Star Trek-like 'warp drive' theorized

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
dakotatelephone...


Dale Harris wrote:

Great. Now lets see them demonstrate a prototype. Maybe then,
someone might take it seriously.


Too bad it's based on String Theory which itself hasn't been confirmed
that it even exists.

** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **


Last time I heard of a warp drive theory using that concept, it required
the energy output of a good-sized star to make it work.


Well they've now cut it down to the size of Jupiter, I believe, but that
still leaves one hell of a storage problem.

The biggest drawback is that the theory is actually based on non-existent
physics, so it's next to worthless.


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On 19 Aug, 10:33, "Dale Harris" wrote:
"Pat Flannery" wrote in message

dakotatelephone...







Dale Harris wrote:

Great. *Now lets see them demonstrate a prototype. *Maybe then,
someone might take it seriously.

Too bad it's based on String Theory which itself hasn't been confirmed
that it even exists.

** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com**

Last time I heard of a warp drive theory using that concept, it required
the energy output of a good-sized star to make it work.

Well they've now cut it down to the size of Jupiter, I believe, but that
still leaves one hell of a storage problem.

The biggest drawback is that the theory is actually based on non-existent
physics, so it's next to worthless.

A warp is esentially a Black Hole with negative mass around it. That
is how the solution panns. To get an idea of the forces involved let
us consider the Schwarzchild radius of the Earth. It is 9mm. The S
radius of Jupiter is about 3m. You can look at the forces. I DID say
that building an elevator to GEO was child's play.

As far as non existant Physics goes, we still don't know what negative
mass is. We know it is needed for a Warp Drive, but we don't know what
it is, how to get it or even if we did get it whether it would be
contollable.


- Ian Parker

Dale Harris wrote:

Well they've now cut it down to the size of Jupiter, I believe, but that
still leaves one hell of a storage problem.

The biggest drawback is that the theory is actually based on non-existent
physics, so it's next to worthless.


But if we use a reverse tachyon field...tie the gaseous core reactor
power output directly into the main deflector array... connect the plus
to the minus, and the minus to the plus...IT COULD WORK!
(cut to painting of Hugo Gernsback on the wall smiling maniacally.)

Pat

On 19 Aug, 15:02, Pat Flannery wrote:
Dale Harris wrote:

Well they've now cut it down to the size of Jupiter, I believe, but that
still leaves one hell of a storage problem.

The biggest drawback is that the theory is actually based on non-existent
physics, so it's next to worthless.

But if we use a reverse tachyon field...tie the *gaseous core reactor
power output directly into the main deflector array... connect the plus
to the minus, and the minus to the plus...IT COULD WORK!
(cut to painting of Hugo Gernsback on the wall smiling maniacally.)


The basic fact of tachyons is that two types of field are produced.
There is a superluminal field which is not localised and therefore
useless for the transfer of information, and there is a sub luminal
condensaton. This sub luminal condensation in fact takes the form of a
familiar field.

A discussion is given here

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/sci...d4f0b3c9ae707f

BTW Academic Physicists are accused of not having open minds. Well the
rewriting of the who;e of Elementary Particle Physics, which is what
this might imply is to me a VERY open mind.

In NO case is there negative mass suitable for warp. All fields have
positive energy.


- Ian Parker