starship-design: Re: More Specific about FTL/ZPE

[TLG.van.der.Linden@tip.nl (Timothy van der Linden)]

Kyle replied: 

>>That "exotic matter" is just a terminology, what the writer (Miguel
>>Alcubierre) probably means is that he doesn't want to speculate about how we
>>might transform space-time.
>>It is likely that the presence of energy/matter will do the transformation.
>>My guess though is that the energy densities needed are far beyond what we
>>like it too be.
>
>In his paper he said something about using "controlled zero-point quantum 
>fluctuation coherence". I _think_ he meant ZPE, but I don't know. Exotic 
>matter _according to his paper_ was matter that had negative gravitation.

Yes, you and Lee are right about exotic meaning "negative gravitation", I
had remembered it incorrectly. 

>>>The drive segments (probably 2, one in front, other in back) would be placed
>>>as I said earlier at the very least 1.25 ship radii in front and back of the
>>>starships non-drive portion. These estimates are the result of long study,
>>>and "best-guess".
>> 
>>Does this idea have a name, so that we might find more information about it?
>>Or can you give us (me) more pointers?
>
>I can give you more information. I'll post it after I finish writing this. It
>doesn't have an official name, just an idea I had after studying Alcubierre's
>design, and studying ZPE. 

I've still little idea what the purpose of the coils is, and how they are
positioned.

>From what I've heard from you so far, I'm inclined to think that the
experimental and theoretical data is too few to really discuss its
properties and make estimates about what practical problems are associated
with using DST.
It is not that this group or I aren't interested in this, we simply are
limited to only use science, that has enough data to discuss about in a way
an engineer would.
If you think I am mistaken here, and consider to have enough data for this
group to do the above, then please correct me.

N.B. You are in the unlucky situation that not all members of the group know
as much about ZPE, FTL and DST as you do. Therefore you might need to supply
more fundamentals than you are used to. I think it is save to assume that we
know the basics of physics and math. Most of us have a few specialties
beyond this.
 
>>>ZPE is theoretically accomplished by placing two charged superconducting
>>>plates within a nanometer of one another.
>>
>>When you say "accomplished", what do you mean with that word?
>>From what I've read about this "Casimir effect", all that is shown, is that
>>energy is present, but the same would be true for two electrical energy
>>present between electrically charged plates.
>>As result we can't use the Casimir effect to turn it into something useful.
>
>I mean the net attraction and negative energy density between the plates.
>Maybe this could be used on the road to negative gravitation without having
>to have negative matter.

Maybe. Unfortunately here too we have too many unknowns, to use it
effectively in this group. We would like to be able to get more or less real
numbers, so that we can quantify the hurdles that have to be overcome.

>>Quantum physics indeed tells us about virtual particles (particles with
>>negative energy), they are at a lot of places where forces play a role.
>>Even between two electrically charged plates there are virtual particles
>>(photons). The trouble is that we cannot turn around the negative energy
>>into positive energy.
>
>True. I wonder where that energy does come from. Any ideas?

Remember that the net energy is equal to zero. But to answer your question:
I assume the energy is borrowed from the energy stored in the charges on the
plates. That is, a charge itself is an energy source, but remember we don't
know how to tap/drain it.

Timothy



>>BTW. Almost every single line of your message appears with the last word on
>>a new line. Is there a way that you do something about your linewidth?
>
>Yeah, I've noticed that. Tell me if this works alright. If not, I'll set
>it narrower. Sorry about the inconvinience.

It doesn't seem to make any difference. Maybe you should set it wider?