Speaker 1: Brought to you by Toyota. Let's go places. Welcome to
Speaker 1: Forward Thinking. Tay them everyone, and welcome to Forward Thinking,
Speaker 1: the podcast of What's the Future and says you stick around,
Speaker 1: I'll make it worth your while. I'm Jonathan Strickland, I'm
Speaker 1: Lauren and I and uh hey, guys, I got a
Speaker 1: question for you. Have you ever seen a little It's
Speaker 1: a I mean it's kind of one of those cult
Speaker 1: classic type things. It's one of those science fiction cult classics.
Speaker 1: It's a Star Trek. Yes, yeah, a little bit. It
Speaker 1: was the one with the force. Yeah, it was. People
Speaker 1: would say. People would say, live long and prospered. Then
Speaker 1: the little gem in their in their hand would light
Speaker 1: up and then they'd be chased down by replicants. I'm
Speaker 1: pretty sure that's what how it went. Where did Gandolf
Speaker 1: come in? You know, um everywhere he could he just
Speaker 1: you could not keep him out. You tried, and he'd
Speaker 1: be like, uh here I am, and we loved him
Speaker 1: for it. No, No, seriously, Star Trek. We're talking about
Speaker 1: warp Drive today, the time traveling Police Box. All right, well,
Speaker 1: let's get let's we're gonna we're done making making terrible
Speaker 1: like meme mash ups here. But now we're gonna talk
Speaker 1: about Star Trek and warp drive. Warp Drive, so you know,
Speaker 1: Star Trek was a space opera, would span the entire
Speaker 1: Middle Key Way galaxy more or less. You know, you've
Speaker 1: got these incredible, huge expanses of distance that you have
Speaker 1: to cover in order for you to have these adventures
Speaker 1: where the Enterprise, which was an exploration ship, could get
Speaker 1: from point A to point you know z delta Q
Speaker 1: forty seven dash m and uh. In order to do that,
Speaker 1: you have to figure out, well, how are we going
Speaker 1: to have a propulsion system for this ship that will
Speaker 1: allow for this this amazing amount of travel. Well, but Jonathan,
Speaker 1: there's no wind resistance in space. So couldn't you just
Speaker 1: continually accelerate like you keep accelerating, and you just keep
Speaker 1: going faster, right, there's nothing to slow you down. There's
Speaker 1: this small problem called relativity. Yeah, special relativity. Alright, Let's
Speaker 1: let's let's talk about light here for a second. Okay,
Speaker 1: So in our universe, from what we understand, anything that
Speaker 1: has mass is limited by the speed of light. Nothing
Speaker 1: can go at the speed of light that has mass,
Speaker 1: nothing can definitely nothing can break through it from our
Speaker 1: side based upon what we know with special relativity. Now
Speaker 1: that doesn't mean that there isn't stuff that's moving faster
Speaker 1: than the speed of light that we just haven't detected yet.
Speaker 1: But we believe that there is an impossible barrier of
Speaker 1: the speed of light and anything on one side of it,
Speaker 1: meaning anything slower than speed of light can't go faster
Speaker 1: than that, and anything faster than speed of light can't
Speaker 1: go slower than that. And how do we know that, Well,
Speaker 1: it's because we have this equation equals mc squared. You've
Speaker 1: heard it before, and it's a very well tested equation.
Speaker 1: It's pretty much proven to be correct on on the
Speaker 1: relativistic scale. Um. But the problem is when you plug
Speaker 1: the numbers and of that, you realize that if something
Speaker 1: with mass goes the speed of light, it's mass would
Speaker 1: technically become infinite. Now I'm going to correct you. That's
Speaker 1: a very common that's a very common uh statement, although
Speaker 1: it's not entirely correct. What we should say instead of
Speaker 1: saying mass, we should think of it in terms of
Speaker 1: just energy Alright, order to accelerate exactly the amount of
Speaker 1: energy you would need to propel that that mass to
Speaker 1: the speed of light, let alone faster would reach infinity,
Speaker 1: which means that you would not be able to do it.
