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.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
Back
Top