Thor. Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 (edited) i posted this before. That Cern video seems more and more legit every time i watch that. Edited October 7, 2013 by Thor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matortheeternal Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 (edited) i posted this before. That Cern video seems more and more legit every time i watch that. It's called propaganda to fuel public interest in space travel. Also, I already know about the guy and his NASA funded project. I knew about it long before I came to this thread. Just because he's testing the Alcubierre metric does not mean he's anywhere near making an Alcubierre drive or FTL travel. From your own link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive#Experiments Just because scientific research is moderately related to the idea of this drive does not make it any more feasible. That's like saying if someone is looking for purple footprints that might hint at the existence of twenty-foot-tall purple elephants, twenty-foot-tall purple elephants must exist. Edited October 7, 2013 by matortheeternal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor. Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 (edited) Not saying they are making one now, there was link how they where testing the science behind it in one of there testing laboratory in a suspended room so there wouldn't be any movement of any kind, because a small vibration would make it impossible with the power output hey would be using at the time in the laboratory conditions. Why so against the idea, its a possible way to finally be able to explore the galaxy at a decent time. I'll link every article i can find on the subject leading to the announcement. http://www.space.com/17628-warp-drive-possible-interstellar-spaceflight.html http://www.space.com/21274-star-trek-warp-drive-physics.html it was also on every media outlet at one time http://www.space.com/9882-warp-drives-wormholes.html Its a on going thing. more coming. Article and the end http://zidbits.com/2012/12/what-is-the-future-of-space-travel/ Edited October 7, 2013 by Thor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matortheeternal Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 (edited) Not saying they are making one now, there was link how they where testing the science behind it in one of there testing laboratory in a suspended room so there wouldn't be any movement of any kind, because a small vibration would make it impossible with the power output hey would be using at the time in the laboratory conditions. Why so against the idea, its a possible way to finally be able to explore the galaxy at a decent time. The in red:Totally irrelevant details, run on sentence, fail. The in yellow:It's not "a possible way". It's a speculative way. There is nothing "possible" about an Alcubierre drive. The chances of it not conceptually violating the laws of physics are extremely low. I'm not against the idea, I just don't want to see people crossing their fingers hoping that we're going to achieve FTL travel by the Alcubierre method. It's a wonderful idea, sure, but unless you're a theoretical physicist you have no business talking about it. (and even then, you might get laughed out if you don't phrase your ideas carefully). I'm willing to wager that everyone involved with the NASA experiment with a physics background doesn't think the Alcubierre drive will be possible - they're doing it for the other discoveries that will be made or the public interest it generates (which NASA seriously needs right about now). Edit:More sources does not more strong argument make. Your sources have to support your viewpoint and come from respectable, knowledgeable, unbiased, and well-established individuals. I still don't know what you're trying to argue for. Are you trying to argue that NASA is building a warp engine or that we will achieve FTL travel by the Alcubierre method? Because if so, I'm just going to laugh and leave this thread. Edited October 7, 2013 by matortheeternal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor. Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 (edited) Then why would they be testing the idea if it was theoretical science, why is that theoretical science being tested in a controlled environment, or is able to be tested at all. Plausible or impossible, either way they are studying the concept. Theoretical science means its beyond our grasp with current technology. Edited October 7, 2013 by Thor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matortheeternal Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 (edited) Then why would they be testing the idea if it was theoretical science, why is that theoretical science being tested in a controlled environment, or is able to be tested at all. plausible or impossible, Either way they are studying the concept. Theoretical science means its beyond our grasp with current technology. You're clearly not reading and understanding what I'm saying. 1. I'm saying the Alcubierre ENGINE is theoretical science. No one at NASA is constructing an Alcubierre engine. The media have this wonderful way of taking a scientific experiment into space time distortion and turning into a full on "NASA IS BUILDING A WARP ENGINE" media blast. That's not what's happening. 2. Testing ideas, even if they prove to be entirely false or far-feteched, does not mean they're true. Testing, whether it returns positive or negative results, expands our knowledge of science. Edit: Here, a source to add to your list. Read it.http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2013-03/warp-factor?nopaging=1 Edited October 7, 2013 by matortheeternal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor. Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 (edited) I never said they are constructing the engine itself, i clearly said they have studied the math behind it and proven it to be a fact.Cern would be a good way to have a controlled test at the math and science behind it. Edited October 7, 2013 by Thor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matortheeternal Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 (edited) I never said they are constructing the engine itself, i clearly said Nowhere have you clearly stated what your perspective is and why you're arguing with me. they have studied the math behind it and proven it to be a fact. Cern would be a good way to have a controlled test at the math and sciencee behind it. Just stop. Scientific theory cannot be "proven to be fact", and they have not done anything near what you said, even if I translate it out of layman's terms. Just stop. Edited October 7, 2013 by matortheeternal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor. Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 (edited) Wow i never argued with someone whose clearly against the whole concept ever becoming a reality, you can argue the fact that science has come a long way, and theoretical science in many ways have been become fact in a short period of time, does not matter what the breakthrough is or the concept,its like saying all theoretical science is impossible. The fact that They openly talked about it is a what made me have hopes for the future, even if you do believe its all a hoax, i do not have that low opinion. Edited October 7, 2013 by Thor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matortheeternal Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 (edited) Wow i never argued with someone whose clearly against the whole concept ever becoming a reality, you can argue the fact that science has come a long way, and theoretical science in many ways have been become fact in a short period of time, does not matter what the breakthrough is or the concept,its like saying all theoretical science is impossible.You continue to misconstrue my argument. I'm not arguing that the Alcubierre Drive is fundamentally impossible, I'm arguing that we don't know if it's possible. That puts it in the in-between state of being "hypothetical". A "speculative concept" for FTL travel. I'm telling you to stop saying it's "possible". I'm asking you to be more logically grounded, and say "it could be possible, but probably isn't". If the Alcubierre Drive is impossible, that doesn't necessarily mean FTL travel is impossible. There are other methods to achieve FTL travel that don't involve distortions in spacetime as the Alcubierre drive does. E.g. teleportation, wormholes, folding space, etc. These are also pretty unlikely, but teleportation (at an atomic level) has already been demonstrated via quantum entanglement. So FTL communication is very feasible (and could actually be done today!). Edited October 7, 2013 by matortheeternal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now