PDA

View Full Version : NASA's Starship Enterprise


ORAC
12th Jun 2014, 11:53
Well, no harm in dreaming..... :O

This is the amazing design for NASA’s Star Trek-style space ship, the IXS Enterprise (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/06/11/this-is-the-amazing-design-for-nasas-star-trek-style-space-ship-the-ixs-enterprise/?tid=pm_pop)

http://img.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp-content/uploads/sites/23/2014/06/14038693038_0da3b292a6_b.jpg

NASA engineer and physicist Harold White announced a few years ago (http://techland.time.com/2012/09/19/nasa-actually-working-on-faster-than-light-warp-drive/) that he was working on a potentially groundbreaking idea that could allow space travel faster than the speed of light. Yes, like in “Star Trek.” And now, to boldly go where no designer has gone before, Mark Rademaker — who is collaborating with White — has created a CGI design concept for the “warp ship.” They’re calling it the IXS Enterprise.

“We wanted to have a decent image of a theory conforming Warp ship to motivate young people to pursue a STEM career,” Rademaker said in an e-mail interview. “It does have some Sci-Fi features that might never transfer to a possible final design, unless we really want to.”

A warp ship such as the IXS Enterprise could allow travel to interstellar space in a matter of weeks rather than, say, centuries. And the science behind why it might be possible is truly mind-boggling. An over-simplified explanation is that the concept seeks to exploit a “loophole” in Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity that allows travel faster than the speed of light by expanding space-time behind the object and contracting space-time front of it. Io9 explains more (http://io9.com/5963263/how-nasa-will-build-its-very-first-warp-drive): Essentially, the empty space behind a starship would be made to expand rapidly, pushing the craft in a forward direction — passengers would perceive it as movement despite the complete lack of acceleration. White speculates that such a drive could result in “speeds” that could take a spacecraft to Alpha Centauri in a mere two weeks — even though the system is 4.3 light-years away. White, whose title is “Advanced Propulsion Theme Lead for the NASA Engineering Directorate,” has mathematically calculated a plausible way to accomplish this using far less energy than required by the original theory, which was proposed in 1994 by physicist Miguel Alcubierre. His concept requires using large rings that surround the spacecraft (which you can see in the image above) to greatly reduce the amount of energy needed to warp space-time in front of and behind the spacecraft.

“The rings are most important as they will form the Warp bubble,” Rademaker said in his e-mail. “The way they are designed now will reduce the energy requirement needed to form the bubble. (By quite a large factor.) Also we tried to fill up as much space within the rings, it’s expensive to leave that open or unused.”

White and his team at NASA’s Eagleworks (http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20110023492) Labs are now working to create a “proof of concept” for this idea. So how quickly can this all become a reality? According to White, in an interview with i09 (http://io9.com/5963263/how-nasa-will-build-its-very-first-warp-drive), proving that the math can become a reality in the lab is the first and probably most important step in the process: What White is waiting for is existence of proof — what he’s calling a “Chicago Pile” moment — a reference to a great practical example.

“In late 1942, humanity activated the first nuclear reactor in Chicago generating a whopping half Watt — not enough to power a light bulb,” he said. “However, just under one year later, we activated a ~4MW reactor which is enough to power a small town. Existence proof is important.”

White explains in great detail the science behind his quest in this lecture:

9M8yht_ofHc#t=33

Rademaker’s design is posted in his Flickr account (https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/), and we’ve included the images with his permission:

http://img.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp-content/uploads/sites/23/2014/06/13965443380_a3067e5020_b.jpg

compressor stall
12th Jun 2014, 12:16
Why is it streamlined?

Boudreaux Bob
12th Jun 2014, 12:21
We can't get to the Space Station, so how do we get to Mars?:uhoh:

tony draper
12th Jun 2014, 12:30
Bean breeze,stop wasting money on manned spaceflight it's a busted flush,concentrate on the unmanned machines, they have done infinitely better than a few dozen people pissing about in low earth orbit.
:uhoh:

cattletruck
12th Jun 2014, 12:36
Essentially, the empty space behind a starship would be made to expand rapidly, pushing the craft in a forward direction

They plan on achieving this by jettisoning this out the back

http://images.forbes.com/media/lists/78/2012/gina-rinehart.jpg

Captain, I don't think the ship canna take anymore...

TomJoad
12th Jun 2014, 22:22
Why is it streamlined?

The saucer section is for atmospheric flight - don't you watch Star Trek:p

A A Gruntpuddock
13th Jun 2014, 03:27
Unfortunately, we would be in the 'rapidly expanding bubble' at the back.

Sounds like fun. :suspect:

arcniz
13th Jun 2014, 03:48
NASA has been living large on growth-biz -- MeninSpace and Coldwarstuff and GPS and WXSats Shuttle and x and y and z.... for a long time. Several decades of early NASA folk have retired on generous pensions, with the legacy of their efforts working great and seen as a permanent improvement to quality-of-life.