Speaker 1: You cannot do it. At the same time, we have
Speaker 1: another thing that we have to take take into account,
Speaker 1: time dilation, which is from the perspective of an outside observer,
Speaker 1: time would start to slow down for anyone who was
Speaker 1: approaching the speed of light, and if they were to
Speaker 1: hit the speed of light, time would stop from the
Speaker 1: perspective of an outside observer. From your perspective, if you're
Speaker 1: the one traveling at that speed, everything's a okay, things normal. Well.
Speaker 1: In fact, going close to the speed of light is
Speaker 1: an easy way to create a time machine. Right, you
Speaker 1: can travel into the future. Well yeah, I can do
Speaker 1: that too, just by waiting around. Just let it happen.
Speaker 1: Speed one second per second, travel faster than the things
Speaker 1: around you into the future because for you, time slows
Speaker 1: down right well, and only it's only when you reach
Speaker 1: that frame of reference that the other observer is in. Right.
Speaker 1: So like if Joe, if if you get in your
Speaker 1: rocket ship and you rock it off at near the
Speaker 1: speed of light and I stay on Earth, to you,
Speaker 1: time is passing exactly as it would if you were
Speaker 1: anywhere else. Doing anything else anywhere. To me, time is
Speaker 1: passing based upon my own experience, exactly the same way
Speaker 1: a second is a second to both of us. However,
Speaker 1: from my perspective, more time would be passing for me
Speaker 1: than it would be for you. And when you got
Speaker 1: back to Earth and we were to compare our our
Speaker 1: time pieces, we would see that. That's the kind of
Speaker 1: that's how what reality would reflect you in your future.
Speaker 1: I would you would be younger when you got back
Speaker 1: then Jonathan was comparatively, In other words, I would have
Speaker 1: aged more in that time because more time would have
Speaker 1: passed for me, less time would have passed for you.
Speaker 1: And we can see that in things like satellites, there's
Speaker 1: what like a seven microsecond. I believe it's like lag
Speaker 1: of satellite clocks versus Earth clocks due to the speed
Speaker 1: with which they're going. However, there's the relationship to the
Speaker 1: mass of Earth. Yeah, there are two things you have
Speaker 1: to take into account, the masses and the speed. But yes,
Speaker 1: you are right, we have to throw in special little
Speaker 1: leap seconds every now and then to keep the clocks
Speaker 1: on track. So um, another interesting thing is that, so
Speaker 1: you know, we talked about the speed of light being
Speaker 1: the maximum. So the maximum maximum being speed of light
Speaker 1: through a vacuum, right, like when there's nothing else there.
Speaker 1: Because light will travel at different speeds through different media. Right,
Speaker 1: If it goes through glass, it's a little slower, If
Speaker 1: it goes through water, it's a little different. But if
Speaker 1: it goes through a vacuum, that's supposed to be the
Speaker 1: fastest ever period right. Wrong. Did you see this? Scientists
Speaker 1: made light go faster than light? Did you? Okay, all right,
Speaker 1: this is this is pretty awesome. So at Princeton we
Speaker 1: had some scientists, and you know scientists, they get a
Speaker 1: little rowdy, just like anybody else. And you know, on
Speaker 1: a Friday night, things are a little slow in the lab.
Speaker 1: It's time to break some basic laws of physics. Uh.
Speaker 1: They actually created a a a little chamber of caesium
Speaker 1: vapor and they they put laser pulses through the this chamber.
Speaker 1: And they were observing that the laser pulses were emerging
Speaker 1: from the end of the chamber before they had fully
Speaker 1: entered the other side of the chamber. So the laser
Speaker 1: pulses are shorter than the chamber actually is, and yet
Speaker 1: they were emerging before they could have already been all
Speaker 1: the way into it. How is this possible? How could
Speaker 1: they actually move faster than the speed of light? Well,
Speaker 1: it turns out it's not actually breaking the law laws
Speaker 1: of physics, it's not breaking special relativity. From what we
Speaker 1: can tell, what seems to be happening there is that
Speaker 1: the information in the laser pulse is contained entirely in
Speaker 1: the very front end of the laser pulse, and as
Speaker 1: soon as it starts entering in the chamber, it's actually
Speaker 1: generating a new laser pulse on the on the other side,
Speaker 1: so it's not the same laser pulse going into the
Speaker 1: front as it is coming out the back. It's kind
Speaker 1: of like if you were to have a set of
Speaker 1: twins and you have one twin positioned at the exit
Speaker 1: of this room and another twin starts to walk into
Speaker 1: one entrance just as the second twin goes out the exit.
