Alcubierre drive, could it cause inconsistencies?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Gerinski
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cause Drive
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the theoretical concept of the Alcubierre drive, which proposes a method for faster-than-light travel. Participants explore its implications, particularly regarding potential inconsistencies in causality and the requirements for exotic matter. The conversation includes theoretical considerations, personal opinions on feasibility, and comparisons to historical scientific views.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express that the Alcubierre drive is an interesting theoretical idea but may be impossible due to the requirement of exotic matter with negative energy density.
  • Others argue that the potential for faster-than-light travel could lead to historical inconsistencies, suggesting that the universe would not permit such scenarios.
  • A participant references academic works that challenge the strength of the argument against the drive based on historical inconsistencies.
  • Some view the Alcubierre drive as an artistic implementation of mathematics, expressing skepticism about its physical viability.
  • There is a comparison made between the Alcubierre drive and Einstein's initial skepticism about black holes, with some suggesting that just because Einstein was wrong about black holes does not mean the Alcubierre drive is possible.
  • Another participant challenges the comparison, arguing that the Alcubierre drive is as improbable as the existence of leprechauns, questioning its grounding in physics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no consensus on the feasibility of the Alcubierre drive. Some believe it is impossible, while others maintain that it might still be theoretically possible despite its challenges.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various theoretical frameworks and historical perspectives, indicating that the discussion is influenced by differing interpretations of relativity and causality. The conversation reflects ongoing debates in theoretical physics without resolving the underlying uncertainties.

Gerinski
Messages
322
Reaction score
15
The Alcubierre drive is a very interesting theoretical idea, if only as a thought experiment. It might in principle allow travel even faster than light speed (according to some external frame of reference).

But we know that faster than light propagation could lead to history inconsistencies, and the universe abhors inconsistencies, it will not allow them (that is probably the deepest law in the universe, consistency between events must hold).

Should we infer that an Alcubierre drive is physically impossible?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
We probably should consider it impossible because it requires exotic matter with negative energy density.
 
Gerinski said:
The Alcubierre drive is a very interesting theoretical idea, if only as a thought experiment. It might in principle allow travel even faster than light speed (according to some external frame of reference).

But we know that faster than light propagation could lead to history inconsistencies, and the universe abhors inconsistencies, it will not allow them (that is probably the deepest law in the universe, consistency between events must hold).

Should we infer that an Alcubierre drive is physically impossible?

Yes. Impossible. Much ado about nothing when the actual physics are examined.
 
Gerinski said:
But we know that faster than light propagation could lead to history inconsistencies, and the universe abhors inconsistencies, it will not allow them (that is probably the deepest law in the universe, consistency between events must hold).

IMO this is not nearly as strong an argument as you seem to think. See:

You may be interested in this thread: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/could-a-warp-drive-work-as-a-time-machine.720433/

Keep in mind that the Alcubierre spacetime is actually nothing like Star Trek-style warp drive. The WP article has a good discussion of this.
 
I see the idea of Alcubierre drive as an artistic implementation of mathematics, but physically unlikely, (extremely so).
Then again, I am told that Einstein considered black holes to be unlikely to exist in actuality, although relativity did allow for that possibility.
 
rootone said:
I see the idea of Alcubierre drive as an artistic implementation of mathematics, but physically unlikely, (extremely so).
Then again, I am told that Einstein considered black holes to be unlikely to exist in actuality, although relativity did allow for that possibility.

What is the connection between Alcubierre drive being possible and Einstein's opinion on Black Holes?
 
tom aaron said:
What is the connection between Alcubierre drive being possible and Einstein's opinion on Black Holes?
rootone's statement seems totally straightforward to me. I don't get why you have a problem with it. He's comparing his point of view about the drive w/ E's point of view about black holes and saying that E was wrong about BH's and he may be wrong about the drive. He's not saying, as far as I can tell, that the drive exists, only that as far as he can tell it MIGHT exist.

I think that's wrong and the drive doesn't exist but that doesn't make his statement logically inconsistent.
 
phinds said:
rootone's statement seems totally straightforward to me. I don't get why you have a problem with it. He's comparing his point of view about the drive w/ E's point of view about black holes and saying that E was wrong about BH's and he may be wrong about the drive. He's not saying, as far as I can tell, that the drive exists, only that as far as he can tell it MIGHT exist.

I think that's wrong and the drive doesn't exist but that doesn't make his statement logically inconsistent.

By that logic then anything can be used.

Einstein was wrong about Black Holes so Leprechauns might be real.

Please explain the physics of how the Alcubierre drive is not fantasy. Everything we know about the Standard model of physics shows it to be no more possible than Leprechauns.
 
Let's see if I'm understanding... Phinds is saying that the drive doesn't exist, despite the theoretical possibility that it might; and you're saying that the drive is no more possible than that leprechauns exist (also a theoretical possibility, albeit remote); and you two are arguing? That "thunk" noise that you just heard is the sound of a thread being locked.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PWiz, PeterDonis and berkeman

Similar threads

  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 82 ·
3
Replies
82
Views
13K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
19K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K