Problem now is... the "easy" stuff has been done, the mil stuff is off in a separate track, commercial Rocket-Launch things are slowly being phased in and the business is going to vendors all around the planet, so NASA's franchise is narrowing and the agency's vast staff and facilities are growing hard put to find funding for much more of same in the future. Photo-ops of Guys and Gals on Mars is not growing popular legs, and prospects of "other life in space" seems to be stretching out into the hundreds of light-years for travel-time, even without broaching the obvious issues about dangers to humanity's survival. Killer-Asteroids are still playing ok, but hardly the thing to provide a sound basis for hiring a whole new generation of Nasahoovians.

Meanwhile, the US Federal Gov has overspent itself by twelve to twenty TRILLION $$ trying to fix the economic fallout of the Millennium's first decade, and the US economy still basically sucks as far as the eye can see. Overall effect is to put a roof on NASA's future economics even if Congress spends every spare penny on shiny new toys to pad the fortunes of aerospace voters in various political tech strongholds.

Nasa's Sky may not be falling, but it seems likely to be seriously puckering up for a while, relative to the good times past. That might could last for a decade -- or maybe for a generation -- or two, maybe?

TomJoad
13th Jun 2014, 18:10
Just watched the video and read the technical report on the interferometer experiments. This is absolutely fascinating - if you have an hour to kill watch the video.

flying lid
13th Jun 2014, 19:20
Just looked at the plans, I have a few suggestions.

There seems to be a critical delta region near the sensor array which may cause fluctuations at the weak plasma conduit.

They should invert the time-matter fields and boost the burst matter stream at the enhanced zone.

Quantum core must have been aligned, because the weak plasma has been calibrated to megawatt to the power minus 6.

There has to be another anomaly within the critical reversed singularity
because the singularity vortex has been not removed.

They also need to boost the power interocitor, because the delta region seems to be in the yellow anomalies sector zone. The quantum energy is fine - however the need to calibrate the gravity dampener before delta region damages the quantum calibration at warp velocity.

Another plasma conduit would boost crystals at the vacuums.

Sorted, now it will work of 2 AA batteries !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lid

tony draper
13th Jun 2014, 19:40
They need the means to eject the Warp Core as well,we did that all the time at sea,
"Captain there's to much steam she'd gonna blow"
"Quickly Chief have your men throw the boilers overboard"
:rolleyes:

First.officer
13th Jun 2014, 20:02
I concur with flying lid's analysis - makes perfect sense.

I would add that it may be preferable though to use Duracell AA batteries, due to longer shelf-life, and the extra power the slick advertising gives you.

F/o

Checkboard
13th Jun 2014, 20:09
Why is it streamlined?

“We wanted to have a decent image of a theory conforming Warp ship to motivate young people to pursue a STEM career,” Rademaker said in an e-mail interview. “It does have some Sci-Fi features that might never transfer to a possible final design, unless we really want to.”i.e. - it's a concept, designed (just like Star Trek and Star Wars ships) to excite desire and interest. Do you think apple stuff sells just for the tech?? Humans LIKE sexy design :) The significant difference, though - is that this one (to the best of our current knowledge) could actually work :D

It's a long watch - but that lecture also states that NASA has a current drive on the books that is NOT a reaction drive! :eek:

That is - it doesn't chuck stuff out the back to go forward!! (Problem - you need to lift a LOT of stuff, and you run out of that stuff pretty quickly.) It creates a field which pushes on the very quantum fabric of vacuum to go forward - and would allow spacecraft (with people) to travel as far as Saturn with ALL current other limitations. :eek:

Solid Rust Twotter
14th Jun 2014, 02:43
Hmmm... *sucks teeth* Going to need an upgrade to the temporal exciters if you want it to work properly, boss. Not cheap, but I can do you a deal on a couple of used ones my brother in law has in his garage. Still good as new, hardly used at all....

con-pilot
14th Jun 2014, 04:26
i.e. - it's a concept, designed (just like Star Trek and Star Wars ships) to excite desire and interest. Do you think apple stuff sells just for the tech?? Humans LIKE sexy design The significant difference, though - is that this one (to the best of our current knowledge) could actually work

Besides that, a curved or circular vessel is easier to pressurize. That is why the Space Station is not a cube.

Hempy
14th Jun 2014, 06:41
flying lid,

Your postulations, whist very well reasoned, ironically fall into the same trap that plagues the NASA team, in that they are sadly but understandably formed on an incorrect assumption.

Brillet & Hall placed a limit on the anisotropy of the speed of light of Δc/c ≈ 10−15, where Δc is the difference between the speed of light in the x- and y-directions.

This is why you say that the Δ region seems to be in the yellow anomalies sector zone and the power interocitor needs to be BOOSTED!

The fact (and I have proven this although without review) is this.

Those two 'brainiacs' were out by a full power. Try Δc/c around 100-150!!

They also completely failed to understand the confluence of any z-axis, but that is a minor abomination in comparison.

Think of it this way. Consider ANY curved 4-dimensional manifold for which the tangent space to any point is a 4-dimensional Minkowski space, as being FLAT......!!

My point being this. Recalculate with that understanding and you will see that if the power interocitor is REDUCED (or preferably removed, although I understand the safety implications), you will find that your two AA batteries are overkill!

