Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Warp Drive


Cookie Monster
 Share

Recommended Posts

There are four known forces of nature.

Weak Force: Allows sub atomic particles to switch into being other types of sub atomic particles.

Strong Force: Allows sub atomic particles to bond together.

Electromagnetism: Electric and magnetic fields, caused by electrons.

Gravity: The most controversial one as there is no evidence its a force. General Relativity says its the curvature of space-time, quantum theory wants it to be a force caused by a graviton particle.

So the aim of a Unified Field Theory is to find out how they all unite into one super force that would have existed very early in the universes life. We can unify the Weak, Strong, and Electromagnetic forces with each other, but not gravity. Or we can unify gravity with electromagnetism in 5 dimensional space called Kaluza-Klein space, but not with the weak or strong force.

Good so far? I`ll get straight to the point. Put a spaceship in a very strong EM field. So strong that gravity and EM unify (making them the same force). The crafty thing about EM fields is we can charge up a super conductor and they dont have any resistance. So we could spend a decade charging the ship up, and voila! Off we go with a warp drive.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
Posted (edited)

I’m not sure you connected the dots with warp drive there.  True, intense gravity like that of a black hole and does warp spacetime, but has it been shown that gravity and EM even could unify?  I wouldn’t think so based on what you stated in the OP.  Although, I thought the graviton had been confirmed by experiment some years ago?

Edited by Guyver
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

There are four known forces of nature.

You nailed it!  with "known"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

OP and that trevor borax johnson loon should get together and have long nutjob conversations about how soaking in hot water while wagging your tail will make you live forever while warp traveling through space heat with a gyroscope (as long as you don't use soap).

Edited by moonman
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Cookie Monster said:

There are four known forces of nature.

Weak Force: Allows sub atomic particles to switch into being other types of sub atomic particles.

Strong Force: Allows sub atomic particles to bond together.

Electromagnetism: Electric and magnetic fields, caused by electrons.

Gravity: The most controversial one as there is no evidence its a force. General Relativity says its the curvature of space-time, quantum theory wants it to be a force caused by a graviton particle.

So the aim of a Unified Field Theory is to find out how they all unite into one super force that would have existed very early in the universes life. We can unify the Weak, Strong, and Electromagnetic forces with each other, but not gravity. Or we can unify gravity with electromagnetism in 5 dimensional space called Kaluza-Klein space, but not with the weak or strong force.

Good so far? I`ll get straight to the point. Put a spaceship in a very strong EM field. So strong that gravity and EM unify (making them the same force). The crafty thing about EM fields is we can charge up a super conductor and they dont have any resistance. So we could spend a decade charging the ship up, and voila! Off we go with a warp drive.

You have obviously watched way too much Star Trek.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, Cookie Monster said:

quantum theory wants it to be a force caused by a graviton particle.

Nope. The graviton is not a part of the nucleus, like you suggest. It's a photon/radiation like particle, that travels at the speed of light, and is generated by high power collisions, like the merging of stars or black holes. It's what likely causes gravitational waves.

If it exists. We can't directly measure gravitational interactions.

 

Edited by zep73
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, Guyver said:

I’m not sure you connected the dots with warp drive there.  True, intense gravity like that of a black hole and does warp spacetime, but has it been shown that gravity and EM even could unify?  I wouldn’t think so based on what you stated in the OP.  Although, I thought the graviton had been confirmed by experiment some years ago?

Gravity and EM can be unified together without the other 2 included, its called Kaluza-Klein space.

If you imagine going from a football down to an atom (a billionth of a football). Then do it again, and again, and again, and again, and again, then you are down to the plank length. Gravitons are predicted to exist down there. 1 x 10 to the minus 54.

Thats so far beyond our atom smasher technology it might well take 500 years before we come up with something to detect a graviton. All we know at this stage (assuming they exist) is they will have a right handed spin of 1. That means both anti-gravitons and gravitons can only attract.

Edited by Cookie Monster
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cookie Monster said:

Gravity and EM can be unified together without the other 2 included, its called Kaluza-Klein space.

If you imagine going from a football down to an atom (a billionth of a football). Then do it again, and again, and again, and again, and again, then you are down to the plank length. Gravitons are predicted to exist down there. 1 x 10 to the minus 54.

Thats so far beyond our atom smasher technology it might well take 500 years before we come up with something to detect a graviton. All we know at this stage (assuming they exist) is they will have a right handed spin of 1. That means both anti-gravitons and gravitons can only attract.

Levels of energy needed are ginormous:

Quote

electroweak unification occurs at around 100 GeV, grand unification is predicted to occur at 1016 GeV, and unification of the GUT force with gravity is expected at the Planck energy, roughly 1019 GeV.

(link, bolding mine)

Before you reach 1028 eV, your spaceship would go through stages being liquid, vapour, plasma, atoms ripped appart, proton decay, quark-gluon plasma...

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bmk1245 said:

Levels of energy needed are ginormous:

(link, bolding mine)

Before you reach 1028 eV, your spaceship would go through stages being liquid, vapour, plasma, atoms ripped appart, proton decay, quark-gluon plasma...

A pleasure to read a post from someone who knows his physics, although "atoms ripped apart" and plasma is the same thing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, zep73 said:

A pleasure to read a post from someone who knows his physics, although "atoms ripped apart" and plasma is the same thing.

Indeed, I made mistake, not 'atoms' but 'nuclei'.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
26 minutes ago, bmk1245 said:

Indeed, I made mistake, not 'atoms' but 'nuclei'.

You had that in the next step: quark-gluon plasma
(It takes a lot more energy to break the strong force than the EM, so there has to be two steps.)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, bmk1245 said:

Levels of energy needed are ginormous:

(link, bolding mine)

Before you reach 1028 eV, your spaceship would go through stages being liquid, vapour, plasma, atoms ripped appart, proton decay, quark-gluon plasma...

Technically the bubble only needs to be one planck unit thick, and it goes around the ship.

Edited by Cookie Monster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Cookie Monster said:

Technically the bubble only needs to be one planck unit thick, and it goes around the ship.

OK, I'll omit constants/conversion units (won't change general idea).

Energy density ~ T4 (T - temperature). T ~ 1032 K (1028 eV), hence energy density ~ 10128 J/m3.

Your bubble, say, has radius of 100 meters and thickness 10-35 m, hence volume of your bubble shell ~ 10-31 m3.

Thus energy (energy density * volume) ~ 1097 J.

If I made mistake, say, on the order of 1030 J (1067 J instead of 1097), still unimaginably huge number.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, bmk1245 said:

OK, I'll omit constants/conversion units (won't change general idea).

Energy density ~ T4 (T - temperature). T ~ 1032 K (1028 eV), hence energy density ~ 10128 J/m3.

Your bubble, say, has radius of 100 meters and thickness 10-35 m, hence volume of your bubble shell ~ 10-31 m3.

Thus energy (energy density * volume) ~ 1097 J.

If I made mistake, say, on the order of 1030 J (1067 J instead of 1097), still unimaginably huge number.

How about a 10 metre radius ship?

Also why does it need to fill the volume of the bubble shell? Can we not just have a very thin bubble wall where the energy is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cookie Monster said:

How about a 10 metre radius ship?

[...]

Won't make significant dent, we'll get 1095 J, instead of 1097 J.

1 hour ago, Cookie Monster said:

[...]

Also why does it need to fill the volume of the bubble shell? Can we not just have a very thin bubble wall where the energy is?

Thats what 'shell' means in my post, and thats why volume is so tiny, i.e. 10-31 m3; with 10 meter sized bubble, its 10-33 m3.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.