Downside of warp drives: Annihilating star systems when you arrive


Recommended Posts

The dream of faster-than-light travel has been on the mind of humanity for generations. Until recently, though, it was restricted to the realm of pure science fiction. Theoretical mechanisms for warp drives have been posited by science, some of which actually jive quite nicely with what we know of physics. Of course, that doesn?t mean they?re actually going to work, though.

NASA researchers recently revisited the Alcubierre warp drive and concluded that its power requirements were not as impossible as once thought. However, a new analysis from the University of Sydney claims that using a warp drive of this design comes with a drawback. Specifically, it could cause cataclysmic explosions at your destination.

To see how the Alcubierre drive could devastate an entire star system, you have to know a little about how it would work. The ship would consist of a central pod, and a large flattened ring around it (pictured below). The ring would have to be made of an as-yet unidentified kind of dense exotic matter capable of bending space-time.

Supply the craft with enough energy, and the very fabric of the universe can be warped. NASA now believes this would require orders of magnitude less energy than Alcubierre originally thought. When activated, space behind an Alcubierre drive expands while contracting in front. The ship itself hums along in a stable pocket, or bubble in space. It turns out the bubble is the problem.

As your faster-than-light ship sails through the cosmos, it?s not alone. Although we often think of space as empty, there are loads of high-energy particles shooting through the void. The University of Sydney research [PDF] indicates that these particles are liable to get swept up in the craft?s warp field and remain trapped in the stable bubble.

warp_drive_starship.jpeg

The longer the journey lasts, the more of these dangerous particles build up. This doesn?t affect the ability of the warp drive to keep bending the laws of the universe ? it?s the stopping that?s going to ruin your day.

The instant the Alcubierre drive is disengaged, the space-time gradient that allows it to effectively move faster than light goes away. All the energetic particles trapped during the journey have to go somewhere, and the researchers believe they would be blasted outward in a cone directly in front of the ship. Anyone or anything waiting for you at the other end of your trip would be destroyed.

Because of a funny little quirk of relativity, there is no upper limit to the amount of energy a Alcubierre drive could pick up. A long trip could vaporize entire planets upon your arrival. The researchers are beginning a new round of number crunching to see how bad the problem is. It?s possible the deadly particle beam could be projected in all directions, making Alcubierre drives unworkable. That spiffy warp ship might make a better weapon than method of transportation.

The Alcubierre drive is, of course, still highly speculative. NASA scientists are working with small-scale models in an effort to produce localized distortions in space, but this new Aussie research could give NASA something to think about. Even with future advances in technology, this method of space flight might prove to be impossible. At least then we wouldn?t have to worry about annihilating everyplace we try to explore.

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/140635-the-downside-of-warp-drives-annihilating-whole-star-systems-when-you-arrive

Pff, invent the Deflector Array as well then?

Pretty sure if someone manages to bend space to achieve warp they could invent something to deflect the particles away in their sleep.

  • Like 2

If the problem is the build-up of particles over the distance of the trip, it would likely be necessary to make shorter 'burst-trips' if you will, going in and out of warp space so that when the particles are released, it wouldn't be so catastrophic. Of course, you first have to know how much travel would be necessary to build up so many particles that stopping would cause a cataclysmic explosion ahead of you. Then you adjust accordingly.

The funny thing is that (as mentioned above) Star Trek already addressed this idea with the Deflector Array, the shape of the ships, and the configuration of the 'Warp Bubble'.

Does anyone else find it funny that the ship above looks a lot like the early Vulcan ships in Star Trek? (Other than the obvious football in the earlier pic)

vulcan_command_ship_02.jpg

  • Like 2

Navigational deflectors, or bussard ramscoops. Or both. Solved :-)

Also the Starfleet rule that you shouldn't enter or exit warp while inside a solar system exists for a reason ;-)

And good call with the vulcan ship there Shane hehe

Navigational deflectors, or bussard ramscoops. Or both. Solved :-)

Also the Starfleet rule that you shouldn't enter or exit warp while inside a solar system exists for a reason ;-)

And good call with the vulcan ship there Shane hehe

Two good, viable options also.

Of course, it's not really a Starfleet rule; rather a United Federation of Planets rule. Starfleet is an Academy for training officers to pilot Federation ships or other work about Federation vessels. It's the Federation that makes such laws and regulations (such as the Prime Directive). This was a mistake I noticed was repeated in J. J. Abram's Star Trek movie. Federation and Starfleet were used interchangeably as though they were one and the same. But they really aren't.

Navigational deflectors, or bussard ramscoops. Or both. Solved :-)

Also the Starfleet rule that you shouldn't enter or exit warp while inside a solar system exists for a reason ;-)

And good call with the vulcan ship there Shane hehe

But I've seen them enter & exit solar systems using warp.

But, supposedly, you're not supposed to use warp while orbiting a planet, something to do with a gravity well and warp not interacting together would destroy the planet or something along those lines.

Two good, viable options also.

Of course, it's not really a Starfleet rule; rather a United Federation of Planets rule. Starfleet is an Academy for training officers to pilot Federation ships or other work about Federation vessels. It's the Federation that makes such laws and regulations (such as the Prime Directive). This was a mistake I noticed was repeated in J. J. Abram's Star Trek movie. Federation and Starfleet were used interchangeably as though they were one and the same. But they really aren't.

No, Starfleet Academy is where students train in order to enter Starfleet.

Starfleet itself is the name of their combined military and exploration fleet.

The UFP (United Federation of Planets) is a coalition of many worlds that work together. Some members of those worlds choose to enlist in Starfleet, and some of them choose to stay with their own local military and/or exploration fleets.

