NASA may have incidentally discovered Warp Drive?

[Sebastian]

Right now there are two promising forms of fusion in development, inertial confinement and tokamak plasma fusion.

Tokamaks are the most likely near-term solution, but inertial confinement is the more promising solution long-term and for smaller and safer applications (including as small as a car).

Tokamaks use torus shaped magnetic confinement systems that are filled with superheated plasma. Fuel in the form of various hydrogen, lithium, beryllium, or helium isotopes is injected into the plasma and high temperatures and pressures (simulating the environment of a fission explosion or that of the interior of the sun). This causes the fusion fuel cycle to commence.

In general, tokamaks rely on heat more so than anything else to create fusion - very much like the Sun.

Inertial confinement is different. These systems use pellets of stable, frozen/cooled fusion fuel (typically a deuterium-tritium mix) that are placed in magnetic suspension and then blasted at multiple angles simultaneously by multiple lasers. The impact causing an implosion of the pellet under great pressure and thus, the strong force takes over, and we get fusion. This is more akin to how a thermonuclear warhead is designed. It is more pressure and force than it is temperature.

The benefit of inertial confinement is the potential for miniaturization, and the portability of it's fuel (pellets). Tokamaks will always be fairly large, unwieldily, and dangerous. Tokamaks also require a great deal of energy to get started, let alone maintained.

However, tokamaks have some added uses, one of which (since we're talking about future energy production) is that they can be used in far-term scientific pursuits towards using singularities as energy storage; but that's a ways off.



Cold fusion isn't a pipe-dream, it is not only possible but has been experimentally demonstrated. This is commonly known in science circles; but among popular science articles the concept of room temperature fusion is often conflated with the claims of a few crackpot scientists who stated they caused fusion in some kind of table-top experiment. This is unfortunate because it killed research into very viable yet elusive forms of fusion based on binding muons with nuclei to form muonic atoms which are far easier to fuse.

Real cold fusion is muon-catalyzed fusion, and again, is experimentally sound and a verifiable phenomenon. It does not produce more energy than what is put into the experiment, however, due to the difficulty in generating muons, among other things. However, with greater research, it may be possible to overcome some of these limitations.

Muon catalyzed fusion is not dependent upon high temperates, so for all practical purposes, it should be known as cold fusion - but, it isn't, so go figure.

Anyway, we need a great deal more research on muon generation at large scales before we can overcome the several problems associated with, let's call it, "luke-warm" fusion..



The ITER tokamak is already being built, so we should start with tokamaks for the time being until inertial confinement generally replaces it on small and moderate scales. Tokamaks should then be reserved for the largest scale energy generation.

Going back to an earlier point, I think we need to explore anti-matter generation at large scales as well. Tokamaks can be useful here as well.

One way of generating anti-matter quickly and cheaply is to collimate beams of charged particles into an oppositely charged Reissner-Nordstrom singularity that is actively and simultaneously evaporating due to Hawking radiation. This would take place, confined, within a tokamak attached to a particle accelerator. Such a system would yield a 50% conversion rate of matter-antimatter.

There are difficulties to this approach (primarily getting the singularity to have a large enough cross-section), but in general it is sound.



Fusion can get us there; especially the helium-3 fuel cycle.

One could potentially generate electricity, directly, without the need for turbines, with fusion reactors. This is because the helium-3 (+boron) fuel cycle is aneutronic, and releases very little energy in the form of non-reactive pions which carry off energy and ultimately decay into lethal gamma rays.

Instead, He-3's fuel cycle results in mostly high velocity charged particles as end products (protons), meaning these particles can be directly converted into electrical current, rather than using a medium for thermalization, steam, blah blah blah...

This is a much more efficient process than using a turbine.

What intrigues me the most is the Hawking Radiation. With it, it allows the possibility that an artificial singularity can generate enormous amounts of energy. What if a small singularity could be contained; what is the energy projection for such an event and is it possible?

I also wonder, if there is life outside our system, would the discovery of a warp field lead to some reaction? In my mind, the greatest argument against extent alien contact is the fact that our government has done nothing to protect us against a hostile species. I judge this on the basis that the US Government has done little to nothing to further research on new energy production technologies that are required to further weapons and propulsion research.