Speaker 1: To you, It's like, how did that person cover that
Speaker 1: entire room instantaneously? They didn't. It's two people in this case,
Speaker 1: it's two pulses, but it was a pulse that's generated
Speaker 1: because the information contained in the beginning of that laser pulse. Okay, well,
Speaker 1: why is this speed limit a problem? If you want
Speaker 1: to explore the galaxy like they did in Star direct
Speaker 1: Let's take a look at the distances. What's the closest
Speaker 1: star to Earth The Sun? It's eight minutes away. You
Speaker 1: got me there? Um the No, what is the closest
Speaker 1: star to our solar system? That is not the Sun? Well,
Speaker 1: it's Proximus Centaurius, and it is four point two light
Speaker 1: years away, meaning it takes four point to earth years
Speaker 1: for light to travel from that star to us, right.
Speaker 1: So you make a good point that that is from
Speaker 1: the outside observer's perspective, not from the traveler's perspective. But
Speaker 1: let's say that you were going at the speed that
Speaker 1: it's not possible to go the speed of light as
Speaker 1: far as we know, So we're gonna still take, for
Speaker 1: to an outside observer, a really long time for you
Speaker 1: to get there. I mean, just prohibitively long for really
Speaker 1: exploring the whole galaxy. Right from from inside that ship,
Speaker 1: it wouldn't take four point two years, right, right, But
Speaker 1: but to anyone else it would take four point two years.
Speaker 1: And that's the closest star. So if we're talking about
Speaker 1: distance stars one, it's still going to take you a
Speaker 1: long time to get there. Personally, it may take months
Speaker 1: for you to get to a distant star on a ship,
Speaker 1: even traveling at the speed of light. To an outside observer,
Speaker 1: it may take generations, depending upon how far away you're talking.
Speaker 1: So even for you if you're talking about really exploring
Speaker 1: the galaxy, like going to other quadrants. So they say,
Speaker 1: I mean, that's going to take a long time at
Speaker 1: subliminal speeds, So can we do it? Is there a
Speaker 1: way that we could ever possibly go superliminal? Well, Star
Speaker 1: Trek had to explain it somehow. What did they say. Well,
Speaker 1: they went with the warp drive approach, which is that
Speaker 1: originally they were calling it a hyper drive back in
Speaker 1: the in the original nineteen sixties series, but then um,
Speaker 1: certainly by the end of that series and when next
Speaker 1: generation kicked up, they started using this this warp field idea. Yeah,
Speaker 1: talking about going at warp two or Warp four or whatever. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, Star Wars stuck with hyper drive, but they
Speaker 1: the idea was that, well Star Wars they never explained
Speaker 1: it. It It might as well just be Magic and Star Wars.
Speaker 1: But start Yeah, so much is in Star Wars and
Speaker 1: Star Trek they attempt to explain it by saying that, uh,
Speaker 1: they generate a warp bubble around the ship, and that
Speaker 1: warp bubble actually warps space around it. And so if
Speaker 1: you were to think of space, you know, space time
Speaker 1: is kind of this think of it as a as
Speaker 1: almost like a fabric in a way. It's but it's
Speaker 1: this three dimensional and really four dimension whole fabric that
Speaker 1: that is the stuff that our our universe, or or
Speaker 1: at least our galaxy sits in and um and things
Speaker 1: like gravity affected and can distort it and change it
Speaker 1: in different ways. And uh So if you were to
Speaker 1: try and travel from point A to point B, and
Speaker 1: it would normally take you ten years of travel because
Speaker 1: of the distances involved. Uh if you were to be
Speaker 1: able to warp those distances so that the distances were
Speaker 1: actually closer together, it would take you less time to
Speaker 1: get there, and you would have the benefit of not
Speaker 1: breaking special relativity in the in the process because in
Speaker 1: a localized area, you're still going well below the speed light.