I agree wholeheartedly with all of your other postulations though and I wish you well with your correspondence with NASA.

First.officer
14th Jun 2014, 11:27
Oh, as a matter of interest...where is the flux capacitor located?

OFSO
14th Jun 2014, 14:02
Given NASA's present record they'll either farm it out to a private contractor or get ESA to build it, with the Russians having to carry the crew into space to get on board.

TomJoad
14th Jun 2014, 20:19
I'm not so sure OFSO looking at the published research papers they have shown a significant investment and commitment. In any respect it certainly is a tantalizing proposition.

OFSO
14th Jun 2014, 21:17
I subscribe to the ESA Bulletin and I'm surprised at how much NASA relies on ESA: a lot of work is carried out on a technology exchange basis with no money changing hands either way.

Back to the theme. I wonder why nobody has thought that it might be easier for the so-called starship to remain in one place and have the galaxy or local area moved around them ? Galaxies are capable of moving at vast speeds in a coherent fashion and are self-powered/propelling (in one direction, anyway). Of course one might have to wait for some time in one place until one's destination came along.......

Checkboard
14th Jun 2014, 22:41
" I understand how the engines work now. It came to me in a dream. The engines don't move the ship at all. The ship stays where it is and the engines move the universe around it." ―Cubert Farnsworth

A Clone of My Own - Futurama Wiki, the Futurama database (http://futurama.wikia.com/wiki/A_Clone_of_My_Own)

Cacophonix
14th Jun 2014, 22:45
Look guys, all this shit is well and good (and well done to NASA) but where are the girls? ;)

Sarah Brightman & Hot Gossip - I lost my heart to a starship trooper 1979 - YouTube

Caco

Windy Militant
15th Jun 2014, 00:06
Cheesy songs and tinfoil costumes eh! I'll see that and raise you this!:}
Sheila B. Devotion - Spacer 1979 - YouTube

PS you don't AA batteries just a nice hot cup of tea to drive it!

TomJoad
15th Jun 2014, 00:31
I subscribe to the ESA Bulletin and I'm surprised at how much NASA relies on ESA: a lot of work is carried out on a technology exchange basis with no money changing hands either way.

Back to the theme. I wonder why nobody has thought that it might be easier for the so-called starship to remain in one place and have the galaxy or local area moved around them ? Galaxies are capable of moving at vast speeds in a coherent fashion and are self-powered/propelling (in one direction, anyway). Of course one might have to wait for some time in one place until one's destination came along.......

As do I, infact I did some work for ESA back in the day - nothing particularly interesting dull regulatory stuff, certainly never got anywhere near NASA - i don't have the right stuff:bored:. Collaborative work is a given in this particular field as demonstrated with other projects like the Large Hadron Collider at CERN and the Joint European Fusion Research. But then again collaboration is the life blood of science.:ok:

India Four Two
15th Jun 2014, 08:14
I would add that it may be preferable though to use Duracell AA batteries, due to longer shelf-life, and the extra power the slick advertising gives you.


F/o,
I love the ads. How to imply that your product is better without actually lying!

"No other Alkaline battery lasts longer" is much slicker and more persuasive than "All Alkaline batteries last for the same amout of time" :ok:

OFSO
15th Jun 2014, 08:21
I also like Scalzi's Skip Drive: you generate a parallel universe in which your starship is where it should be and move into it. Meanwhile an identical replacement starship is thought to pop into where your starship was (although obviously you can't verify this as you've gone with the first one). Of course this does suppose an infinite number of parallel universes, but what the heck, if infinite means infinite, who cares ?

Between Scalzi and Farnsworth I think they have the problem sorted.....

Mostly Harmless
16th Jun 2014, 07:52
I see the music is coming out... and I am seeing/hearing some new songs so... let us say that they find a suitable power source and manage to make this magical carpet to ride...

NASA has a bit of a musical history... waking astronauts with music, Hadfield making music videos in space....

Let us assume it is a one way mission and rather than sending the best and brightest the Earth has to offer, they send you (or me) on a one way rocket ride to the stars. Someone bright enough to run the show but suicidal enough to know that they aren't coming back.

What would be your musical message upon departure?

Would you go classical with Sprach Zarathustra, the 5th or Adiagio in D minor?

Would you go with Lucky Buck Rogers.... BINijYepahA Oh those 80's girls? :)

Would you go with something more poignant to your permanent departure like this? fxCUyy_aVzA

Or more soulful? D5Y11hwjMNs

What is your last musical message home?

Mostly Harmless
16th Jun 2014, 07:56
Or this? 42IL0O6pPqQ

seniortrooper
16th Jun 2014, 10:23
OFSO: I concur. It seems by the time you add:
Earths rotation to the
solar system speed thru the galaxy we are in
to the galaxy speed through the universe
and then add this linear speed to the expanding speed of the universe on the whole

we seem to be travelling at around 7 million miles per hour RIGHT NOW.

So - let's just wait and watch the stars wazz past over the next several billions of years and pick and mix our neighbours.............. Simples :ugh: