was....
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #43 on: October 19, 2005, 08:13:33 pm »
indeed. in fact these theories are extensions of the work done by the theorists who made the theories he discussed. they are using the tools developed by einstein and the others. Alcubierre, Van den Broek and Krasnikov are using the very tools given to them by those luminaries those developers of what has become the "orthodoxy" of science today.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2005, 09:19:25 pm by Stormbringer »

Offline KBF-Kapact

  • No matter how much Paramount and Viacom abuse and neglect and generally make a bloody mess of Trek, and despite the fact that they seem to have intentionally stuck a knife in it's belly, technically they still own it.
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 324
  • Gender: Male
  • Old enough to know better, but I just don't give a
    • What is Fantasy Trek?
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #44 on: October 19, 2005, 09:22:10 pm »
Why?

What makes science theory become reality is funding.  No Bucks = No Buck Rogers, and spending money on Star Trek esque  fantasy should be left to Star Trek esque SF writers...  Scientists should stick with science...


So let's keep all our money here on Earth? Dump the space program for example? Sure.... and if we had always thought that way, the moon would have a red flag on it, and people in the gulf coast wouldn't have known they were about to have a hurricane turn their home into shredded wheat. This guy working at his computer isn't keeping someone else from looking to solve the Bird flu problem.

I'm all for space exploration, but I don't think that Governments take the need for funding seriously enough...  It was because of funding that the USA got to the moon first, although Russia did have a lot of firsts to boast of as well.  First man in space, first woman in space, first orbital space station (Salyut), first EVA...  When Jim Lovell peformed the first LOI, that turned the tables in terms of lunar exploration, but NASA took a hell of a gamble with this...  Neil Armstrong landing on the moon obviously was the nail in the coffin, and the Russians gave up after that, because there was no point in paying exhorbitant amounts of money to come second in a race that was over... 

Hell, most people are so disinterested in Space Exploration that they couldn't even tell you anything about the later missions without looking up the NET.  Skylab was another magnificent achievement that hardly anyone knows anything about now...  Before this, we never really had any reasonable data on the Sun...  Most people operate under misconceptions that the first words said on the moon were "tranquility base here the eagle has landed."  In actual fact they were "Engine Arm Off, Command Override off, 413 (to tell the AGS that the LEM was grounded) is in."

I don't much care wether the flags planted on the moon are red with a gold sickle and stars or red white and blue stripes.  As long as someone is exploring space, I'm all for it and all power to them...

What I meant by that remark was that I see no profit or reason to waste money trying to break the laws of physics...  There's real science to be investigated, but most people are far more interested in phasers and beam transporters and warp fields than they are in Pete Conrads pin point landing 200 yards from Surveyor 3 in Apollo 12...


You've got a point, and you obviously know your subject. I just think, as I said, that someone trying to push the envelope (obviously just my opinion of what he's doing. You're entitled to your own) a bit and trying to do something that someone else thinks is impossible is a good thing. Oh sure, he could be working on more immediate concerns, but I don't think that he's slowing progress too much. As for which flag sits on the moon, well, a flag is a piece of cloth. But I tend to think that the Soviets would have been more apt to militarize the whole thing. I mean, we put our own flag there, but at the same time, would the Soviets had said "We come in peace for all mankind"? Anyway, that whole thing is academic. Until I get that flux capacitor perfected, noone can go back and change anything anyway... ;D


You do know your subject pretty well, as I said.
KBF-Kapact
IKS Ab'Qaff
"Surrender or be des-"

{sound of explosion}
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com/
http://houseabukoff.blogspot.com
http://kapactsrant.blogspot.com/
http://startrekenterprisevirtualseasons.blogspot.com/

Klingon Black Fleet
"...laughing, undefeated..."


Offline Commander Maxillius

  • You did NOT just shoot that green sh-t at me?!?
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2299
  • Gender: Female
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #45 on: October 19, 2005, 10:09:34 pm »
Microwave ovens and computer technology are byproducts of the space race.

Set your sights on a lofty goal, and the things, the means you devise to get there someone will use them to do something else, like cook food and write better looking papers.


I'd love to see the tech cast-offs of the race to lightspeed!
I was never here, you were never here, this conversation never took place, and you most certainly did not see me.

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #46 on: October 19, 2005, 10:58:49 pm »
Why?