Speaker 1: You are in a little subspace bubble um that is
Speaker 1: kind of magically created. That they didn't really get into
Speaker 1: the actual explanation of this until I believe Star Trek
Speaker 1: first contact, which began development the date of which is
Speaker 1: going to become important in just a moment. So the
Speaker 1: idea here is that we have like, you know, kind
Speaker 1: of like if you were to look at a map
Speaker 1: and you look at New York and you look at
Speaker 1: l A and you think, wow, would take a really
Speaker 1: long time. You know, you're just tracing your finger from
Speaker 1: New York l A and following all the highways, and
Speaker 1: then you think, well, what if I just fold the
Speaker 1: map so that L A is on top of New
Speaker 1: York and now boom, I'm magically there. That's more or
Speaker 1: less what we're talking about, except that it's not necessarily
Speaker 1: taking two points in space and folding all of space
Speaker 1: time so that they are adjacent. That would be more
Speaker 1: like a wormhole, which is a different concept of speed travel. Yeah,
Speaker 1: this would be more like, let's let's try and crinkle
Speaker 1: space time so that we can get it closer. And
Speaker 1: that way we're still traveling at at relativistic speeds, but
Speaker 1: we're but we're having less distance to cover. More more
Speaker 1: like um, more like riding a surfboard on a wave
Speaker 1: rather than trying to swim through it, or like moving
Speaker 1: on a like standing on a moving sidewalk, and walking
Speaker 1: rather than walking on you know, just level. So in
Speaker 1: Star Trek, what they're precisely talking about doing, because you
Speaker 1: can always look into the signs of Star Trek, they
Speaker 1: write a lot of books about it that are really fun.
Speaker 1: Um is using a matter antimatter reaction to create a
Speaker 1: really energetic plasma which is then channeled into warp coils
Speaker 1: that generate this warped field that formed the subspace bubble
Speaker 1: that take you too, you know, planet cling on. Where
Speaker 1: did the Jeffreys tubes come in? Those as you used
Speaker 1: to to access the nace cells? Right? Which which which
Speaker 1: come into that process somehow? Right? Yeah, that's where the
Speaker 1: warp field ends up emanating from the ship to end
Speaker 1: up surrounding it and then creating this warp drive. Okay, so,
Speaker 1: uh so the ship itself isn't moving at superliminal speeds.
Speaker 1: It's riding a wave of space that's moving at superliminal speeds. Yeah,
Speaker 1: more or less. Yeah, I don't think it's gonna come
Speaker 1: out exactly the way Star Trek did. I don't think
Speaker 1: we're gonna come across dilithium crystals anytime soon. Those are
Speaker 1: what we're supposed to generate the antimatter. But antimatter is
Speaker 1: a real thing. For those of you who don't know.
Speaker 1: Antimatter is matter that would have an opposite charge of
Speaker 1: its counterpart in matter. So the electron has a negative charge,
Speaker 1: a positron would be the uh the antimatter component that
Speaker 1: would be the positively charged sub atomic particle. In the
Speaker 1: antimatter world, any matter and matter when they meet annihilate
Speaker 1: one another and release energy as a result. UH. During
Speaker 1: the Big Bang, for reasons we don't fully understand, there
Speaker 1: was a little bit more matter than there was antimatter,
Speaker 1: and so the those those early reactions and the annihilated
Speaker 1: most of everything, and we had more matter or left over.
Speaker 1: So that's why we've got matter in our universe. UM.
Speaker 1: I would guess from a universe that had antimatter, maybe
Speaker 1: they would view theirs as the matter and ours would
Speaker 1: be the antimatter. Again, it's that frame of reference thing.
Speaker 1: I believe this was explored in the teenage Mutant Ninja
Speaker 1: Turtles cartoon series with the neutrinos. I'm sure it was.
Speaker 1: Any I'm not gonna even pause to acknowledge that any further.
