Warp Drive Theory

[T'Pol 0]

Sub light speed with multilightspeed distances how?

 

The relative-snail explanation.

 

The warp field that surrounds the starship is manipulated in order to alter their power and size. The aft portion of the field is made smaller and reaches out behind the starship only a few hundred meters. The aft portion stretches the fabric of space-time behind the vessel, making it larger. The forward section of the warp field becomes larger, stretching out several million meters a head of the vessel. The field then condenses or folds the space-time in front of the vessel to make the space-time in that area smaller. Therefore space and time bends much like the body of a snail to create propulsion. Once the starship has covered the condensed space in front of it the field reforms to do the same process all of again, this process is almost instantaneous and so the vessels speed and direction appears to be constant. This also means that the actual vessel is only traveling at about 0.9 of light speed and so the vessel does not need the infinite energy needed to push it beyond the light barrier. However, if an observer situated on a planet or station were to observe the vessel then it would appear to be traveling beyond the speed of light. There fore the ships speed may only be 0.9 c (‘c’ indicating light speed) but its RELATIVE speed would be [perhaps] 1516 c. (warp nine).

 

The Subspace explanation.

 

The ‘subspace’ warp fields that now surround the vessel create a ‘pocket’ of subspace in which the vessel sits. Because subspace conforms to different physical laws than our dimension then the vessel is able to use the aft section of the warp field to create a force on the aft section of the starship pushing it beyond c. Simple!

 

 

Both explanations have solid foundations in physics and yet both are completely unrealistic. Evidence from the show seems to point to both explanations, as do the tech manuals. Although the majority of people follow the ‘relative-snail’ explanation. Both explanations also explain why the warp power is needed on at all times during warp (rather than only a burst from the warp engines and then letting inertia do the rest).

[master_q 0]

I would not say that they are completely unrealistic. Yes, I would say to a degree they are. However, one thing that must come to mind is that this whole explanation of how warp theory works only focuses on the casual structure of space-time and that no doubt is a problem. They again, the whole theory of general relativity is really on the casual structure. This is a key which any kind of “warp theory” lacks (as in the missing variables that it presents). It again shapes my mind into ideas of how paramount the unification of QM & GR is (Quantum Gravity!).

 

First we have the idea of that warp drive creates geodesics in space-time continuum by “stretching space”, in a way (someone could imagine as being some form of a wormhole). Then we can apply things like the Raychaudhuri-Newman-Penrose Equations and so on (but that’s another story).

 

We only have a general, causal structure. By the regular interpretations or ideas in what or how we can go FTL (well, you are not technically going faster . . . you would just appear so in another frame of reference) it gives us a limit. The issue that needs to be addressed is “how”. I don’t mean “how” as the casual structure, but “how” in the atomic structure. The atomic structure of space and time is the real key ingredient here. Some kind of starship is not a black hole or is not a star. The casual theorems and ideas of a ship would not get you that far because causal applies to the much larger scale. You would result in a larger scale. No doubt. But you must get there first and that requires Quantum Gravity. I have high enthusiasm that once QG is in place, then we will be much closer to actually developing something like warp drive. (There is also a lot to work out in QM also)

 

After issues like that have been addressed then you can really connect the dots to “how”. It would show if was “unrealistic” or not.

 

 

Master Q

StarTrek_Master_Q@yahoo.com

[Xeroc 0]

Well... neither of those explanations are quite correct. There is someone (who I am of course helping) I know who is working on a flash program which will explain exactly how warp drive (theory) works, but alas, they are not finished.

 

The basic idea is it uses subspace to "warp" space - essentially making the distance in front of the ship smaller. (the intricate spatial details I will refrain from mentioning here - unless you would like me to elaborate?) This is a quite vague explanation - but without numerous diagrams and some prior knowledge of the nature of subspace, really hard to explain.

 

Remember: this is how it works in Star Trek - not necessarily how it would work in our universe.

[cptwright 1]

Well... neither of those explanations are quite correct.  There is someone (who I am of course helping) I know who is working on a flash program which will explain exactly how warp drive (theory) works, but alas, they are not finished.

