Travel to New Worlds in NASA's Starship Enterprise (Some Day)

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
Someone over at NASA has been paying way too much attention to Star Trek and possibly SG-1 to boot. The NASA team is working on a prototype that closely resembles starships from Star Trek. The only small detail that might hold the project up a bit is that pesky faster-than-light warp engine. So, how’s that project coming guys? :D
 
Whats funny is when people think star trek ships they only think of the warp engine, when there's a ton of other stuff you need to worry about, such as space debris

Which is why trek ships have deflectors, otherwise running into a piece of dust at 50x the speed of light would be, well, interesting to say the least

*BOOM!*
 
Meh, theoretical drives, with the same exact theory as before just now someone whipped up some fancy new pictures to make it look pretty and "real"

NASA announced in 2012 that it was working to build a "warp drive" that could enable "faster-than-light" travel. Two years later and the space agency hasn't built a spaceship capable of such speeds yet — but thanks to artist Mark Rademaker, we now know what one could look like.
Click to expand...
Yet 10 years before this they shut down their Breakthrough Propulsion Physics (BPP) program, which all things considered was really cheap for NASA, and the upside is with this department, other little departments wouldn't regurgitate the same ideas a decade later acting as if we're that much closer. We're not going to go to warp speeds in our lifetimes unless a) some uber genius figures something out while not working at GE or any major corporation that will claim all rights to the technology or b) we find some exotic alien technology that crashed here in the past or b) some exotic alien technology gets handed to us by aliens, but the BPP program was great because it simply did the pen and paper approach to see what is actually possible and then what is feasible.

ShamisOMally said:
Whats funny is when people think star trek ships they only think of the warp engine, when there's a ton of other stuff you need to worry about, such as space debris

Which is why trek ships have deflectors, otherwise running into a piece of dust at 50x the speed of light would be, well, interesting to say the least

*BOOM!*
Click to expand...
Always wondered about that, since the ship really isn't traveling that speed, just the space around it is, what happens when space that is moving meets space that isn't moving? I mean a piece of debris enters the "warp space" it can't exactly be traveling at 50x the speed of light since that'd be violating all sorts of treaties and laws. So wouldn't the debris basically be traveling at the exact same speed that it had before it entered?
 
That is a FTL prototype craft design the rings are the space bending engine think futurama the ship does not move itself it moves space around it...
 
ShamisOMally said:
Whats funny is when people think star trek ships they only think of the warp engine, when there's a ton of other stuff you need to worry about, such as space debris
Click to expand...

True. In the Star Trek universe the discovery of warp drive is generally considered the single most important technological breakthrough that a species can make because it leads to many other discoveries, one of the most notable ones being the answer to the question "Are we alone in the universe?"
 
sfsuphysics said:
Always wondered about that, since the ship really isn't traveling that speed, just the space around it is, what happens when space that is moving meets space that isn't moving? I mean a piece of debris enters the "warp space" it can't exactly be traveling at 50x the speed of light since that'd be violating all sorts of treaties and laws. So wouldn't the debris basically be traveling at the exact same speed that it had before it entered?
Click to expand...

This is a good question though, I'd like to know too. I tend to think that the debris would go around the edge of the warped space. It might be possible to warp right through the center of a star.
 
niconx said:
This is a good question though, I'd like to know too. I tend to think that the debris would go around the edge of the warped space. It might be possible to warp right through the center of a star.
Click to expand...

Since light is susceptible to gravity, I would assume traveling in a warp bubble would be as well. Although you are moving slower than relativistic light, your ship is still physically real and too much gravity would still pull at it, and crush it if you got too close to a star.
 
I always preferred the idea of fold engines from the Robotech manga/ cartoon universe from my childhood.
Space/ time gets distorted by some type of artificial wormhole and "folds" two places together, so you pass instantaneous from one point to another.
It bypasses the need for excessive speed and reduces chance of hull rupture from debris.
I thought it was a pretty novel and outside the box way of thinking if possible.
 
