This is a repository for all cool scientific discussion and fascination. Scientific facts, theories, and overall cool scientific stuff that you'd like to share with others. Stuff that makes you smile and wonder at the amazing shit going on around us, that most people don't notice.
Post pictures, vidoes, stories, or links. Ask questions. Share science.
Originally Posted by mikey23545:
Sweet holy Moses.
"A few months ago, physicist Harold White stunned the aeronautics world when he announced that he and his team at NASA had begun work on the development of a faster-than-light warp drive.
His proposed design, an ingenious re-imagining of an Alcubierre Drive, may result in an engine that can transport a spacecraft to the nearest star in a matter of weeks — and all without violating Einstein's law of relativity. We contacted White at NASA and asked him to explain how this real life warp drive could actually work."
Researchers from the University of Sydney have done some advanced crunching of numbers regarding the effects of FTL space travel via Alcubierre drive, taking into consideration the many types of cosmic particles that would be encountered along the way. Space is not just an empty void between point A and point B… rather, it’s full of particles that have mass (as well as some that do not.) What the research team — led by Brendan McMonigal, Geraint Lewis, and Philip O’Byrne — has found is that these particles can get “swept up” into the warp bubble and focused into regions before and behind the ship, as well as within the warp bubble itself.
When the Alcubierre-driven ship decelerates from superluminal speed, the particles its bubble has gathered are released in energetic outbursts. In the case of forward-facing particles the outburst can be very energetic — enough to destroy anyone at the destination directly in front of the ship.
“Any people at the destination,” the team’s paper concludes, “would be gamma ray and high energy particle blasted into oblivion due to the extreme blueshifts for [forward] region particles.”
Originally Posted by mikey23545:
Sweet holy Moses.
"A few months ago, physicist Harold White stunned the aeronautics world when he announced that he and his team at NASA had begun work on the development of a faster-than-light warp drive.
His proposed design, an ingenious re-imagining of an Alcubierre Drive, may result in an engine that can transport a spacecraft to the nearest star in a matter of weeks — and all without violating Einstein's law of relativity. We contacted White at NASA and asked him to explain how this real life warp drive could actually work."
my simplistic understanding was this will not be possible without damage when you stop. [Reply]
Originally Posted by "Bob" Dobbs:
What the research team — led by Brendan McMonigal, Geraint Lewis, and Philip O’Byrne — has found is that these particles can get “swept up” into the warp bubble and focused into regions before and behind the ship, as well as within the warp bubble itself.
When the Alcubierre-driven ship decelerates from superluminal speed, the particles its bubble has gathered are released in energetic outbursts. In the case of forward-facing particles the outburst can be very energetic — enough to destroy anyone at the destination directly in front of the ship.
“Any people at the destination,” the team’s paper concludes, “would be gamma ray and high energy particle blasted into oblivion due to the extreme blueshifts for [forward] region particles.”
If I'm reading this correctly, this is only a problem for people at the destination, not people inside the ship, right?
And if so couldn't the problem be solved by choosing a stopping point far enough away from inhabitants so this blast of particles doesn't impact them? [Reply]
Originally Posted by mikey23545:
If I'm reading this correctly, this is only a problem for people at the destination, not people inside the ship, right?
And if so couldn't the problem be solved by choosing a stopping point far enough away from inhabitants so this blast of particles doesn't impact them?
Would you be able to plot that precise? Especially in its infancy? [Reply]
While the particles would mainly be an issue in front and back, the article implies that they could radiate from the craft in ANY direction. You MAY have to slow down too far away from your destination to be practical. [Reply]
One of the things that has made me wonder about the Alcubierre drive, is that you'd pretty much have to have your route laid out knowing exactly where every object is along your path. You couldn't steer. And hitting something at that speed would be bad. So you could probably travel quickly in the vast emptiness between galaxies, but there would still need to be a lot of mapping going on. For safe efficient space travel, we need a 3D live map of the universe to navigate. [Reply]
Originally Posted by "Bob" Dobbs:
While the particles would mainly be an issue in front and back, the article implies that they could radiate from the craft in ANY direction. You MAY have to slow down too far away from your destination to be practical.
Well, certainly doesn't sound like you can eliminate it as a possibility yet. Worth continuing the research on it, I'd say. [Reply]
Originally Posted by KC Fish:
One of the things that has made me wonder about the Alcubierre drive, is that you'd pretty much have to have your route laid out knowing exactly where every object is along your path. You couldn't steer. And hitting something at that speed would be bad. So you could probably travel quickly in the vast emptiness between galaxies, but there would still need to be a lot of mapping going on. For safe efficient space travel, we need a 3D live map of the universe to navigate.
I would think you could avoid obstacles by making your flight path a series of small jumps rather than one long straight line path, working your way around cosmic "roadblocks".
As you say, though, it would require a lot of mapping first. [Reply]
Originally Posted by mikey23545:
I would think you could avoid obstacles by making your flight path a series of small jumps rather than one long straight line path, working your way around cosmic "roadblocks".
As you say, though, it would require a lot of mapping first.
Come to think of it, could this also be a solution to the "particle" problem? Maybe by making multiple short jumps, you could allow the particles to dissipate at every jump so there was not nearly so much of a burst when you arrived at your final destination... [Reply]
Press Conference on MESSENGER results from Mercury
NASA will host a news conference at 2 p.m. EST on Thursday, November 29, to reveal new observations of Mercury's polar regions from the MESSENGER spacecraft. The briefing will be carried live on NASA TV.
The information below, although historically accurate, has not been substantially updated since circa 2005, we will be updating the page to include the new results from the MESSENGER mission.
Mercury would seem to be one of the least likely places in the solar system to find ice. The closest planet to the Sun has temperatures which can reach over 700 K. The local day on the surface of Mercury is 176 earth-days, so the surface is slowly rotating under a relentless assault from the Sun. Nonetheless, Earth-based radar imaging of Mercury has revealed areas of high radar reflectivity near the north and south poles, which could be indicative of the presence of ice in these regions (1-3). There appear to be dozens of these areas with generally circular shapes. Presumably, the ice is located within permanently shadowed craters near the poles, where it may be cold enough for ice to exist over long periods of time. The discovery of ice on the Earth's moon can only serve to strengthen the arguments for ice on Mercury.
How was the evidence for ice found?
Investigations of Mercury were done from Earth using the Arecibo radio telescope, the Goldstone antenna, and the Very Large Array (VLA). The Goldstone/VLA study (1) used the NASA Deep Space Network 70-m Goldstone dish antenna to transmit 8.51 GHz, 460 kW, right circularly polarized radar waves towards Mercury. The reflections were received by the National Radio Astronomy Observatories 26 VLA antennas. Calibration and processing of the radar returns showed radar-bright (high radar reflectivity) with depolarized signatures at the north pole. The Arecibo observations (2,3) were made by transmitting an S-band (2.4 GHz), 420-kW, circularly polarized coded radar wave at Mercury. The wave reflects off Mercury back to Earth. The wave is both transmitted and received by the Arecibo radio telescope. Filtering and processing the return signal gives a radar reflectivity map of Mercury's surface with a resolution of approximately 15 km. About 20 anomalously reflective and highly depolarized features were observed at the north and south poles. [Reply]
