When considering the use of EM-drives in the making of warp-drives the attached two papers might be of interest.In the meantime, back to figuring out how to reliably drive an EM-drive...Edit: You might also like to read Sonny's Warp-field Mechanics 101 and 102 articles.http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20130011213.pdf Best, Paul M.
Partial success. I found a unfortunately trimmed edit of a presentation where he started to explain it. But the answer was truncated by the end of the clip.starts at 53:46 seconds and ends before Dr White has finished his answer. However it is probable that better clips of this presentation exist. I'll look for one tomorrow.
That's a good point to make: As the hypothesized warp region is dynamically created by the dPhi/dt dynamics, there is no constant warp. Hence, the 'boost factor' is only the time averaged or integrated value of the warp. Larger amounts of particles should hence not be able to accumulate. The real operation of the drive would be much more akin to many small 'boost' periods per second, like small warp jumps. Is that correct?
Even for very short journeys the energy released is so large that you would completely obliterate anything in front of you,
Dr Rodal: It was my impression that Dr White made his defense after the critics which probably included the Sidney critques came out; But that is just my memory of it which could be faulty. I am not sure this video i found is even the one my memory is from because i remember him going into not mathematical but verbal detail as to why particle acceleration and photon blue shift were not issues with his warp drive. but it doe give a partial defense.So here is my question to the forum: Does anyone recognize the venue that video was taken from so I can refine my search terms for google? We need a better clip than what i found.
Quote from: Stormbringer on 04/24/2015 01:05 pmDr Rodal: It was my impression that Dr White made his defense after the critics which probably included the Sidney critques came out; But that is just my memory of it which could be faulty. I am not sure this video i found is even the one my memory is from because i remember him going into not mathematical but verbal detail as to why particle acceleration and photon blue shift were not issues with his warp drive. but it doe give a partial defense.So here is my question to the forum: Does anyone recognize the venue that video was taken from so I can refine my search terms for google? We need a better clip than what i found.here, itīs about 4 minutes longer. You can jump to 54:00
As far as the issue with the warp drive gamma burst, from my understanding of the topic, the amount of build up has to do with both the average amount of particulate matter in your way (random gasses, dust motes, even possibly small rocks) and the length of time in warp. (Speed might also factor into this, but I cannot remember to be honest.) So a boost through 10,000 miles of space past lunar orbit might not have a whole lot of gamma burst to it despite the density provided from solar winds. But a boost of the full 4.2-ish light years from Alpha Centauri COULD be quite the lethal light show.As such, it seems like one of ways we'd handle this in the early days is just a matter of protocol. Any approaches to a star system end with the arriving ship coming out of the main leg of their warp fairly off in the distance to harmlessly shove off the burst. The advised distance for this would be an 'outer warp limit'. Until more information is known about the new star system, and the nature of the gamma burst itself, it might also be advisable to attempt to come in pointed to some degree off the target systems ecliptic. Following a short period of observation (verifying your position mostly), one could make a few shorter hops as they come in, to try and keep the burst minimized. Finally, it would seem that unless the 'inner warp limit' around the destination planet was quite large, the advisable thing to do is for the arriving ship to actually come out of warp having driven PAST the planet it is attempting to reach. This ensures that regardless of gamma burst, Earth and its satellites are not in any sort of peril. Speaking of the satellites, my own recommendation for the inner warp limit would be a distance a bit beyond the current useful orbits for satellites, just to ensure we don't bombard our infrastructure with gamma bursts unnecessarily.In the early days of warp travel, this is probably quite sufficient to deal with any issues. Though as more and more warp craft are built, some amount of effort would need to be expended to deal with orbital traffic control to ensure that an arriving ship doesn't accidentally blast a recently arrived ship.Chances are decent we'd set up some sort of scheduled window per the ships flight plan such that once you arrive at the outer warp limit, there is a radio ready to chat with you to let you know what flight path to take in and at what time intervals.Just my thoughts.
Quote from: Star One on 04/23/2015 06:51 pmSo it looks like any interest in warp drive has been for now shelved. But then warp drive isn't the EM drive & I imagine it's possible that people were getting the two mixed up and this is an act of clarification.Your statements are of course your personal view. I regard the first statement as unwarranted speculation, as the announcement from NASA Glenn just pertains their own center's work on space propulsion, and also because NASA Eagleworks is not conducting engineering of an actual warp-drive vehicle but is instead conducting R&D interferometer tests for the purposes discussed in previous posts.I regard Glenn's statement as a necessary sanitary statement to answer science-fiction fans that may be unaware of the difference between R&D and actual aerospace-engineering, and therefore may have completely unrealistic short-term expectations.
So it looks like any interest in warp drive has been for now shelved. But then warp drive isn't the EM drive & I imagine it's possible that people were getting the two mixed up and this is an act of clarification.