Generally for long term applications in space, even at sub-luminal rest velocity and exotic acceleration the solution to most things in a thick water shield for radiation and debris. You'd gather a lot of nasty ahead of you, even if it stretched out like a reverse singularity event and eventually there would be a maximum volume for the medium causing untold problems. Like penetrating your fold, and sending larger than expected mass into your water shield. I'd sign up for a one way trip to Mars, but I most certainly wouldn't strap a negative matter propelled engine to my butt.

I am worried about coming to an emergency stop with these things, considering the energy potential required to create the initial dip in matter. Runaway train! Hell, even the energy required to finally discover the negative mass in quantity to make this a reality at all! We haven't observed it locally in quantity aside from interaction particles, so it may be a very special place in the cosmos if at all.

You also have a very MiB flying ball situation trying to control such an event. In idea, negative mass is attracted to regular mass, it creates a repulsive force (anti-gravity), and again in idea you would have something continually zipping back and forth in the sphere of influence until it has energy potential that can escape the bound equal (+/-) mass, or collide. Newton's laws of motion fall apart and you would have to know the final resting phase of the particles/objects in question or else you could potentially be flung in any direction the universe determines. If it happens at all.

Matter + anti-matter == kaboom
Matter + negative matter == poof

Entropy and the law of conservation are laughing at us right now for being complete idiots. :mad:
 
SGA76 said:
I always preferred the idea of fold engines from the Robotech manga/ cartoon universe from my childhood.
Space/ time gets distorted by some type of artificial wormhole and "folds" two places together, so you pass instantaneous from one point to another.
It bypasses the need for excessive speed and reduces chance of hull rupture from debris.
I thought it was a pretty novel and outside the box way of thinking if possible.
Click to expand...

I believe that results in accidental portals to Hell.

event-horizon_10358880.png
 
The article is balking at 2 years for such an ambitions propulsion system? Have they heard of the Manhattan Project? That had way more people with way larger budgets trying to build the first nuclear weapon, and it still took so long of a time.

It'll happen, but us non-scientists can't accurately speculate on when.
 
Something that would do around 150000 miles an hour would be more practical right now.
 
Yeah I'm going to need a couple of these in my Star Citizen account by Tuesday Thank You.
Check out SC organization SERR.

Every one knows its not about propulsion its all in the particle redistribution mechanism via telepathic coordinate drop.
 
MajorDomo said:
Someone over at NASA has been paying way too much attention to Star Trek and possibly SG-1 to boot. The NASA team is working on a prototype that closely resembles starships from Star Trek. The only small detail that might hold the project up a bit is that pesky faster-than-light warp engine. So, how’s that project coming guys? :D
Click to expand...

NASA is NOT working on a prototype that closely resembles Star Trek, Star Wars, babylon 5, firefly or whatever.

That's just an artists concept rendering. You know, like the bazillions of concept designs that emerged prior the xbox one and PS4 release that look NOTHING like the final thing.
 
The final result will be a computer model on someones laptop that proves some aspects of it but will then have a 8 trillion dollar developement cost to take it further.
 
3d modeling PC: $2,000
3DS MAX software: $3675
1 cup of coffee at Govt facility: $100
NASA Engineer doodling for fun: $5,000

Belief that you actually made progress: Priceless
 
I'm I the only one that thinks they could have come up with a more original name?
 
This is no more legitimate an image of feasible technology than a picture of the Millenium Falcon.
 
Our interstellar travel ships, assuming we are around long enough to have any, won't look like sleek Sci-Fi-inspired designs. They will be practical, built in space from an orbital station. There is no need for sleek in space. There won't be wide open spaces for people to play basketball, bleach-white mess halls, or places for people to "take in the view". Alien got it mostly right, at least with the ship interiors. Claustrophobes need not apply.
 
I recall reading about some design for a "warp drive" that some Russian scientist came up with a couple years ago. Although it required some insane amount of power that nothing yet in existence was capable of making yet. Then some other guys came along and adapted that theory to use possibly much less power. The only problem with this theory is that it would release so much energy upon reaching its destination that it pretty much destroyed anything directly it is path when it stopped.
 