What makes science theory become reality is funding.  No Bucks = No Buck Rogers, and spending money on Star Trek esque  fantasy should be left to Star Trek esque SF writers...  Scientists should stick with science...



So let's keep all our money here on Earth? Dump the space program for example? Sure.... and if we had always thought that way, the moon would have a red flag on it, and people in the gulf coast wouldn't have known they were about to have a hurricane turn their home into shredded wheat. This guy working at his computer isn't keeping someone else from looking to solve the Bird flu problem.


I'm all for space exploration, but I don't think that Governments take the need for funding seriously enough...  It was because of funding that the USA got to the moon first, although Russia did have a lot of firsts to boast of as well.  First man in space, first woman in space, first orbital space station (Salyut), first EVA...  When Jim Lovell peformed the first LOI, that turned the tables in terms of lunar exploration, but NASA took a hell of a gamble with this...  Neil Armstrong landing on the moon obviously was the nail in the coffin, and the Russians gave up after that, because there was no point in paying exhorbitant amounts of money to come second in a race that was over... 

Hell, most people are so disinterested in Space Exploration that they couldn't even tell you anything about the later missions without looking up the NET.  Skylab was another magnificent achievement that hardly anyone knows anything about now...  Before this, we never really had any reasonable data on the Sun...  Most people operate under misconceptions that the first words said on the moon were "tranquility base here the eagle has landed."  In actual fact they were "Engine Arm Off, Command Override off, 413 (to tell the AGS that the LEM was grounded) is in."

I don't much care wether the flags planted on the moon are red with a gold sickle and stars or red white and blue stripes.  As long as someone is exploring space, I'm all for it and all power to them...

What I meant by that remark was that I see no profit or reason to waste money trying to break the laws of physics...  There's real science to be investigated, but most people are far more interested in phasers and beam transporters and warp fields than they are in Pete Conrads pin point landing 200 yards from Surveyor 3 in Apollo 12...



You've got a point, and you obviously know your subject. I just think, as I said, that someone trying to push the envelope (obviously just my opinion of what he's doing. You're entitled to your own) a bit and trying to do something that someone else thinks is impossible is a good thing. Oh sure, he could be working on more immediate concerns, but I don't think that he's slowing progress too much. As for which flag sits on the moon, well, a flag is a piece of cloth. But I tend to think that the Soviets would have been more apt to militarize the whole thing. I mean, we put our own flag there, but at the same time, would the Soviets had said "We come in peace for all mankind"? Anyway, that whole thing is academic. Until I get that flux capacitor perfected, noone can go back and change anything anyway... ;D


You do know your subject pretty well, as I said.


HaHa..  If you get the old flux capacitor working, you've got to make sure you find a stylish motor car to put it in...  ;)

I've been fascinated with Apollo since I was four years old...  I think it's the most amazing thing mankind has done since discovering fire!  I've poured over all the mission transcripts, scoured the NET for photo, audio and video footage and technical schematics of the spacecraft and computers...  I've got this great simulator http://www.eaglelander3d.com of the LEM which is really just fantastic, and flght tested for realism by Gene Cernan, CDR Apollo 17!!!   Passing through certain altitudes triggers recordings of the Commander and Lunar Module pilot to say the words they said at the time, so you really get a feel from the landing through their eyes.  As you land the intrepid on the Ocean of Storms, Alan Bean actually shouts the read outs on the instrument pannels to you, and his "There it (the surveyor probe) is!  Oh My God! Right down the Middle of the Road!"

Oddly enough, and this is something that a lot of people are surprised at, one of the main reasons the USA got there first was that in the end they were more willing to take risks than the Russians. Apollo 8 was only the second manned test flight of the Saturn V and they immediately went for Lunar Orbit.  The British had a huge radio dish at the time, I think the only one available to the Russians capable of tracking an object to the moon, and used to press the Russians on when they were going to send a man up there.  "When we can be 100% sure we'll get him back" was the response. In fairness too, the Russians were beset by several mishaps that seem pretty much to have been down to bad luck, and refusal to listen to expert advice on the part of the people in charge.  No surprises there...

