An explanation of the Alcubierre-White Warp Drive | AsteronX



A simple explanation of how a real warp drive could work | AsteronX In this video we discuss how warp drives work. Alcubierre Drive, NASA’s Warp Drive …

22 Comments

  1. Since you seem to have read all the work on this I have a question to ask which I haven't found anywhere that has the answer to for us laymen besides maybe the papers that I probably can't understand…

    I'm trying to figure out energy requirements for a warp drive given variable speed and distance traveled. I would assume that the longer you have it on the more energy it takes, and the faster you go the more energy it takes, but the only energy requirements I have found is a 10c 8ly trip to be around 68 exajoules… Is this requirement the same for if I traveled a 1c 8ly trip? or a 10c 1ly trip? etc. I basically need to know the energy requirements from 0 to 100,000 in both c and ly, but I don't know where to find this…

    For reference to what I'm doing, I'm trying to design a ship for sci-fi universe that is similar to star trek but stays as close to reality as I think necessary so I need a baseline from which to work around. Obviously a major part of that is figuring out energy requirements and fuel capacity.

  2. I think the government rather see every piece of technology used to make 'em better weapons and bombs or to help 'em find somekind of fucking god that doesn't exist. I don't think that the government of today want scientists make something that benefits mankind. Only something to destroy the planet or make 'em more money.

  3. heres a question ??? … Did ''John Hutchison '' the Canadian that was able to Pick up bouling balls and other things and even join metal to wood and plastics together and even transport them to other places close to his house with his equipment .. DO just what ur talking about ? HIS equipment was some kind of Sound equiment that would OSCILATE at certain frequencies wich would Cause strange things to happen ..MAYBE HE DID EXACTLY WHAT THE WARP DRIVE IS SUPPOSED TO DO EXCEPT he did not find the way to Control what he did ..WHAT IF ???

  4. There's simply too many technical hurdles – energy requirement being the main one. Negative mass on paper looks quite promising, but so far we haven't even had hints that it exists in the real world. It's no good having a Warp Drive that crosses the Universe in a week if you have to convert all the matter in the Universe into energy to do it. Other potential issues – and even Alcubierre himself acknowledges them – are that to travel 200 light years today, someone might have to have started warping space for you 200 years ago; or that you could have to have first physically travel there slower-than-light to set up the equipment needed; or that the particles picked up by the bow-wave could potentially destroy where you are going. All depends on which solution to Einstein Field Equations is actually correct – the Alcubierre solution is just one of many candidates.

  5. What we can achieve is direct nuclear fusion propulsion, either by inertial ignition or another method. I am not mentioning using '' possible '' controlled nuclear fusion to heat a propellant, but rather using it for direct propulsion.

    1 kg of deuterium – helium-3 has as much gross energy as 353 trillion joules if we consider 24% losses in x-ray and neutron fusion so that still gives 76% of the charged particles of gross energy if we consider a gain of 20 for each fusion and direct exhaust losses we could assume that the direct nuclear fusion propulsion of deuterium helium-3 can conservatively deliver 63 trillion joules per KG, so with that kind of propulsion we would have a fuel 2.65 million times. more energetic than the chemical fuels they use in today's rockets considering an efficiency of 24 million joules per KG.

    I think within our real world, this is the best we can achieve, as far as deuterium is concerned, and helium-3 can be found in infinite quantity for human terms only on the planet Uranus. And at least the fusion of deuterium – helium-3 is possible artificially, although it requires many advances.

    With all this energy density per KG, humans could build a ship capable of reaching a fraction of the speed of light and carry thousands of tons of payload to another star at the cost of a few thousand tons of fusion fuel. Here I am not even thinking of a high efficiency engine, just conservative efficiency, since it would be using fusion products to produce exhaust directly, this is still much more efficient than a thermonuclear weapons-powered Orion. I think here of an engine capable of producing a plasma with an energy density of hundreds of KW / h for each KG for over 1 year and 3 months.
    The fusion system in the case the engine or reactor as you prefer would modestly weigh 4 thousand tons Already the fuel 5000 tons 50% deuterium 50% helium-3.
    Systems that use fictitious antimatter propulsion, nuclear pulses, or '' possible '' direct nuclear fusion are still tied to the rocket equation, but once you have a fuel with an energy density millions of times the energy density of chemical fuels the rocket equation becomes virtually irrelevant, even because a spacecraft with a modest tank loaded with 10 tons of deuterium – helium-3 would have a propulsion tank that would have the same energy density of 26.5 million tons of deuterium. If we were to build a ship with 26.5 million tons of chemical fuel, the amount of more fuel needed to accelerate that fuel would be in the order of thousands of times.

