by mike_esspe on 6/10/14, 12:57 PM with 58 comments
by Steuard on 6/10/14, 1:26 PM
They spend a lot of time discussing quantum vacuum energy, but the one short note about its "propulsion implications" includes the comment that "Those particular gravity theories are still up for debate." That's perhaps generous: quantum gravity isn't far from my field, and I've never heard of this take on the origin of gravity and inertia.
I'm also rather puzzled by the quote "Although gravity’s effects on electromagnetism and spacetime have been observed, the reverse possibility, of using electromagnetism to affect gravity, inertia, or spacetime is unknown." That's really not at all true. Our models of gravity all include very well-defined effects of electromagnetism on spacetime: the energy density in those fields causes space to curve, just like any other form of mass or energy. Hypothesizing anything else would require fundamental changes to the theory. That's entirely possible! But it's misleading to characterize the current state of affairs as having an unfilled gap like this.
So yeah. I'd love a good spacedrive as much as the next guy. But this article doesn't do much to make me optimistic about it.
by sehugg on 6/10/14, 2:08 PM
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/technology/features/ntrees.html#....
by madaxe_again on 6/10/14, 4:10 PM
by eudox on 6/10/14, 1:54 PM
They should just have a page that says: "FTL is impossible, but that's fine, once you get used to the way things are."
by thearn4 on 6/10/14, 1:18 PM
by jcfrei on 6/10/14, 5:53 PM
by sdegutis on 6/10/14, 2:03 PM
For real?
by misterfusion on 6/10/14, 11:16 PM
by throwwit on 6/11/14, 1:06 AM