Speaker 1: So any further, I said, and now you made me
Speaker 1: do it again. You made me break my word. Anyway,
Speaker 1: So the matter antimatter reactions could actually create enough energy,
Speaker 1: uh theoretically speaking, to create some form of warp bubble
Speaker 1: according to certain theories, nothing that we've been able to
Speaker 1: test out and actually say yes, this is uh, this
Speaker 1: is something that's actually possible. It's just hypothetical at the moment.
Speaker 1: But it would probably take a lot of it, like
Speaker 1: like a seriously huge amount of antimatter, because the any
Speaker 1: matter that we've produced in things like the large had
Speaker 1: drunk collider you're talking about minis aal amounts, not like
Speaker 1: something on the size of say Jupiter, which is what
Speaker 1: people first thought would be required to create a warp
Speaker 1: bubble of significant size to move something like a vessel
Speaker 1: um from one point to another. Beyond that being able
Speaker 1: to designate different levels of warp because you know, they
Speaker 1: had the warp nine through warp warp ten, and then
Speaker 1: they eventually would like I think in the final episode
Speaker 1: of the Next Generation, the new version of the Enterprise
Speaker 1: goes like warp fourteen or something, which doesn't make any
Speaker 1: sense because according to the mythology in the world, warp
Speaker 1: ten was supposed to approach infinite speed. So I don't
Speaker 1: know how you go faster than infinite speed. But what
Speaker 1: is infinite speed? It's it's essentially its supposed to be
Speaker 1: infinitely faster than the speed of light. Because warp nine
Speaker 1: was I think one thousand, nine hundred times the speed
Speaker 1: of light. I don't know. I'm betting that Canter Yeves
Speaker 1: was involved and I disapprove. Yeah, well, no ship was
Speaker 1: supposed to be able to actually go arp ten. I
Speaker 1: think the the the upper limit on ships was supposed
Speaker 1: to be nine point six five or something. But but
Speaker 1: of course star Trek, you know, establishes rules and then
Speaker 1: breaks them. Okay, so Scotty aside, what have real scientists
Speaker 1: said about this? Well, so we've got a Mexican physicist.
Speaker 1: His name is Miguel Acubert, and uh he proposed a
Speaker 1: method of stretching space, so you would stretch it in
Speaker 1: a wave, which would cause the fabric of space ahead
Speaker 1: of a spacecraft to contract and the space behind it
Speaker 1: to expand, thus propelling it kind of like in that
Speaker 1: surfboard type fashion you were talking about, Lauren, so that
Speaker 1: you could move at from an outside perspective at superliminal speeds. Right,
Speaker 1: But again, what we're saying is that the ship itself,
Speaker 1: relative to its reference frame, is not going faster than
Speaker 1: the speed of light. It's riding sort of a bubble
Speaker 1: or a wave of space that is going faster than
Speaker 1: the speed of Right. So you're still you're still um
Speaker 1: maintaining special relativity. You're not breaking it in any way.
Speaker 1: You're not like physically traveling. It's not like not like
Speaker 1: someone is suddenly able to run faster than the spe
Speaker 1: of light. It's just that again, let's say that you're
Speaker 1: doing the hundred meter dash and uh, and you're able
Speaker 1: to to to compress those hundred meters into two meters
Speaker 1: for you, and you'd be able to across that that
Speaker 1: hundred meters in the same amount of time that normally
Speaker 1: take it across two meters. That's oversimplifying what this model
Speaker 1: would do, but it's a similar idea. It's this idea
Speaker 1: of being able to essentially compress space uh and ride
Speaker 1: the super fast hyper space warp bubble um. Right. But
Speaker 1: the problem here is still with fuel because what Miguel
Speaker 1: was saying, I'll Alciber was saying that um that you
Speaker 1: would potentially need more energy than what's contained in the
Speaker 1: entire universe in order to get this engine started. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and then there were others who said that even if
Speaker 1: you fiddled with a little bit, you might be able
Speaker 1: to get it down to a matter antimatter reaction to
Speaker 1: provide the energy for generating this hypothetical warp bubble. As
Speaker 1: far as we know, this is just hypothetical. We may
Speaker 1: not ever be able to do it. Well, I think
Speaker 1: what he showed is that, um, it's theoretically consistent. The
Speaker 1: problem is just practical right that that that it's not
Speaker 1: like that this doesn't make sense the idea. What it
Speaker 1: is is that the idea makes sense. It like could
Speaker 1: technically work. You just need this stuff that we don't
Speaker 1: know if you could really make right And and anti
Speaker 1: batter was just one of the examples of something that
Speaker 1: could give power. In fact, he was talking more about
Speaker 1: if you were able to find matter that has negative mass.
