# Alcubierre and Dark Matter

Discussion in 'Nerd Out Zone' started by Sevio, Jul 25, 2016.

1. ### SevioBack Into Space

• Member
I thought this quote was rather interesting so I figured I'd put it in its own thread so as not to hijack the Consciousness thread. So how much is known about this Conformal Gravity theory and how it could potentially permit a warp bubble without negative energy?
NeonSturm likes this.
2. From the documentations I've seen everything I list below is possible:

It is presented that two objects (subatomic particles, fluid particles, planet+star, …) which circle around each other create an volume where:
1. Space is pushed outward (on air-foils it creates under-pressure).
2. Waves are pushed outward (Objects might bend these waves and create a shadow without or with fewer pushing space. Because these waves come from everywhere, shadow is thrown in all directions)
• 2 Ships placed parallel to each other aside each other have less waves between them than on the other side - thus pushing them together. More space, larger waves can form.

In old times, peoples wondered what air is and thought about angels sitting in the sky next to stars speaking with each other (although the space is without air to speak with).
They had no idea that we will one day use hydrodynamic (hydro=water) formulas for calculating air in jet engines.
Maybe we will one day use hydrodynamic formulas to calculate warp drive engines. Is this really that far-fetched?
3. ### PsychoticLeprechaunDesigner & Web Developer

• Dev Member
Conformal Gravity takes as an axiom that there is a conformal symmetry to space time. This symmetry yields different metrics when you derive the equivalent ones to those of General Relativity. These metrics mean that when you run through the maths of the Alcubierre drive, specific shaping functions for the warp bubble yield only positive components for the energy. That's a not-so-elegant reason to like CG, but the fact that the extra terms it produces in the field equations account for dark matter and dark energy, if all the difficulties in the maths involved can be ironed out it becomes a rather elegant alternative to GR.
Sevio likes this.
4. ### PsychoticLeprechaunDesigner & Web Developer

• Dev Member
The idea of using fluid dynamical equations to solve for propulsion in a vacuum intuitively comes across as impossible as the other use cases (air, water, etc.) are all definite fluids. That said, there is at least one theory that proposes we treat vacuum as a superfluid (appropriately called the Superfluid Vacuum Theory), though these are subject to somewhat different maths due to the lack of viscosity.

Another interesting thing to note, is that it is commonly considered a requirement for there to be a real matter to act as propulsion for bodies. Yet recently there have been experiments showing devices able to generate thrust (albeit in very small quantities) without propulsion. The proposal for how this works that seems most intuitive is the idea that the devices use the virtual particles in the vacuum for their propulsion. Plenty of opposition exists to the proposal, but it is a possibility, and if so is one of the most sci-fi technologies ever as well as giving some more credence to the idea of the vacuum having some fluid properties.
Sevio likes this.
5. General Relativity only works as long as Mass is constant.
But the closer you approach light-speed, the more mass an object gets in formulas for energy needed for acceleration and consequently deceleration.

I played around with the thought that the flow of time is 1D in 4D space-time (x,y,z,t) and that according to the Pythagorean Theorem the Hypotenuse is sqrt(xx+yy+zz+tt).
When our velocity in x+y+z increases, t has to decrease because the Hypotenuse can only be equal to c (c = speed of light).
Velocity might be only a shift between [sqrt(xx+yy+zz) = s=0; t=1] and [sqrt(xx+yy+zz) = s=1; t=0].
If we accelerate one object by accelerating exhaust, we shift both objects between velocities in sqrt( ss+tt )=c=constant.
Do we shift both objects t→s by accelerating one to +1x/t and one to -1x/t or do we shift objects opposite on the s=0;t=1←→s=1;t=0 scale? Or can we do both?

I have thought about ways of archiving different masses for objects at low velocities (compared to c) of about 5'000 RPM of a 3.5" disc to 10'000 RPM of a 5m wide disk.
Then I saw a video about pendulums made out of 2 segments (second being shorter). The segments transfer energy efficiently to each other, thus you get an outer segment of different mass because mass is relative to velocity.
If the inner segment is accelerated until the outer segment swings a full turn, it makes a fast turn with higher mass.
But if this outer segment makes a turn outside the inner segment's full circle only at one side of that circle (and stays at lower speeds near the centre during the opposite period) it makes a slow turn with lower mass.

Another experiment for a game's physic engine:
A–(–)–––B – a pipe with 2 end points, A and B and a spinning disk (-) on the line between A and B.
B–––(–)–A - a pipe with opposite period (like a sine wave vs a cosine wave).
|
While the disks go around A, the rotational energy is stored in the bottom disk.
When they met, the energy skips disks, so that they always spin with high rotational energy when they go around the right end.
Because spinning disks have a higher mass –sqrt(1*1 around x-axis + 1*1 along x-axis)=1.4 times the velocity and mass increases with velocity–, there must be a net force in one direction.

Looping back to the topic - I am curious if this causes gravity or how it revolutionizes our view of space!

Last edited by ; at Aug 14, 2016