 

[gourimoko]

What intrigues me the most is the Hawking Radiation. With it, it allows the possibility that an artificial singularity can generate enormous amounts of energy. What if a small singularity could be contained; what is the energy projection for such an event and is it possible?

John Wheeler first theorized that singularities might be used as an energy source. Stephen Hawking's research into what subsequently became Hawking Radiation gave us the clear-cut mathematics to completely understand how such a system would work.

The general idea is that you could produce many yattowatts of energy over a 5-year period of time by gravitationally collapsing the equivalent mass-energy of two Empire State Buildings. Or, as I described above, creating a large enough micro-black hole (charged/spinning), and increasing it's mass gradually within a high pressure, magnetically confined system - like a tokamak.

I also wonder, if there is life outside our system, would the discovery of a warp field lead to some reaction?

I've been asked about this quite a bit actually, and personally I think the answer can be a bit complicated but I think it does make some sense in general.

Human beings, on average, will be considered among the very first generations of intelligent species to have ever existed over the history and span of life of the universe. Aliens alive a trillion years from now would look back at humans as having existed in "the early universe," and among the very first few generations of long-lasting stars.

What all this means, from my perspective, is that the Fermi paradox assumes that intelligence emerges from life far easier than it probably does. Instead, I posit that intelligence is extremely rare, and that the universe has not existed long enough for there to be hordes of intelligence throughout.

Instead, like us, there are probably pockets of intelligence in each galaxy, but not necessarily very near one another.

In our immediate vicinity, within 100 light-years in any direction (10 years travel at warp), I doubt there are any intelligent species. And that isn't to say there isn't life, but not necessarily intelligence.

Think about it. The Earth has had life for more than 4/5ths of it's existence; effectively, as soon as it cooled, it had life. Life is an emergent property of the correct chemistry. However, intelligence did not emerge until perhaps 2-3 million years ago, maybe sooner depending upon what we would consider "intelligent."

Civilization did not emerge until at least 10,000-15,000 years ago. That's a blink of an eye with respect to the age of the Earth; which is roughly the same age of our star, which is likely among only the third major generations of stars in the very very young universe.

In my mind, the greatest argument against extent alien contact is the fact that our government has done nothing to protect us against a hostile species. I judge this on the basis that the US Government has done little to nothing to further research on new energy production technologies that are required to further weapons and propulsion research.

Or perhaps the government has a treaty with the aliens as to span and stretch out human advancement and technology that relates to space flight or advanced energy production such that humans don't grow too fast too soon?

I'm being only slightly facetious, but the conjecture I think could go both ways, I think.

 

[Sebastian]

John Wheeler first theorized that singularities might be used as an energy source. Stephen Hawking's research into what subsequently became Hawking Radiation gave us the clear-cut mathematics to completely understand how such a system would work.

The general idea is that you could produce many yattowatts of energy over a 5-year period of time by gravitationally collapsing the equivalent mass-energy of two Empire State Buildings. Or, as I described above, creating a large enough micro-black hole (charged/spinning), and increasing it's mass gradually within a high pressure, magnetically confined system - like a tokamak.




I've been asked about this quite a bit actually, and personally I think the answer can be a bit complicated but I think it does make some sense in general.

Human beings, on average, will be considered among the very first generations of intelligent species to have ever existed over the history and span of life of the universe. Aliens alive a trillion years from now would look back at humans as having existed in "the early universe," and among the very first few generations of long-lasting stars.

What all this means, from my perspective, is that the Fermi paradox assumes that intelligence emerges from life far easier than it probably does. Instead, I posit that intelligence is extremely rare, and that the universe has not existed long enough for there to be hordes of intelligence throughout.

Instead, like us, there are probably pockets of intelligence in each galaxy, but not necessarily very near one another.

In our immediate vicinity, within 100 light-years in any direction (10 years travel at warp), I doubt there are any intelligent species. And that isn't to say there isn't life, but not necessarily intelligence.

Think about it. The Earth has had life for more than 4/5ths of it's existence; effectively, as soon as it cooled, it had life. Life is an emergent property of the correct chemistry. However, intelligence did not emerge until perhaps 2-3 million years ago, maybe sooner depending upon what we would consider "intelligent."

Civilization did not emerge until at least 10,000-15,000 years ago. That's a blink of an eye with respect to the age of the Earth; which is roughly the same age of our star, which is likely among only the third major generations of stars in the very very young universe.