Speaker 1: All right, so I'm gonna blow you guys minds here
Speaker 1: for a second negative mass. All right, negative negative mass,
Speaker 1: So negative mass would be like imagine it's I can't
Speaker 1: really imagine this, but I'm going to ask you to
Speaker 1: do it anyway. Imagine that you have an object that
Speaker 1: has negative two kilograms of mass, instead of having two
Speaker 1: kilograms of mass, it's negative two kilograms a mass. Now,
Speaker 1: with simple equations, for example, force equals mass times acceleration.
Speaker 1: If you take that negative factor in there and you
Speaker 1: multiply that by an acceleration and to get the force,
Speaker 1: you're going to get an interesting results. So, for example,
Speaker 1: it would mean that if I had an object with
Speaker 1: negative mass and I were to push it, it would
Speaker 1: move in the opposite direction of the force applied to it. So, Joe,
Speaker 1: if you had negative mass and I pushed, you would
Speaker 1: go into your hand, Yes, you would. You would move
Speaker 1: into me, and that would be a very awkward thing,
Speaker 1: and we'd have to go see hr. But or or
Speaker 1: on a larger scale, like a negative moon and a
Speaker 1: negative earth, if you could imagine such things would um
Speaker 1: would repel each other instead of attracting each other gravitationally.
Speaker 1: It would also be a little odd because when you
Speaker 1: have negative mass, the the electromagnetic force that holds it
Speaker 1: together would be uh a destructive force rather than because
Speaker 1: it because anything that pulls it together would actually push
Speaker 1: it apart. Let me ask you this, all right, so
Speaker 1: you've got negative mass. Let's say that I have a
Speaker 1: negative mass object that that I've suspended somehow, don't don't
Speaker 1: ask me how yet. But then but then it drops,
Speaker 1: let go of it. What happens to it? It up? No,
Speaker 1: it does not go up. It actually falls. And the
Speaker 1: reason why it falls is because what we call gravity
Speaker 1: a force, it's actually an uh, it's actually acceleration. It's
Speaker 1: not really a force in the in the sense of
Speaker 1: the basic forces of thermodynamic law. It's an acceleration. It
Speaker 1: would still fall, however, because an object that has negative
Speaker 1: mass would go in the opposite direction of where you
Speaker 1: put placed force. You know, if I put an object
Speaker 1: on top of a table, technically the table is pressing
Speaker 1: up at a level of force that's equal to keeping
Speaker 1: that object on on the table. Well, if an object
Speaker 1: with negative mass goes in the same direction as whatever
Speaker 1: force you applied to it, it happens to be. That
Speaker 1: means you'd have to put a negative mass object underneath
Speaker 1: a table and let go, and the table would keep
Speaker 1: it from falling. But if you were to remove that table,
Speaker 1: then it would fall and once it hit the ground,
Speaker 1: because the ground would be providing force pushing up, and
Speaker 1: because the object would want to go in the same
Speaker 1: direction as where the force is coming from. It would
Speaker 1: start to either disintegrate or burrow into the surface of
Speaker 1: the Earth, not stopping until it got to the center.
Speaker 1: Just kill me, now, this well, this is this is
Speaker 1: the kind of stuff matter like this is what physicists
Speaker 1: might call exotic matter. It's stuff that in a lot
Speaker 1: of cases, we don't really have any way of knowing
Speaker 1: that this exists. But you can make sense of it mathematics.
Speaker 1: You can make a mathematical argument for it, but we
Speaker 1: don't have any actual practical evidence of it. I would
Speaker 1: put quotation marks around sense in that particular application. But
Speaker 1: but ries about this go back to the nineteen fifties,
Speaker 1: and um, we're we're kind of revamped and applied to
Speaker 1: conceptual engines in the nineteen eighties, which probably is what
Speaker 1: led us to our fancy star trek kind of concepts. Right.