I do agree with the idea of pushing the envelope, but I guess I'm a doubting Thomas when it comes to ideas like faster than light travel and time travel.  I do think the thread about terraforming Mars is interesting though.  Although it would be a technological hurdle and a half, I don't see any physical laws against that one...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #47 on: October 19, 2005, 11:16:10 pm »
FTL is apparently forbidden for massive (well positive mass) objects. However, there is no speed limit on space time itself moving. therefore (all things being relative ;) ) the same effect as FTL travel is possible. i do not believe that the Causality Ordering Postulate is any more real than Einstein's Cosmological constant was.  it is a fudge factor. like Einstein's greatest blunder it too will be discarded. 

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #48 on: October 19, 2005, 11:41:36 pm »
FTL is apparently forbidden for massive (well positive mass) objects. However, there is no speed limit on space time itself moving. therefore (all things being relative ;) ) the same effect as FTL travel is possible. i do not believe that the Causality Ordering Postulate is any more real than Einstein's Cosmological constant was.  it is a fudge factor. like Einstein's greatest blunder it too will be discarded. 

Actually, if you do a Google search on type Ia Supernovae, you'll see his cosmological constant might not have been a blunder after all... 

As for moving space time, once science actually defines what spacetime is, then I'll decide whether I believe it can be moved or not... 


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #49 on: October 20, 2005, 12:08:19 am »
We already know it can be. frame dragging is real and can not only be found in cosmic proportions but in the laboratory. It is already well established in relativity from time dialation and verfied in atomic clock experiments to such things as the lorentz contraction which i do not recall if it was observationally verified yet except in theory and accelerator experiment.

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #50 on: October 20, 2005, 12:10:59 am »
We already know it can be. frame dragging is real and can not only be found in cosmic proportions but in the laboratory. It is already well established in relativity from time dialation and verfied in atomic clock experiments to such things as the lorentz contraction which i do not recall if it was observationally verified yet except in theory and accelerator experiment.

Well, I won't be holding my breath waiting for them to break out the gravtion emitters for a trip to Proxima Centauri...  Besides, under the experiment above, the cosmic speed limit holds (no pun intended) fast...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #51 on: October 20, 2005, 12:13:07 am »
We already know it can be. frame dragging is real and can not only be found in cosmic proportions but in the laboratory. It is already well established in relativity from time dialation and verfied in atomic clock experiments to such things as the lorentz contraction which i do not recall if it was observationally verified yet except in theory and accelerator experiment.

Well, I won't be holding my breath waiting for them to break out the gravtion emitters for a trip to Proxima Centauri...  Besides, under the experiment above, the cosmic speed limit holds (no pun intended) fast...

that is true however my point was to prove the validity of the concept of manipulating/moving the space time frame which you expressed doubt of.

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #52 on: October 20, 2005, 12:15:50 am »
FTL is apparently forbidden for massive (well positive mass) objects. However, there is no speed limit on space time itself moving. therefore (all things being relative ;) ) the same effect as FTL travel is possible. i do not believe that the Causality Ordering Postulate is any more real than Einstein's Cosmological constant was.  it is a fudge factor. like Einstein's greatest blunder it too will be discarded. 

Actually, if you do a Google search on type Ia Supernovae, you'll see his cosmological constant might not have been a blunder after all... 

As for moving space time, once science actually defines what spacetime is, then I'll decide whether I believe it can be moved or not... 

i have seen articles on it. but the cosmological constant is only one (and not necessarily the best or correct) explanation for what is observed there.

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #53 on: October 20, 2005, 12:17:21 am »
We already know it can be. frame dragging is real and can not only be found in cosmic proportions but in the laboratory. It is already well established in relativity from time dialation and verfied in atomic clock experiments to such things as the lorentz contraction which i do not recall if it was observationally verified yet except in theory and accelerator experiment.

Well, I won't be holding my breath waiting for them to break out the gravtion emitters for a trip to Proxima Centauri...  Besides, under the experiment above, the cosmic speed limit holds (no pun intended) fast...

that is true however my point was to prove the validity of the concept of manipulating/moving the space time frame which you expressed doubt of.

I don't doubt that it can be done, and is done, in nature, the Earth is doing it right now, and indeed so are our own bodies on a very tiny scale but I don't think this helps much with faster than light travel, but this is more a case of moving space by warping spacetime, rather than relocating it... 


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #54 on: October 20, 2005, 12:20:37 am »
FTL is apparently forbidden for massive (well positive mass) objects. However, there is no speed limit on space time itself moving. therefore (all things being relative ;) ) the same effect as FTL travel is possible. i do not believe that the Causality Ordering Postulate is any more real than Einstein's Cosmological constant was.  it is a fudge factor. like Einstein's greatest blunder it too will be discarded. 

