Star Trek Physics?

Main Question or Discussion Point

Wow, From current experiments and theory; the idea of a cloaking device may be a reality.
This leads me to the question; is there research in other areas of the so called "Star trek Physics" i.e. force fields etc?
 

Answers and Replies

George Jones
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,231
785
Wow, From current experiments and theory; the idea of a cloaking device may be a reality.
This leads me to the question; is there research in other areas of the so called "Star trek Physics" i.e. force fields etc?
You should take a look at the book The Physics of Star Trek by Lawrence M. Krauss.
 
Thanks Mr. Jones I'll download it now.
 
869
3
Physics of Star Trek is good but way out of date!

The answer is yes, virtually everything on Star Trek has been contemplated as real technology.

There are several theoretical models for warp drives. Many unresolved theoretical problems remain (the problem is not simply engineering or scale) so this will likely require a rather fundamental leap in known theory.

Experiments in quantum teleportation are ongoing. A transporter may well be possible for inanimate matter. Transporting humans is extremely problematic and may well forever be deemed unethical due to the fact that the original is destroyed.

Directed energy weapons, my understanding, have been in development for some time and almost certainly will be deployed within most peoples' lifetimes. Reagan's Star Wars program supposedly was going to use lasers to knock out nuclear warheads.

I am not aware of anything specifically relating to force fields.

Photon Torpedos are not going to be happening anytime soon due to the enormous cost of making antimatter. But, if a cheap supply of antimatter is devised or discovered, you can bet that antimatter will be incorporated into weaponry. This is one of the most terrifying prospects of modern physics; antimatter weapons would leave no fallout, and therefore a frightened power may be more inclined to use them in a first strike than with nuclear weapons. If all nuclear fuel were replaced gram for gram with antimatter, there'd probably be enough energy to turn the Earth into an asteroid belt!

Oh let's see, what else. Holodecks are definitely going to be a reality this century, as will cloaking devices (very similar idea). We probably would not be able to touch a hologram anytime soon, but the visual aspects of the holodeck are not that far from reality. As for a cloaking device, this too will probably happen pretty soon. Microscopic projection devices like DLP chips, if they could be miniaturized even further, would be ideal candidates for such a device. A subject could be shrouded in a fabric of interwoven projectors and cameras which would retransmit incoming light in a straight line in the opposite direction.

100 years from now, I boldly predict that we won't be talking about whether the technology on Star Trek can be replicated, but whether humans can become omnipotent like Q. :)
 
1,644
2
What about Stargate SG-1 and Atlantis? Obviously, it's another sci-fi series, but the technology of the "Ancients," is very different, maybe even more advanced than Star Trek.
 
Hello peter0302 thanks for your kind and friendly reply. I now see that there is lots of work that can be done in physics. I think I will remain a physics major. Thanks for your help.
 
George Jones
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,231
785
Last edited by a moderator:
Can i ask a quick question,
most of the promblems that stop FTL travel seems to be that the closer to the speed of light you get the more energy it takes to acelerate hence making it almost impossible to reach.
however all these problems are caused by the fact that we are inside our space-time that the laws of physics apply to.
so why dont we take a page out of the Star Trek and Stargate books and go outside it.
unfortunatly i have neither the excpertise or qualifications to say how but surely it is possible to leave it and then re-enter hence making the trip alot faster that it would to travel inside space time.
 
ZapperZ
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
2018 Award
35,228
4,048
Can i ask a quick question,
most of the promblems that stop FTL travel seems to be that the closer to the speed of light you get the more energy it takes to acelerate hence making it almost impossible to reach.
however all these problems are caused by the fact that we are inside our space-time that the laws of physics apply to.
so why dont we take a page out of the Star Trek and Stargate books and go outside it.
unfortunatly i have neither the excpertise or qualifications to say how but surely it is possible to leave it and then re-enter hence making the trip alot faster that it would to travel inside space time.
If you're trying to circumvent the laws that we know of, then why stop there? Why not simply make things up?

