Earth To Mars In 3hrs **no Joke** Options

[Marslauncher]

Just got tipped off to this story

http://news.scotsman.com/scitech.cfm?id=16902006

Here is the paper

http://www.uibk.ac.at/c/cb/cb26/heim/theor...sicsaip2005.pdf


They could feasibly have a prototype within 5 years!!!

Happy New Year indeed everyone.

[Bill Harris]

Be careful... we don't want _them_ to find us.

--Bill

[ElkGroveDan]

They could feasibly have a prototype within 5 years!!!

Hold on there a minute. You realize of course that this proposal requires rewriting the present laws of physics, don't you? I'll get excited when I see some real science supporting this notion. Until then, I'll just wait for anti-matter warp drives.

[Bob Shaw]

This is the subject of the lead article in the 7 January 2006 New Scientist.

The 'prototype in five years' line appears to relate to the prospects of a high-Tesla test to determine whether any physical effects may be detected being feasible in about that timescale - not to the building of a spacedrive.

Bob Shaw

[Bob Shaw]

I just had a brief look at the paper itself, which is as clear as the proverbial water-enriched regolith. I'm no judge of the specific content, which seems to promise wonders indeed, but I can judge the cultural context as defined by the References.

These are skimpy, and in some cases appear to be quite 'generalist' in nature, and are *not* what I'd expected. The NS article *does* make it clear that Burkhard Heim only described this work once in a peer-reviewed form (and also that he must have been a most remarkable man, being horribly injured in the 1940s yet still pursuing his theories). His major claim to credibility appears to be that his theories have correctly predicted the masses of fundamental particles in ways that simply outshine competing methodologies.

Sandia Labs appears to offer the prospect of a test using the Z-machine X-ray generator, wich could probably generate the necessary magnetic fields.

Bob Shaw

[Guest_Richard Trigaux_*]

This seems too nice to be true.

I read most of the article, and not understood everything, partly because it is high level theory, partly because it often makes non-obvious inferences.

It could be true while being still unnoticed by the experiments, as only very special conditions are required (fast speed into very high magnetic fields) which were never gathered into a lab, and no more in nature (although it could nicely explain the jets in pulsars and quasars: high speed + high magnetic fields). But at least the proposed test if feasible (at a moderate cost) and it should unambiguously prove or disprove this theory.

After, if it proves true, hello the stars...

[Decepticon]

"Sulu ahead warp factor 6...Engage!"

[RNeuhaus]

With this, we will be able to warp to follow to the U-F-0.

Rodolfo

[nprev]

A slim chance is better than none...and we really need something like this ASAP. However, I won't get my hopes up..

[Stephen]

Just got tipped off to this story

http://news.scotsman.com/scitech.cfm?id=16902006

Here is the paper

http://www.uibk.ac.at/c/cb/cb26/heim/theor...sicsaip2005.pdf
They could feasibly have a prototype within 5 years!!!

Happy New Year indeed everyone.

For more info, you might also want to check out:

http://www.uibk.ac.at/c/cb/cb26/heim/

and especially:

http://www.uibk.ac.at/c/cb/cb26/heim/theor.../raumfahrt.html

======
Stephen

[ljk4-1]

My questions - assuming for a moment this method even has a chance of working.

* How would we know if another dimension/universe has a faster speed of light?

* How would we find it with this method?

* What if the dimension/universe in question does have a faster speed of light, but then that means its other physical laws don't jive with our own and the starship that tries it is either destroyed or stuck in this alternate dimension/universe?

* If it does work, is this why we haven't seen ETI - they are all dimension-jumping in their starships?

* What if there are beings who live in said dimension/universe who really don't like interlopers from other realities using their reality for a faster ride? This might also explain why we haven't seen ETI yet.

Just once I'd like to see a theory of this kind that doesn't invoke the near-magical abilities of alternate dimensions or string physics or need the technology and energy requirements of a Kardashev Type 3 civilization.