 

The basic idea is it uses subspace to "warp" space - essentially making the distance in front of the ship smaller.  (the intricate spatial details I will refrain from mentioning here - unless you would like me to elaborate?) This is a quite vague explanation - but without numerous diagrams and some prior knowledge of the nature of subspace, really hard to explain.

 

Remember: this is how it works in Star Trek - not necessarily how it would work in our universe.

so when your done working on this flash program are ya gonna share so we can better understand the theory of warp drive? didnt i hear something on one of the tlc or discovery shows on nasa that they are working on variables of warp drive, and that they have ideas that have come from the show?

[Xeroc 0]

Well... neither of those explanations are quite correct.  There is someone (who I am of course helping) I know who is working on a flash program which will explain exactly how warp drive (theory) works, but alas, they are not finished.

 

The basic idea is it uses subspace to "warp" space - essentially making the distance in front of the ship smaller.  (the intricate spatial details I will refrain from mentioning here - unless you would like me to elaborate?) This is a quite vague explanation - but without numerous diagrams and some prior knowledge of the nature of subspace, really hard to explain.

 

Remember: this is how it works in Star Trek - not necessarily how it would work in our universe.

so when your done working on this flash program are ya gonna share so we can better understand the theory of warp drive? didnt i hear something on one of the tlc or discovery shows on nasa that they are working on variables of warp drive, and that they have ideas that have come from the show?

Yes. I'll be sure to share the link. And - it is suppossed to have some thoeries about how Warp Drive might actually work. (without subspace)

[master_q 0]

Well... neither of those explanations are quite correct.  There is someone (who I am of course helping) I know who is working on a flash program which will explain exactly how warp drive (theory) works, but alas, they are not finished.

 

The basic idea is it uses subspace to "warp" space - essentially making the distance in front of the ship smaller.  (the intricate spatial details I will refrain from mentioning here - unless you would like me to elaborate?) This is a quite vague explanation - but without numerous diagrams and some prior knowledge of the nature of subspace, really hard to explain.

 

Remember: this is how it works in Star Trek - not necessarily how it would work in our universe.

That’s basically what T'Pol said, Xeroc. (Sorry to say)

 

It really is all up to interpretation in a point. It is science fiction and one can really only go as so far in understanding the nature of ST’s idea.

 

You said

“The basic idea is it uses subspace to "warp" space - essentially making the distance in front of the ship smaller. (the intricate spatial details I will refrain from mentioning here - unless you would like me to elaborate?)”

 

That’s basically what he/she said. That goes right into the geodesic of the curvature of space-time. In fact that is almost exactly what he/she said (T’Pol just did not expand on the idea too much)!

 

Give me a few minutues. I'm going to elaborate on the details of null geodesics.

 

 

Master Q

StarTrek_Master_Q@yahoo.com

[master_q 0]

First of all Xeroc, everyone here (besides myself) are really only looking at the casual structure. This is a very big gap in anything to compute the understanding of what “warp theory” is. You can’t just get from A to B without a regular and normal look into the atomic structure. Both you and T'Pol both say “we are just going to play around with this geodesic magically”. That’s a big gap in actually having any kind of conjecture.

 

I know that you said that “this is how it works in Star Trek - not necessarily how it would work in our universe”, but to me that just takes away the whole point in trying to make up a theory - even for science fiction. If you make up a theory for warp drive, then try to make it correct and work.

 

Both of you are saying we are taking the idea of geodesics to our advantage, but the general question must be how. We can generally view some kind of sphere as a in a hyperbolic-space (to a degree, that is . . . and remember I’m right now talking about the casual structure). Xeroc, if we look into something like a global hyperbolicity, then you can deep down into ideas of geodesic and the possible manipulation of or creating them more curved ones. Subspace can later be applied also, but at the heart you have to start here.

 

Ok, . . . If you remember back to when I was talking about co-ordinate systems in the electrodynamics of moving bodies (I believe we were talking about that in the time travel topic) and you have a good grasp on what I said, then you probably should have no difficulties on it now. However, be aware that it is a lot more complex and I’m going to be talking about quantum filed theory.