The problem here is that, we can't! If you can claim that in another world, our laws don't work, or work the same way, then you also have no way of knowing HOW such a thing will function. So how would we know we'd be the same being in that world, and able to "come out" the other side back into this world. Since we're just making things up, then I can make things up too, and I can speculate that your body will fractionalize different properties of your body will have different dispersive laws in that other world. You'll never get back.

This is the problem with making speculation like this. It leads to pointless discussion that solves nothing, and which is why we prohibit such a thing in our https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=5374".

Zz.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
CompuChip
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
4,284
47
most of the problems that stop FTL travel seems to be that the closer to the speed of light you get the more energy it takes to accelerate hence making it almost impossible to reach.
Forget about "almost". Also, if this explains most of the problems, maybe the rest of comes from the fact that time would dilate infinitely and length would contract infinitely. But hey, that's just details.

To go "outside our spacetime" firstly supposes that there even exists something outside our spacetime (for which, AFAIK there is no evidence of, nor need for).

On the upside, if Einstein was wrong and we are not stuck to Lorenz invariance, we could make so much more theories! :biggrin:
 
Im sorry that i broke into speculation but surely thats how really theories start. phasers in star Trek in the 60s was probably seemed as far fechted as we know think FTL drives are and now we can blow up missiles using lasers attached to planes.
Science isnt really about what we know but what we dont. i admit im young and bearly understand many of the theories that we use to explain our universe and im doing well if i get the jist of a simple peice of calculus.
the very reason i joined this site was to expand my horizons and be able to discuss with all seriousness ways to travel between stars and create vast amounts of energy that can be used to power the planet with minimal impact to it.
with this in mind can i rephrase my question?
what then is a viable way, even theoreticaly to travel between stars without having to resort to generation ships or stasis pods.
 
CompuChip
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
4,284
47
Admittedly history has proven that science can evolve really fast, making possible things that nobody imagined even several years ago. But special and general relativity, which prohibit FTL travel, have proven so successful that nobody really doubts their correctness anymore.

For some feasible and theoretical options, you could consult this page.
 
So asuming that even the like of Zero point energy (if it could be utilized) could not propel a craft fast than the speed of light because it requires an infinate amount of energy.
therefore why dont we just use nature as our guide. Wormholes. yes there unstable but they follow the laws of physics and hence are predicatble.
also the problems of time might noly be caused because of a lack of energy something we may be able to provide it with enough to get a person or even a ship through.
 
ZapperZ
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
2018 Award
35,228
4,048
therefore why dont we just use nature as our guide. Wormholes. yes there unstable but they follow the laws of physics and hence are predicatble.
Can you point to me an example of a "wormhole" that we currently have that we can test this?

Zz.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole
take particular note of the part about Transverable wormholes
yes it is miles away from what we can currently do but they are theoretically possible.
 
ZapperZ
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
2018 Award
35,228
4,048
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole
take particular note of the part about Transverable wormholes
yes it is miles away from what we can currently do but they are theoretically possible.
Since you're new here, let me clarify that I'm not someone you want to use a wikipedia article on. I do not consider that to be a valid reference.

Secondly, I asked for an example of a worm hole that we can use to verify such a thing. You are attempting to use a "wormhole" as if this is something we already know of and already verified, very much like using a superconductor, for instance, to do things. That is why I asked for an example of one.

Thirdly, there are a gazillion things that are "theoretically" possible that never amounted to anything. The physics journals are littered with them.

Zz.
 
okay lets try taking this in a diffrent direction. why dont we look at direct energy weapons (phasers basically).
we know that the US military can use lasers mounted on planes to blow up missles surly then these weapons are more effective than the projectile based weapons we use at the moment. so why arn't we??
 
ZapperZ
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
2018 Award
35,228
4,048
okay lets try taking this in a diffrent direction. why dont we look at direct energy weapons (phasers basically).
we know that the US military can use lasers mounted on planes to blow up missles surly then these weapons are more effective than the projectile based weapons we use at the moment. so why arn't we??
What does this have anything to do with what you were talking about?