Or maybe we're still thinking Newtonian and everyone else in the galaxy has gone post-Einsteinian?

[deglr6328]

Ughh. Is anyone else having visions of the Podkletnov debacle? I mean it's virtually identical.

[Guest_Richard Trigaux_*]

* How would we know if another dimension/universe has a faster speed of light? 


* What if the dimension/universe in question does have a faster speed of light, but then that means its other physical laws don't jive with our own and the starship that tries it is either destroyed or stuck in this alternate dimension/universe?

After a first expectative reaction, I must tell I am a bit skeptic about this. The paper postulates that our space-time has four more dimentions than the already known 3 space dimention and time dimention. Starting from this, applying einsteinian calculus can produce a coherent theory, and predict many things. (especially Heim notes that the gravitation results from curvature of the three space dimentions, and he then deducts that the other forces result from curvature in the other dimentions, which makes sense). The problem is that the author don't provide evidence of the existence of such other dimentions. So that only experiment can settle the issue. Fortunately the proposed experiment with the "sandia Z machine" would (after the theory) produce clearly measurable effects at a low cost. So I think this experiment must be done. But I would not bet on it.

* If it does work, is this why we haven't seen ETI - they are all dimension-jumping in their starships?

* What if there are beings who live in said dimension/universe who really don't like interlopers from other realities using their reality for a faster ride?  This might also explain why we haven't seen ETI yet.

Just once I'd like to see a theory of this kind that doesn't invoke the near-magical abilities of alternate dimensions or string physics or need the technology and energy requirements of a Kardashev Type 3 civilization.

Good question, ljk4-1. Of course we could start the usual debate about why we don't yet have visits of ETI, because they don't exist, because we are the firsts, because they consider us as inferior war-prone specy bound to quickly destroy our planet, because we are in a space zoo, etc. But in the instance my prefered hypothesis would be simply that Heim's theory don't work.

It would be noted too that there are discrepancies between the UFO behaviors and the Heim's spaceships behaviors. One of the main is about the fact that UFO can apparently accelerate at thousands of g, a thing which would crush any biological occupier, and that the Heim machine is not supposed to do. Unless we see UFOs in one of the n parallel spaces of the theory?

[Guest_Richard Trigaux_*]

With this, we will be able to warp to follow to the U-F-0. 

Rodolfo

There is a common belief about the warp drive being a marvellous thing, but I say it don't work. Why?

Warp drive is supposed to work as follow: a spaceship folds the space around it, and this produces a gravitationnal field which accelerates the ship. On some variants it can accelerate at higher speed than light.

What I say is that this is strictly equivalent to a surfer who would surf on a wave he produced himself with blowing on the ocean. Admitting he could do that with a 100% efficiency, he would simply recover with his surf the energy he used to blow. Or the force exerted by surfing and the force necessary to create the wave are the reaction of each other, and thus they cancel each other with a perfect exactitude.

A curved space is a mass. We can create a warp drive very easily: take a heavy iron ball (for warping space) and a balsa model spaceship, and let them float inside the shuttle or ISS. You would see the spaceship model approaching the iron ball, attracted by its mass (to be exact we should do the experiment into free space, not aboard the ISS which has a stronger gravitationnal field. On Earth one could use a Cavendish-like experiment). In order to maintain the acceleration, we should keep a constant distance between the spaceship model and the "space warping" iron ball, by attaching the iron ball to the model spaceship, so what it is alway in front of it and it exerts a constant acceleration on it. But in doing so, the global center of mass receives no acceleration, and we just have a useless "modern art sculpture" unable to move, because the attractive force (by the warping mass) and the force necessary to move the warping mass are the reaction of each other.

Anyway warped space has a mass, that you have to move too, and unfortunately it is much heavier than any spaceship.

This reasoning is also true, I think, with any distortion of space, including warping having the effect of a negative mass.

[abalone]

We could use cold fusion to power it, but dont let the oil company spies find out because they will put out contracts on all of us.