B I have a few questions about Warp drives? I am a layman.

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter rgtr
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Layman Warp
rgtr
Messages
90
Reaction score
8
TL;DR Summary
I have a few questions about Warp drives? I am a layman.
I watching this video and have a few questionsIs the warp shield the bending of space in the warp drive?

In a warp drive in order to speed you need a to feed in energy.

If you do not feed energy would the speed just be the speed of the ship?what is the warp shield made of? I mean is it man made or created by nature?Is the smaller the bubble the faster you go? How does this relate to Lentz's paper and my question?

Does Lentz's and Alcubierre's paper have the 3 criteria that Bobrick and Martire require to create the warpdrive?In Lentz's paper can the warp shield be created by nature or is it man made? In Lentz's and Alcubierre's papers can you accelerate faster then light?By shrinking the passenger area do you need less energy to go faster?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I am sorry to say there are no trustworthy papers supporting warp drives.
 
But what about lentz's work?
 
rgtr said:
I watching this video
Videos are generally not good sources if you want to actually learn the physics. I would recommend picking some of the papers published on the subject (which you evidently are aware of since you refer to them in your post), reading them, and framing questions based on what you read. That will be a much better basis for PF discussion.

For example:

rgtr said:
what about lentz's work?
If you are interested in it, then read it, and pose questions here (in a new thread, since this one is going to be closed, as you will see shortly in a follow-up post from me) based on what you read.

anuttarasammyak said:
I am sorry to say there are no trustworthy papers supporting warp drives.
This is a bit extreme. "Warp drives" are perfectly mathematically valid solutions of the Einstein Field Equations, and there are plenty of perfectly valid papers describing these solutions and exploring their mathematical properties. They are generally not considered physically realistic because they generally require some form of "exotic matter", or have other peculiar properties that are generally not considered to be possible to actually realize. But that is a much weaker statement than the one you are making.
 
  • Like
Likes anuttarasammyak
Since the thread is not based on a valid reference, it is now closed. A new thread on this topic can be started if it has a valid reference as a basis for discussion.
 
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
Back
Top