As to why we're not using such things, you need to ask the military.

Zz.
 
mheslep
Gold Member
254
728
History channel aired in 2005 a bit called 'https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000M9BSBO/?tag=pfamazon01-20' thats fairly funny. The foreground is Shatner driving around LA in a convertible boasting about how he invented the technology of the modern world; he's mastered the art of self mockery so it all goes well. The background consists of some interesting interviews with various engineers and physicists - a Motorola engineer who was at least a little inspired by Trek's communicator and so on.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
f95toli
Science Advisor
Gold Member
2,938
439
we know that the US military can use lasers mounted on planes to blow up missles surly then these weapons are more effective than the projectile based weapons we use at the moment. so why arn't we??
Because lasers that are powerfull enough to actually destroy something are very big, very expensive, and have very limited range.
Basically, any "energy based" weapon (LASER, MASER etc) will have a very limited range when used within the atmosphere. Also, if the enemy knew the frequency they could quite easily neutralise the beam by simply using something cover the target with something that is very reflective in that frequency range (for many lasers a simple mirror would do).
They might be useful in space but so far we haven't had a war is space (but I am sure that will happen some day...)
 
russ_watters
Mentor
19,027
5,185
I don't think anyone addressed this directly:
with this in mind can i rephrase my question?
what then is a viable way, even theoreticaly to travel between stars without having to resort to generation ships or stasis pods.
There isn't one. Star Trek physics only exists on Star Trek. It isn't real. The writers call it "technobabble" and that's an accurate description of what it is. For example, someone was in here a while ago talking about "subspace", mistakenly thinking it described a real concept in physics. It doesn't.

Though I personally love sci fi, I find it incredibly naive when people even credit writers with thinking up new technologies. Heck, sometimes different writers are given credit for the same thing! But no, none of them gets credit for the cel phone or microwave. They played no part in the development. They are good dreamers, but not real physicists or inventors.
 
Last edited:
782
1
From what little I've read about all, this is that most of the 'things' on Startrek, etc., have come from either variations of previous sci-fi stuff, or adaptations of earlier physics theories/hypotheses.
 
I'm sorry that i'm going back to a previos point but i have had an apiffiny as we all do from time to time.
The speed of light, as we know speeds up as we reduce the number of particals in its way (due to friction i think). hence we can in theory accelarate past the normal speed of light in normal space by creating a near absalote vacume.
Presuming that we have access to a very large energy sorce i.e Zero point energy which we know exists we can accelerate to nearly the speed of light in normal space and then create a near perfect vacume in a small area around the ship allowing it to acelerate even fast. inside the vacume the ship is not breaking the laws of physics as they are still under the speed of light. however outside the vacume the observe would observe that the ship was traveling faster.
there no laws of physics broken and still getting an FTL drive.
before you start shooting my head off because it is unviable think. energy does not create friction as far as i know hence it would be safe to presume a energy field of some kind would allow a vacume to be formed. also the Zero point energy i think has already been talked about in this thread and the water hydrogen experiments.
 
russ_watters
Mentor
19,027
5,185
None of that even resembles real science SirAethelredd. You apparently have heard of the refractive index, but have no idea what it really is and you've just made something up that sounds good in your head and allows FTL travel. That's how science fiction writers do their science. Sorry, but you're going to need to start learning science from scientists, not from science fiction writers.

This thread serves no useful purpose. Locked.
 
Last edited:
CompuChip
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
4,284
47
The speed of light, as we know speeds up as we reduce the number of particals in its way (due to friction i think). hence we can in theory accelarate past the normal speed of light in normal space by creating a near absalote vacume.
You mean this phenomenon?
 

Related Threads for: Star Trek Physics?

  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
20
Views
6K
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
21
Views
6K
  • Last Post
Replies
9
Views
4K
Top