    So I like concepts that work with nuclear fusion for direct propulsion so much, since the human being able to master at least the fusion of deuterium – lithium and adapt it for space propulsion, would be a revolutionary advance at the very least.
    Accelerating to a good fraction of the speed of light with this kind of propulsion would be limited only by the amount of fuel they were willing to spend, and the power that the inertial ignition fusion system could handle, so the bigger the better.

  6. Artificial intelligence should equally distribute resources among 10billion earthlings..thus making them happy..and also implanting AI in brain..thus as soon as brain grow..all humans will be learned..and automatically 10billion scientist will be formed..for research with there mental counterpart in a robot..whereas the human bodily counter of the brain of 10billion people earth will be all equally happy with equal distribution of all resources..and sex partners..and will not fight as emotional disbalance and greed will be controlled by implant or be satisfied in virtual world reality for them..
    @AstroneX

  7. It might be possible but there needs to be a good reason to do it. Otherwise it will never be done. And by that I mean it needs to generate money somehow or nobody will ever invest in such thing.

  8. It's interesting to explore the notion of "warp drive" versus that of "electromagnetic-antigravitics". Warp drive assumes that you wrap your craft in a field capable of reducing total mass to zero — then simply use common propulsion techniques to provide thrust. Emgravitics not only agrees with this, but explains how it can be far more simply accomplished. Basically, any craft capable of creating a powerful emgravitic field (fundamentally, a very expansive and super-high-voltage DC capacitor charged to several hundred thousands of volts) can "levitate". (Biefeld-Brown Effect).

    But note how this entirely differs from AsteronX's description: There's no dematerialization within a Biefeld-Brown warp field. Biefeld-Brown simply screens the craft from gravitons — then other methods are used for propulsion. One method (the most elegant) has already been described by Bob Lazar — gravity wave amplification. This technique causes a levitated craft to accelerate rapidly toward any chosen gravitational source in the Universe. So folks, first you levitate, then you gravitate!

  9. It's interesting to explore the notion of "warp drive" versus that of "electromagnetic-antigravitics". Warp drive assumes that you wrap your craft in a field capable of reducing total mass to zero — then simply use common propulsion techniques to provide thrust. Emgravitics not only agrees with this, but explains how it can be far more simply accomplished. Basically, any craft capable of creating a powerful emgravitic field (fundamentally, a very expansive and super-high-voltage DC capacitor charged to several hundred thousands of volts) can "levitate". (Biefeld-Brown Effect).

    But note how this entirely differs from AsteronX's description: There's no dematerialization within a Biefeld-Brown warp field. Biefeld-Brown simply screens the craft from gravitons — then other methods are used for propulsion. One method (the most elegant) has already been described by Bob Lazar — gravity wave amplification. This technique causes a levitated craft to accelerate rapidly toward any chosen gravitational source in the Universe. So folks, first you levitate, then you gravitate!

  10. This remembers me of the spinning black hole stuff, that while we are not able to create them, we can use their spin to add momentum to mass at the cost of a parcel of that mass, efectively trading mass for energy at very high efficiency rates.

    As such, once the warping device starts its cycle, isn't it possible to use the unique features of warp to "generate" energy on the spot instead of having it stored from somewhere else?

  11. So time goes differently to those traveling in hyper-space?

    Like… There are systems we can never visit because once we get there they don't exist anymore (not counting ones already "dead" that we still receive radiation from)?

  12. Not to be pessimist but i don't believe humanity will be traveling anywhere in the solar system with regularity much less deep space anytime soon.
    First we gotta fix what's wrong in our world in order not to take all the baggage we got to other worlds.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*