Actually, if you do a Google search on type Ia Supernovae, you'll see his cosmological constant might not have been a blunder after all... 

As for moving space time, once science actually defines what spacetime is, then I'll decide whether I believe it can be moved or not... 

i have seen articles on it. but the cosmological constant is only one (and not necessarily the best or correct) explanation for what is observed there.

I concur, but either way it's a very interesting line of research.  I don't really like the idea of a Universe with no big crunch, since it will inevitably die of old age as the entropy increases and not be regenerated, but the data is pretty hard to argue with...  Of course, I haven't felt 100% convinced that there isn't some kind of error in observation in this and that we might be looking at an incomplete picture...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #55 on: October 20, 2005, 12:22:00 am »
but it can. that's what the metrics in the article are about. simply put manipulating space itself so that the traveller surfs along with the space in front contracting and the space in back expanding. if it is possible to grab space, and it is, then it is possible to do this. when the traveller is at rest in a quasi detatched bubble of space time the only thing moving faster than light is the expansion which as you know large parts of our universe are unobservable for that very reason.

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #56 on: October 20, 2005, 12:23:29 am »
FTL is apparently forbidden for massive (well positive mass) objects. However, there is no speed limit on space time itself moving. therefore (all things being relative ;) ) the same effect as FTL travel is possible. i do not believe that the Causality Ordering Postulate is any more real than Einstein's Cosmological constant was.  it is a fudge factor. like Einstein's greatest blunder it too will be discarded. 

Actually, if you do a Google search on type Ia Supernovae, you'll see his cosmological constant might not have been a blunder after all... 

As for moving space time, once science actually defines what spacetime is, then I'll decide whether I believe it can be moved or not... 

i have seen articles on it. but the cosmological constant is only one (and not necessarily the best or correct) explanation for what is observed there.

I concur, but either way it's a very interesting line of research.  I don't really like the idea of a Universe with no big crunch, since it will inevitably die of old age as the entropy increases and not be regenerated, but the data is pretty hard to argue with...  Of course, I haven't felt 100% convinced that there isn't some kind of error in observation in this and that we might be looking at an incomplete picture...

Not necessarily in M theory it is quite possible that another creation event will occur.

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #57 on: October 20, 2005, 12:25:48 am »
FTL is apparently forbidden for massive (well positive mass) objects. However, there is no speed limit on space time itself moving. therefore (all things being relative ;) ) the same effect as FTL travel is possible. i do not believe that the Causality Ordering Postulate is any more real than Einstein's Cosmological constant was.  it is a fudge factor. like Einstein's greatest blunder it too will be discarded. 

Actually, if you do a Google search on type Ia Supernovae, you'll see his cosmological constant might not have been a blunder after all... 

As for moving space time, once science actually defines what spacetime is, then I'll decide whether I believe it can be moved or not... 

i have seen articles on it. but the cosmological constant is only one (and not necessarily the best or correct) explanation for what is observed there.

I concur, but either way it's a very interesting line of research.  I don't really like the idea of a Universe with no big crunch, since it will inevitably die of old age as the entropy increases and not be regenerated, but the data is pretty hard to argue with...  Of course, I haven't felt 100% convinced that there isn't some kind of error in observation in this and that we might be looking at an incomplete picture...

Not necessarily in M theory it is quite possible that another creation event will occur.

My derision for M-Theory is for another thread... ;)


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #58 on: October 20, 2005, 12:27:05 am »
Well hell! one of them thar theories has to be true some time. ;)

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
Re: Van Den Broek's alcubierre metric variant warp space configuration
« Reply #59 on: October 20, 2005, 12:30:20 am »
but it can. that's what the metrics in the article are about. simply put manipulating space itself so that the traveller surfs along with the space in front contracting and the space in back expanding. if it is possible to grab space, and it is, then it is possible to do this. when the traveller is at rest in a quasi detatched bubble of space time the only thing moving faster than light is the expansion which as you know large parts of our universe are unobservable for that very reason.

Actually, the expansion only moves faster than light from the point of view of someone (hypothetically) who is standing observing from outside spacetime...  In the spacetime continuum, this paradox is resolved by the mallebility of time, because no particle is moving faster than c with reference to any other particle, and outside the Spacetime continuum, if there is an outside, relativity does not hold sway...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!