Quote from: Rodal on 04/23/2015 06:59 pmQuote from: Star One on 04/23/2015 06:51 pmSo it looks like any interest in warp drive has been for now shelved. But then warp drive isn't the EM drive & I imagine it's possible that people were getting the two mixed up and this is an act of clarification.Your statements are of course your personal view. I regard the first statement as unwarranted speculation, as the announcement from NASA Glenn just pertains their own center's work on space propulsion, and also because NASA Eagleworks is not conducting engineering of an actual warp-drive vehicle but is instead conducting R&D interferometer tests for the purposes discussed in previous posts.I regard Glenn's statement as a necessary sanitary statement to answer science-fiction fans that may be unaware of the difference between R&D and actual aerospace-engineering, and therefore may have completely unrealistic short-term expectations.Personally, I'm awaiting an unequivocal "Chicago Pile" moment, instead of near misses and uncertain results.
Quote from: JasonAW3 on 04/24/2015 03:28 pmQuote from: Rodal on 04/23/2015 06:59 pmQuote from: Star One on 04/23/2015 06:51 pmSo it looks like any interest in warp drive has been for now shelved. But then warp drive isn't the EM drive & I imagine it's possible that people were getting the two mixed up and this is an act of clarification.Your statements are of course your personal view. I regard the first statement as unwarranted speculation, as the announcement from NASA Glenn just pertains their own center's work on space propulsion, and also because NASA Eagleworks is not conducting engineering of an actual warp-drive vehicle but is instead conducting R&D interferometer tests for the purposes discussed in previous posts.I regard Glenn's statement as a necessary sanitary statement to answer science-fiction fans that may be unaware of the difference between R&D and actual aerospace-engineering, and therefore may have completely unrealistic short-term expectations.Personally, I'm awaiting an unequivocal "Chicago Pile" moment, instead of near misses and uncertain results.The Chicago pile (the world's first artificial nuclear reactor) had no radiation shielding and no cooling system of any kind. Enrico Fermi described the apparatus as "a crude pile of black bricks and wooden timbers." It was made of a large amount of graphite and uranium, with "control rods" of cadmium, indium, and silver. The Atomic Energy Commission later noted, that the real "gamble" was conducting "a possibly catastrophic experiment in one of the most densely populated areas of the nation!"Thus, Eagleworks probably should adopt a better analogy than the "Chicago Pile moment" Perhaps we should help them find a more politically acceptable analogy
...I'm thinking about that ring laser thing (from the optical diametric drive research) again where the wave form is formed in such a way that there are always transient negative energy regions in the waveform. ...
Quote from: Stormbringer on 04/24/2015 04:13 pm...I'm thinking about that ring laser thing (from the optical diametric drive research) again where the wave form is formed in such a way that there are always transient negative energy regions in the waveform. ...What ring laser thing possessing " always transient negative energy regions in the waveform" are you referring to?Link please
Quote from: Star-Drive on 04/21/2015 12:09 pmWhen considering the use of EM-drives in the making of warp-drives the attached two papers might be of interest.In the meantime, back to figuring out how to reliably drive an EM-drive...Edit: You might also like to read Sonny's Warp-field Mechanics 101 and 102 articles.http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20130011213.pdf Best, Paul M.Paul M,Thanks a lot. This papers very interesting, but little old. And what about latest papers/presentations which dated 04/04/2015, 04/09/2015 and 04/15/2015. I've seen only few pages from them and it would be very interesting to read full version. Can you share full document, please. In attachment are this pages I've seen.Best regards,Nikita Unkovsky
Quote from: niihelium on 04/24/2015 10:54 amQuote from: Star-Drive on 04/21/2015 12:09 pmWhen considering the use of EM-drives in the making of warp-drives the attached two papers might be of interest.In the meantime, back to figuring out how to reliably drive an EM-drive...Edit: You might also like to read Sonny's Warp-field Mechanics 101 and 102 articles.http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20130011213.pdf Best, Paul M.Paul M,Thanks a lot. This papers very interesting, but little old. And what about latest papers/presentations which dated 04/04/2015, 04/09/2015 and 04/15/2015. I've seen only few pages from them and it would be very interesting to read full version. Can you share full document, please. In attachment are this pages I've seen.Best regards,Nikita UnkovskyNikita:Dr. White's latest Warp Field Interferometer (WFI) results are just in PowerPoint file format at the moment, for they are just used for keeping the Eagleworks' technical and management teams aware of the latest developments. So if you want a copy of same you need to send a note to Dr. White asking for it. In the meantime Dr. White cautioned me yesterday that I need to be more careful in declaring we've observed the first lab based space-time warp signal and rather say we have observed another non-negative results in regards to the current still in-air WFI tests, even though they are the best signals we've seen to date. It appears that whenever we talk about warp-drives in our work in a positive way, the general populace and the press reads way too much into our technical disclosures and progress.Next find attached Sonny's latest WFI data set number-1 analysis that utilizes all 28.5k period samples instead of just a very few arbitrarily selected pixel addresses we used before so as to minimize the compute times. And I'm glad that Dr. White was an ex-game programmer in his youth because his programming expertise was really needed for this problem to be able to analysis this large set in less than the 100 years his initial cut at is indicated. In fact it is now running in less than 4-to-6 hours on a Windows 7.0 PC with an Intel i5 in it. Be that as it may, you will note that the assumed in-air space-time compression signal is still there with now a much improved signal to noise ratio than the previous example I provided.Best, Paul M.