Reading over Alcubierre's paper on his "warp" drive (http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0009013), the metric in equation 3 has a velocity term, v, that doesn't seem to be needed anywhere. Even in the one spot where it seems potentially valuable, equation 12, he just call it =1 and essentially ignores it. Also, it doesn't seem to have any mathematical connection to dx/dt (he just randomly says that's what it is after equation 5.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

So I'm just wondering what it is I'm missing here? Why is the v term included at all? Is there some stronger need that requires it actually be equal to dx/dt? And finally, if v>0, doesn't that then destroy his equation 5 (i.e. 3-space would curve when a body has velocity)?

Any insight into that variable would be appreciated.

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Velocity term in Alcubierre metric

Loading...

Similar Threads - Velocity term Alcubierre | Date |
---|---|

I What is the "limit of vanishing transport velocity"? | Mar 5, 2018 |

Velocity in terms of proper time | Mar 25, 2014 |

Lorentz boost matrix in terms of four-velocity | Dec 11, 2013 |

Solve relativistic velocity in terms of momentum (vector equation) | Dec 3, 2012 |

Coming to terms with the velocity addition formula | Aug 10, 2008 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**