 

Because we are working with global hyperbolicity, then we can apply that there is a family of Cauchy surface (sigma) t for a point u in the present. So the Cauchy surface for u would be a null surface. We would also have interceptions from every timeline curve in u. Let’s extend this beyond that. If we have a geodesic pq and we have a line showing the geodesic of max length (don’t forget that u is the global hyperbolic), then null geodesic between p and q which would max the length and null the curves. This can be traced back to quantum filed theory . . . and that’s the neat thing - that we have an overall connection and so on. From topology (even though I’m no expect in it) we could say that the length of this curve is an upper semicontinuous (meaning that it has breaks) function. To get the max (or the curve of max length) it would be the geodesic. (If it were not then small variation would give a longer curve of pq). If we expanded that more (and more into the range of QFT), then one could say that point will conjugate to p with the null geodesic gamma joining them.

 

Diagram: {Just think of our light cone}

(p to q - past to future . . .)

 

{tip of cone}

Crossing region of light cone

q -Future end point of gamma

neighbouring geodesics meeting at q

p

 

 

Does that make sense Xeroc?

 

If that does (hopefully it does), then this basic foundation could be applied to the idea of subspace and geodesics.

 

I probably will go on and expand this into warp drive, but right now I have brain freeze (LOL - must be thinking topologically too much in the co-ordinate system . . . .I guess that would do it for anyone). {The good old stuff - energy! - in the form of and the idea of subspace and so on}

 

 

Master Q

StarTrek_Master_Q@yahoo.com

[Xeroc 0]

Well, so much for not getting into the details.

 

Master_Q, I'm not overlooking the details of the Warp Theory, I just didn't expand on it because it is hard to explain coherently, but so much for that!

 

Alright, this is based on a theory about the atomic structure of space called "Subspace Theory" - it is based on the accumulated properties of subspace shown in ST. While this theory could be pertinent to the "real" universe, there really isn't any evidence for subpsace existing.

 

First, what is subspace?

Bascially, our universe is like a giant 4-D Onion, we exist in one 3-D layer, and subspace is a collection of layers "below" (4-D) us. Also, the atomic structure of space is similar enough to matter so that space can have a density value - subspace is more dense based on the same relative distaces based on an absolute extra-universal measurment system. This means that subspace is "smaller" with the same amount of relative "spatial mass". What warp drive does is it "links" normal space with subspace (only in front of the ship) causing normal space to become "more dense" or "smaller" or "shorter" The matter (spaceship) does not get distorted, it moves on to the shortened space and the space returns to normal behind the ship. This is bascially how it works. Of course, with diagrams all this would be much more clear.

[master_q 0]

Well, so much for not getting into the details.

 

Master_Q, I'm not overlooking the details of the Warp Theory, I just didn't expand on it because it is hard to explain coherently, but so much for that!

 

Alright, this is based on a theory about the atomic structure of space called "Subspace Theory" - it is based on the accumulated properties of subspace shown in ST.  While this theory could be pertinent to the "real" universe, there really isn't any evidence for subpsace existing.

 

First, what is subspace?

Bascially, our universe is like a giant 4-D Onion, we exist in one 3-D layer, and subspace is a collection of layers "below" (4-D) us. Also, the atomic structure of space is similar enough to matter so that space can have a density value - subspace is more dense based on the same relative distaces based on an absolute extra-universal measurment system.  This means that subspace is "smaller" with the same amount of relative "spatial mass".  What warp drive does is it "links" normal space with subspace (only in front of the ship) causing normal space to become "more dense" or "smaller" or "shorter" The matter (spaceship) does not get distorted, it moves on to the shortened space and the space returns to normal behind the ship.  This is bascially how it works.  Of course, with diagrams all this would be much more clear.

Well I’m not really debating that. I think I know what subspace is according to ST and some of its correlation to physics. You are just addressing what it is, but the whole point is “how” and “why”. It is like saying this is the definition of “x”, but not giving how we get to “x”. In my reply I stated how and why QFT can apply to the null geodesics. One must apply that to get to “x” before one can develop "x". (And to the fact that the definition of “x” is not in question . . . When did I say it was?)

 

 

Master Q

StarTrek_Master_Q@yahoo.com

Edited June 12, 2003 by master_q