ShamisOMally said:
Whats funny is when people think star trek ships they only think of the warp engine, when there's a ton of other stuff you need to worry about, such as space debris

Which is why trek ships have deflectors, otherwise running into a piece of dust at 50x the speed of light would be, well, interesting to say the least

*BOOM!*
Click to expand...

Which is why putting an attractive field ahead of the ship's bow is a bad idea. NASA's proposed warp field dynamics would cause the ship to incinerate within a few microseconds due to friction with interstellar hydrogen.
 
COUGH


Why is it they yap about Alpha Centari? That was Lost in Space, we have since come to understand there are no Earth-like planets there? :eek::rolleyes:
 
xX_Jack_Carver_Xx said:
COUGH


Why is it they yap about Alpha Centari? That was Lost in Space, we have since come to understand there are no Earth-like planets there? :eek::rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Well actually.... ;)

Seriously, in my astronomy classes every semester I need to do a major overhaul of the material for exoplanet. Translation, yes there are planets around Alpha Centauri, no the ones we found are not Earth-like, however who knows what we'll find later.
 
Phoenix333 said:
Which is why putting an attractive field ahead of the ship's bow is a bad idea. NASA's proposed warp field dynamics would cause the ship to incinerate within a few microseconds due to friction with interstellar hydrogen.
Click to expand...

Might need to rethink how matter interacts between unmoving and moving space, all I'm saying.
 
bmellis1984 said:
3d modeling PC: $2,000
3DS MAX software: $3675
1 cup of coffee at Govt facility: $100
NASA Engineer doodling for fun: $5,000

Belief that you actually made progress: Priceless
Click to expand...

Why not just use Blender 3d and cut out $3675 of the total cost? :p
 
MajorDomo said:
Someone over at NASA has been paying way too much attention to Star Trek and possibly SG-1 to boot. The NASA team is working on a prototype that closely resembles starships from Star Trek. The only small detail that might hold the project up a bit is that pesky faster-than-light warp engine. So, how’s that project coming guys? :D
Click to expand...
Looks more of Space Odyssey and Lost in Space, than Star Trek and SG-1.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Might need to rethink how matter interacts between unmoving and moving space, all I'm saying.
Click to expand...

Lowering the spatial density ahead of the ship is creating an artificial gravity well that the ship is "falling" into. The ship is not the only thing that can fall into that gravity field. I'll let you figure out the rest from there.
 
Phoenix333 said:
Lowering the spatial density ahead of the ship is creating an artificial gravity well that the ship is "falling" into. The ship is not the only thing that can fall into that gravity field. I'll let you figure out the rest from there.
Click to expand...

we're talking two separate things. You're talking about the ship falling, which means it's moving which means it can't go FTL. I'm talking about warping space and moving the space the ship happens to be in, which can allow for FTL travel.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Well actually.... ;)

Seriously, in my astronomy classes every semester I need to do a major overhaul of the material for exoplanet. Translation, yes there are planets around Alpha Centauri, no the ones we found are not Earth-like, however who knows what we'll find later.
Click to expand...

Is there new info on more planets? As I understand it there's currently one planet candidate in the Alpha Centauri system, and the data is still heavily disputed. If it's real it seems to have about the same mass as Earth, but it's close orbit around Alpha Centauri B makes it scorching hot.
 
Phoenix333 said:
Which is why putting an attractive field ahead of the ship's bow is a bad idea. NASA's proposed warp field dynamics would cause the ship to incinerate within a few microseconds due to friction with interstellar hydrogen.
Click to expand...

OK, we'll take your word on this Mr. Internet Guy.

Know how I know this is BS? You postulate that interstellar hydrogen will create friction with a vessel traveling at "warp speed". Maybe.

But then you say that the ship will incinerate within a few microseconds. Obviously you have zero idea how quickly such an incineration would take place, but you decided to arbitrarily use the term "microseconds" anyway because it sounds impressive.

Not impressive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top