Or perhaps the government has a treaty with the aliens as to span and stretch out human advancement and technology that relates to space flight or advanced energy production such that humans don't grow too fast too soon?

I'm being only slightly facetious, but the conjecture I think could go both ways, I think.

Fucking Vulcans. If it weren't for them, we would have had the Warp Five engine decades ago.

 

[No Regard]

Thank you for taking your time explaining these stuff, @gourimoko , really appreciated!

I find the idea about negative mass extremely fascinating. But I wondered if we at this point have any idea what this energy is? Or could this be what we'd call dark energy?

 

[gourimoko]

Thank you for taking your time explaining these stuff, @gourimoko , really appreciated!

I find the idea about negative mass extremely fascinating. But I wondered if we at this point have any idea what this energy is? Or could this be what we'd call dark energy?

No prob!

Dark energy and negative energy are overlapping concepts as both cause the deformation of spacetime (in opposing directions); they could be opposite ends of the same phenomena, but we don't know enough about dark energy yet to say for sure.

 

[Benway]

Negative mass is repulsive!

 

[gourimoko]

Negative mass is repulsive!

Yes.

 

[Benway]

It's a pun...

 

[Sebastian]

@gourimoko, anything new regarding peer review of the findings?

 

[Shakalu M.D.]

Fucking dark ages. If it weren't for you I'd be chilling on Mars by now. Also I forget, @gourimoko. Did you like or dislike Interstellar? I had some problems with the science so I'm thinking you probably disliked.

 

[gourimoko]

Fucking dark ages. If it weren't for you I'd be chilling on Mars by now. Also I forget, @gourimoko. Did you like or dislike Interstellar? I had some problems with the science so I'm thinking you probably disliked.

Absolutely loved Interstellar, it's one of the best movies I've ever seen.

The science in the movie was 90% sound. Which is more than can be said for almost any sci-fi film. Keep in mind, the consultant and also co-collaborator on the story, Kip Thorne, is a renowned physicist. I've attended quite a few of his lectures and seminars, and I've read most of his books. He's highly respected.

 

[gourimoko]

@gourimoko, anything new regarding peer review of the findings?

Well...

What I had feared might happen has happened.

A good portion of the academic community has come to NASA, furious, and wants either immediate answers, a halt to funding, or funding of their own.

Now, Harold White, who leads the team at EagleWorks is basically on radio silence, and Paul March who was one of the lead engineers and physicists on the team has also clammed up.

This is because many physicists are creating a media narrative that the EmDrive is impossible because it violates the laws governing the conservation of energy as well as momentum; something we generally believe cannot be done.

However, some of these names I know (like Sean Carroll) and I know they understand the physics behind the EmDrive they simply reject it.

This all boils down to one fundamental concept, and that is, can you derive work (energy) from the quantum vacuum? If the quantum vacuum represents the lowest ground state of the universe, then the answer should be no; but if it isn't, which is still in line with quantum mechanics, then you should be able to use it as a medium (a reaction mass) thereby conserving both energy (non-linear reaction) and momentum (you are moving the quantum "virtual particles" away from you).

Another way to look at this, which is a bit more exotic, is that instead of moving virtual particles, you are compressing and expanding spacetime. This is the EagleWorks team's belief; that the quantum vacuum particles that are popping in and out of existence all the time, are also linked to the composition and density of the fabric of spacetime, and by moving them (changing their relative density within a given space) one is changing the density of spacetime itself.

This is why the EmDrive and the Warp Drive are one in the same concept, because both are working, supposedly, under Harold White and Paul March's quantum mechanical interpretation of gravity and spacetime. The Warp Drive is, in essence, a much larger EmDrive. But if you read the media reports, they would tell you these two things are different (which is what I always thought prior to the release of these results, now I'm not so sure).

But so far, their tests have not be falsified, and they have sufficient sigma to categorically state their results can likely be reproduced (since the vacuum tests). The question now is whether or not these results will scale with increases in power? The Chinese science team that worked on their version of the EmDrive had an order of magnitude more thrust per watt by using a different means of driving the EmDrive (via a large magnetron).

We'll see what happens, but right now the team is mum and I doubt further results will be as open or forthcoming in the near future.