The wording used in the newest Star Trek film is correct in the usage cases present. Watch it again more closely using the context I've provided above. You will find that every example is correct.

But I've seen them enter & exit solar systems using warp.

But, supposedly, you're not supposed to use warp while orbiting a planet, something to do with a gravity well and warp not interacting together would destroy the planet or something along those lines.

BTW, there is a bit of fuzz surrounding this as it is handled somewhat inconsistently at times. I've viewed it along the lines of there are certain systems in which it is safe to enter/exit warp speed, and certain systems where it is not safe. This is mostly due to the inconsistencies shown...but heck they've even shown warp in atmo before in Star Trek IV on Earth of all places...

No, Starfleet Academy is where students train in order to enter Starfleet.

Starfleet itself is the name of their combined military and exploration fleet.

The UFP (United Federation of Planets) is a coalition of many worlds that work together. Some members of those worlds choose to enlist in Starfleet, and some of them choose to stay with their own local military and/or exploration fleets.

The wording used in the newest Star Trek film is correct in the usage cases present. Watch it again more closely using the context I've provided above. You will find that every example is correct.

BTW, there is a bit of fuzz surrounding this as it is handled somewhat inconsistently at times. I've viewed it along the lines of there are certain systems in which it is safe to enter/exit warp speed, and certain systems where it is not safe. This is mostly due to the inconsistencies shown...but heck they've even shown warp in atmo before in Star Trek IV on Earth of all places...

Ah, man, you're right. My bad.

Hyperdrives is where it's at baby, none of this messing about with warp drive. Check out Stargates speeds compared to Star Treks.

Asgard hyperdrives can hop between galaxies in minutes. It was supposed to take Voyager, what? 75 years to get a mere 70,000 lightyears? (3/4 of the width of our galaxy)

Hyperdrives is where it's at baby, none of this messing about with warp drive. Check out Stargates speeds compared to Star Treks.

Asgard hyperdrives can hop between galaxies in minutes. It was supposed to take Voyager, what? 75 years to get a mere 70,000 lightyears? (3/4 of the width of our galaxy)

Those little guys know their stuff and would bitch slap those star fleet noobs.

but heck they've even shown warp in atmo before in Star Trek IV on Earth of all places...

I remember seeing that in the theatre, back in the 1980s.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Apple reportedly has a second-generation iPhone Fold planned for 2027 by Hamid Ganji The iPhone Fold is one of the most anticipated tech products expected to debut this fall. It will be Apple’s first foldable iPhone, ushering in a new product category for the company. While the first generation has yet to hit the shelves, a new leak suggests Apple has already begun work on its successor. Chinese leaker Digital Chat Station claims that the second-generation iPhone Fold has already been confirmed, meaning Apple could launch a successor in fall 2027. The foldable iPhone is also reportedly referred to as the “iPhone Ultra,” though it remains unclear whether Apple will ultimately choose that branding, especially as Samsung is rumored to rename the Galaxy Z Fold 8 as the Galaxy Z Fold Ultra this year. The leaker also claims that the second-generation foldable will feature a wider folding display while reusing the same screen found in the first generation. Apple’s first foldable iPhone is expected to feature a 7.8-inch inner display and a 5.3-inch outer screen in a passport-style form factor. It has already been reported that Apple plans to change its iPhone release cycle in 2026 to spread launches throughout the year. Under this strategy, the iPhone Fold is expected to debut this fall alongside the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max. The standard iPhone 18 and iPhone Air 2 are expected to arrive later in 2026 or in early 2027. Speaking of the iPhone Air, Digital Chat Station says Apple remains undecided about a third-generation model. The company is reportedly waiting to see how the iPhone Air 2 performs in the market, and if sales disappoint, a successor may never materialize. As we reported this week, the iPhone Air has not been scrapped from Apple’s plans. The second-generation model is reportedly scheduled for spring 2027 and could introduce upgrades such as an additional rear camera for ultrawide photography and improved battery life.
    • ahh yes the good old your opinion differs from mine so you are therefore insane lol destiny 1 had no agenda pushing and was a massive success of a game, if you clearly look online the team for some reason thought they had too many men on the team and went on a woman and dei recruitment drive and we all know how destiny 2 performed from then on in
    • The limited imaginations and business acumen of non-dominant players is simply that: the abject lack of creative business acumen. Businesses often want to operate in a financially-rewarding marketplace (free market economics) and/or exit/cash-out at maximal financial recompense. Money is their incentive; regulations are both their obstacles and their tools; politics is their means of influencing the marketplace. Google, in this story's example, is crying that AWS and Azure are "too dominant" -- cuz Google Cloud is not printing as much money as Alphabet wants (although it is still dramatically more than they actually need). The EU DMA should truly follow-the-money and treat the EU as its own sovereign nation in order to protect European market players: Domestic entities are exempt from market-influence regulations until absolute monopoly is achieved; Foreign (non-EU/non-Euro) entities are all regulated via stricter DMA measures whereby regulated partnership with independent domestic entity becomes the only way for foreign entities to 'tip the scale' for favorable financial remunerations. Basically create a dual-track aligning with China's foreign investment models. In my eyes, this is the only way to properly protect the European marketplace beyond the current dot-com/ai-bubble/social-media crazes.
    • I have a fire n ice theme w my bedroom laptops. one is a red lenovo gaming laptop (fire) and the precision is ice
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      Vistor earned a badge
      One Year In
    • First Post
      kinowa earned a badge
      First Post
    • Rookie
      krychek57 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      406
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      172
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      131
    4. 4
      Xenon
      72
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!