Quote of the Day
In this study, Applied Physics unveils a new type of warp drive—a theoretical method of space travel that complies with general relativity and operates at a constant subluminal speed without requiring unphysical forms of matter. Known as the “Constant-Velocity Subluminal Warp Drive,” this model eliminates the need for the previously hypothesized “exotic” or negative forms of energy. By integrating a stable shell of ordinary matter with the shift vector of an Alcubierre-like drive, Applied Physics has developed a “warp bubble” capable of moving objects rapidly within the bounds of light speed. This breakthrough is the first physical solution to a warp drive, made possible using the Warp Factory analysis tool developed at Applied Physics. Although this design requires significant energy, it proves that warp effects can be achieved with conventional matter while adhering to known energy constraints. Applied Physics is continuing to make progress as humanity embarks on the Warp Age.
Applied Physics
Constant Velocity Warp Drive
In reference to Constant velocity physical warp drive solution – IOPscience, April 29, 2024
Less than light speed, but even if it were 0.5 light speed it would be game changer.
See also The Warp Age Beckons: Scientists Forge Ahead with Faster-Than-Light Drive (msn.com)
“Less than light speed, but even if it were 0.5 light speed it would be game changer.”
– Gotta crawl before you can walk.
One of those annoying marketing webpages that points to a paper that isn’t accessible.
Anyway, as far as I can tell this is merely an exercise in pure mathematics. And as anyone should know, mathematics in and of itself has no meaning; it is merely manipulation of symbols according to an internally consistent set of rules.
Applied mathematics, in the sense of a system of equations that describes some real world phenomenon, is a different matter; that can actually used to help build stuff.
Sometimes it isn’t immediately obvious where a given paper falls; consider for example the original papers on Relativity before experimental confirmation was done. And perhaps the same is true here. I can’t tell if the work actually predicts any experimental result. If not, it is merely mathematical masturbation. If it does predict an experimental result, then it is potentially meaningful, provided the experiment is done and produces the predicted outcome, and then only if the math predicts things that have real world applicability.
I managed to find a link to the GitHub code repository for the simulation code. I didn’t follow it, but that may be of interest to you.
The problem is that it’s easy to write simulation code for anything you can imagine. Consider “global warming” models. Having a model that describes a real world system is a different problem entirely.
If the code doesn’t reference physical laws, then it is a fantasy simulation.
If it does reference physical laws, the code can be checked against those laws.
If the references are beyond the known limits of physical reality (negative energy, negative mass, etc.), then it probably is, but may not be, fantasy.
Constant velocity doesn’t need a drive to maintain.
Yes, I know space isn’t really a perfect vacuum.
An interesting practice in theory. The engineering behind something like this is an entirely different thing not to mention the amount of energy that would be required.
We still haven’t figured out how to climb out of Earth’s gravity well without using basically fire….giant rockets of burning hydrogen and oxygen. We probably should concentrate on how gravity works and how to control it. There’s a lot of other things we have to figure out how to do before we start worrying about “warp drive”.