 

[NtG]

Misleading headline, they didn't actually confirm it, just eliminated the possibility of some errors:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/nasa-latest-tests-show-physics-230112770.html

NASA confirms that the ‘impossible’ EmDrive thruster really works, after new tests

By Rick Stella 19 minutes ago

Engineer Roger Shawyer’s controversial EmDrive thruster jets back into relevancy this week, as a team of researchers at NASA’s Eagleworks Laboratories recently completed yet another round of testing on the seemingly impossible tech. Though no official peer-reviewed lab paper has been published yet, and NASA institutes strict press release restrictions on the Eagleworks lab these days, engineer Paul March took to the NASA Spaceflight forum to explain the group’s findings. In essence, by utilizing an improved experimental procedure, the team managed to mitigate some of the errors from prior tests — yet still found signals of unexplained thrust.

Isaac Newton should be sweating.

Flying in the face of traditional laws of physics, the EmDrive makes use of a magnetron and microwaves to create a propellant-less propulsion system. By pushing microwaves into a closed, truncated cone and back towards the small end of said cone, the drive creates the momentum and force necessary to propel a craft forward. Because the system is a reaction-less drive, it goes against humankind’s fundamental comprehension of physics, hence its controversial nature.

On the NASA spaceflight forums, March revealed as much as he could about the advancements that have been made with EmDrive and its relative technology. After apologizing for not having the ability to share pictures or the supporting data from a peer-reviewed lab paper, he starts by explaining (as straightforward as rocket science can get) that the Eagleworks lab successfully built and installed a 2nd generation magnetic damper which helps reduce stray magnetic fields in a vacuum chamber. The addition reduced magnetic fields by an order of magnitude inside the chamber, and also decreased Lorentz force interactions.

However, despite ruling out Lorentz forces almost entirely, March still reported a contamination caused by thermal expansion. Unfortunately, this reported contamination proves even worse in a vacuum (i.e. outer space) due in large part to its inherently high level of insulation. To combat this, March acknowledged the team is now developing an advanced analytics tool to assist in the separation of the contamination, as well as an integrated test which aims to alleviate thermally induced errors altogether.

While these advancements and additions are no doubt a boon for continued research of the EmDrive, the fact that the machine still produced what March calls “anomalous thrust signals” is by far the test’s single biggest discovery. The reason why this thrust exists still confounds even the brightest rocket scientists in the world, but the recurring phenomenon of direction-based momentum does make the EmDrive appear less a combination of errors and more like a legitimate answer to interstellar travel.

At this time, it’s unknown when Eagleworks Laboratories intends to officially publish its peer-reviewed paper, however, hearing of the EmDrive’s advancements from one of its top engineers bodes well for the future of this fascinating tech.

@gourimoko

 

[gourimoko]

Misleading headline, they didn't actually confirm it, just eliminated the possibility of some errors:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/nasa-latest-tests-show-physics-230112770.html

@gourimoko

Totally agree. The headline has nothing to do with the recent tests by NASA's Eagleworks team. Total click-bait.

What is still a head-scratcher is why they continue to refer to quantum fluctuations as "plasma." My guess is that something in their theory or experience leads them to believe that these fluctuations behave as a plasma under certain high energy density conditions?

While Sean Carroll has been adamant that this isn't the case; it is intriguing that some other competing theories regarding high energy densities contained within the near-horizon geometry of black holes would have quantum fluctuations behave as a plasma.

If any of these findings are true, and the believed explanation of these findings holds (an interaction with vacuum fluctuations) and let me say that I remain extremely skeptical; then, it would mean that the most likely scenario is that we've seemingly stumbled onto a means of manipulating space-time.

These fluctuations aren't just meaningless statistical anomalies. According to a great deal of quantum physics, particularly with respect to string theory, these fluctuations literally hold empty space together in a massively entangled state. By interacting with them, by any direct means, affords us the ability to expand and contract space-time.

So, that's why so many physicists remain highly skeptical about using a simple magnetron and what amounts to a copper tube in order to manipulate the fabric of space-time. Just seems like we would have been able to predict such a thing, rather than stumbling upon it like this.

Personally, I can get behind the idea of a quanta of inertial momentum explaining the minuscule levels of thrust, if there is any thrust - but that still leads to problems with respects to our understanding of conservation of momentum within a system.