A new study provides some theoretical underpinning to warp drives, suggesting that the superfast propulsion tech may not forever elude humanity.

Sci-fi fans — especially “Star Trek” devotees — are familiar with warp drives. These hypothetical engines manipulate the fabric of space-time itself, compressing the stuff in front of a spaceship and expanding it behind. This creates a “warp bubble” that allows a craft to travel at incredible velocities — in some imaginings, many times faster than the speed of light.

In 1994, Mexican physicist Miguel Alcubierre published a groundbreaking paper that laid out how a real-life warp drive could work. This exciting development came with a major caveat, however: The proposed “Alcubierre drive” required negative energy, an exotic substance that may or may not exist (or, perhaps, the harnessing of dark energy, the mysterious force that seems to be causing the universe’s accelerated expansion).

Alcubierre published his idea in Classical and Quantum Gravity. Now, a new paper in the same journal suggests that a warp drive may not require exotic negative energy after all.

“This study changes the conversation about warp drives,” lead author Jared Fuchs, of the University of Alabama, Huntsville and the research think tank Applied Physics, said in a statement. “By demonstrating a first-of-its-kind model, we’ve shown that warp drives might not be relegated to science fiction.”

The team’s model uses “a sophisticated blend of traditional and novel gravitational techniques to create a warp bubble that can transport objects at high speeds within the bounds of known physics,” according to the statement.

Understanding that model is probably beyond most of us; the paper’s abstract, for example, says that the solution “involves combining a stable matter shell with a shift vector distribution that closely matches well-known warp drive solutions such as the Alcubierre metric.”

The proposed engine could not achieve faster-than-light travel, though it could come close; the statement mentions “high but subluminal speeds.”

This is a single modeling study, so don’t get too excited. Even if other research teams confirm that the math reported in the new study checks out, we’re still very far from being able to build an actual warp drive.

Fuchs and his team admit as much, stressing that their work could end up being a stepping stone on the long road to efficient interstellar flight.

“While we’re not yet preparing for interstellar voyages, this research heralds a new era of possibilities,” Gianni Martire, CEO of Applied Physics, said in the same statement. “We’re continuing to make steady progress as humanity embarks on the Warp Age.”

The team’s study was published online on April 29. You can find it here, though all but the abstract is behind a paywall; a free preprint version is available via arXiv.org.

  • Possibly linux
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    7 months ago

    You can not go faster than the speed of light.

    These studies are the click bait of the academic world

    • AmbroisindeMontaigu@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      7 months ago

      The study says “subluminal” in its abstract, the linked article hides that between lots of speculation and talk about fictional FTL warp drives, so I’d say the study is ok, the article is clickbait.

    • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      “Hi, not only did I not read anything except the headline, I no understanding of what a warp drive does and have never heard of Aculbierre.”

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Pretty much. If you do, using some kind of cute trick like Alcubierre metrics, you break causality, guaranteed. Clickbait is actually flattery, I think. These headlines might as well be “bat boy”.

      Showing a subluminal one is possible without negative energy density is really neat from a theoretical perspective, but gravity is weak. If 99% of c is all you need it’s almost certainly easier to use the hypothetical reaction engine of your choice than burrito spacetime.

    • lemmyseizethemeans@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yeah don’t know why you got down voted. Thing about mass and the speed of light, well, it’s not negotiable. Unless you got zero mass there’s only so fast you can go thems the facts so agreed, click bait.

      • Possibly linux
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        I’m pretty sure you still can’t go faster than the speed of light with zero mass. It would be exactly the speed of light.

        • lemmyseizethemeans@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          It’s because you need more than infinite energy. The cool thing about special relativity is you can understand it with algebra. As you accelerate you gain mass, that’s the rub

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Well, the Alcubierre metrics specifically sidestep that, by “moving” a chunk of a spacetime through itself.

        It still breaks causality and is generally suspect for not corresponding to a physical thing quantum gravity allows, though. Plus, since they’re potentially finite, they come with a guarantee any such shenanigans would require negative energy density to happen.