FTL Drive, here we come?
David Shaw
(19 Apr 2017 15:34 UTC)
|
||
Re: [TML] FTL Drive, here we come?
Jeffrey Schwartz
(19 Apr 2017 22:34 UTC)
|
||
(missing)
|
||
(missing)
|
||
Re: [TML] FTL Drive, here we come?
Richard Aiken
(19 Apr 2017 23:30 UTC)
|
||
Re: [TML] FTL Drive, here we come?
C. Berry
(19 Apr 2017 22:39 UTC)
|
||
Re: [TML] FTL Drive, here we come?
Jeffrey Schwartz
(19 Apr 2017 23:32 UTC)
|
||
Re: [TML] FTL Drive, here we come?
C. Berry
(19 Apr 2017 23:42 UTC)
|
||
Re: [TML] FTL Drive, here we come?
Richard Aiken
(20 Apr 2017 01:04 UTC)
|
||
Re: [TML] FTL Drive, here we come?
Tim
(20 Apr 2017 04:10 UTC)
|
||
Re: [TML] FTL Drive, here we come? Tim (20 Apr 2017 02:43 UTC)
|
||
Re: [TML] FTL Drive, here we come?
Richard Aiken
(20 Apr 2017 02:59 UTC)
|
||
Re: [TML] FTL Drive, here we come?
Tim
(20 Apr 2017 04:14 UTC)
|
||
Re: [TML] FTL Drive, here we come?
Richard Aiken
(19 Apr 2017 23:24 UTC)
|
||
Re: [TML] FTL Drive, here we come?
shadow@xxxxxx
(20 Apr 2017 15:40 UTC)
|
||
Re: [TML] FTL Drive, here we come?
Richard Aiken
(20 Apr 2017 17:38 UTC)
|
||
Re: [TML] FTL Drive, here we come?
Tim
(21 Apr 2017 02:41 UTC)
|
||
Re: [TML] FTL Drive, here we come?
Richard Aiken
(21 Apr 2017 03:13 UTC)
|
||
Re: [TML] FTL Drive, here we come?
Richard Aiken
(21 Apr 2017 03:18 UTC)
|
||
Re: [TML] FTL Drive, here we come?
Richard Aiken
(21 Apr 2017 03:27 UTC)
|
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 06:33:50PM -0400, Jeffrey Schwartz wrote: > "With negative mass, if you push something, it accelerates toward you," > > Potentially M-Drives too. Would a rocket motor with negative mass > exhaust be able to recover the propellant? If you had balanced positive and negative masses, then any force between the two would accelerate both of them in the same direction at the same rate. Apart from some rather nasty instabilities internally, it could behave much like some sort of cross between a reactionless drive, and the inertialess drive of the Lensman stories. Unfortunately the "negative mass" fluid reported recently does not actually have negative mass. It has positive mass, but carefully set up so that the net effect of certain interactions within those limited conditions is similar in some ways to something with negative mass. It is certainly worth studying, because the dynamics of this state is not well known and there are definitely some counterintuitive features. It does not have any applications for warp drives or antigravity, though if something with truly negative mass is ever discovered, these sorts of experiments would likely give us a better idea of how it behaves and what we could try to do with it. It's similar to other articles in that past that reported that a particular arrangement of supersonic flow was an "artificial black hole". There was some tenuous justification, since sound can't get out against the flow, and there is an analogy between a type of noise resulting from this and the predicted Hawking radiation from a real black hole where light can't escape. For the very narrow and limited purposes of their experiment, it behaves like a black hole should, and the outcomes of the experiment give some clues as to how those annoyingly inaccessible real black holes might behave. - Tim