Speaker 1: But so technically, if you could get your hands on
Speaker 1: a whole bunch of this exotic matter that we're not
Speaker 1: sure exists, you could maybe create this warp drive. Possibly
Speaker 1: possibly because if if you get two objects, um that
Speaker 1: the masses of which cancel out, then um, you know,
Speaker 1: the interactions between them could create a constant acceleration in
Speaker 1: the direction of the positive mass, wherein their momentum and
Speaker 1: energy would remain canceled out. I'm going to just not
Speaker 1: because at some point I just started imagining candy bars
Speaker 1: that in the middle of that sentence. That's probably safer
Speaker 1: from everybody. Let me put to you this way. Let
Speaker 1: let me say something else. So let's say that we
Speaker 1: were able to create a warp drive. That doesn't even
Speaker 1: even assuming that that's even possible, and we've got their
Speaker 1: people working on it right now. NASA's got folks working
Speaker 1: right now trying to see if there's if this is
Speaker 1: actually a possibility. We don't just breeze past that NASA
Speaker 1: is working on warp drive. Well, they're looking at at
Speaker 1: least the feasibility of Yeah, I wouldn't saying building a
Speaker 1: warp drive. I'd say, checking to see if the science
Speaker 1: or at least the hypothesis can be reflected in reality. Yeah,
Speaker 1: they wouldn't. You wouldn't say working on it as in
Speaker 1: like their building one. You'd say they're doing research on it,
Speaker 1: and they've devoted at least one, I think fifty dollar
Speaker 1: interferometer to this research right to see if it as
Speaker 1: all it is at all possible to generate a warp
Speaker 1: bubble in the first place. But I was going to
Speaker 1: say that even if we were able to make a
Speaker 1: warp drive like tomorrow, and we were able to build
Speaker 1: a ship that could in fact warped space around it,
Speaker 1: there's some other potential issues, one of which is that, uh,
Speaker 1: there's some people who think that it's possible such a
Speaker 1: device would create such a huge level of hawking radiation
Speaker 1: that we would all die we were to ride inside
Speaker 1: a spacecraft. That yeah, there's there's also there's also some
Speaker 1: some people who suggest that the deceleration process, while perfectly
Speaker 1: fine for everybody who's on board, assuming that we're still
Speaker 1: okay from the hawking radiation, UM, could be somewhat destructive
Speaker 1: at the destination. Yeah, there's this idea that UM, say,
Speaker 1: a bubble of space moving through space around it at
Speaker 1: the superliminal speeds, would sort of collect charged particles that
Speaker 1: are flying through space at super high energy as it
Speaker 1: moved along, and it would just kind of like carry
Speaker 1: them along in its pocket until you stop. And parts
Speaker 1: don't have breaks the way that the ship does, and
Speaker 1: so you know, suddenly your bubble stops, your ship stops,
Speaker 1: the particles keep going and destroy the sal system. Right. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so is you're is you're flying along, you're just collecting
Speaker 1: ammunition that will immediately be launched out in a cone
Speaker 1: of death in front of you wherever you stop. My bad,
Speaker 1: It's kind of how I am. Everywhere everything I touch
Speaker 1: a destroy. Well, just the point is, if we if
Speaker 1: we get this drive working, you'd want to, like, I
Speaker 1: don't know, park around the block. You don't, don't pull
Speaker 1: right up to where you're going. Yeah. Um, And and
Speaker 1: there's theres still a little bit of an energy problem
Speaker 1: because even this NACA team, which is being led by
Speaker 1: a herald sunny white um, is saying that the system
Speaker 1: would work on about like the annual energy consumption of
Speaker 1: the United States, which is smaller than that Jupiter thing
Speaker 1: that we were talking about. I think they said that
Speaker 1: the antimatter, the amount of antimatter they would need, would
Speaker 1: be about the size of the voyage your spacecraft, as
Speaker 1: opposed to Jupiter, which is significantly smaller. Yeah. Yeah, it's
Speaker 1: still the the we're still running into that huge problem
Speaker 1: of how do you apply enough energy? In fact, that
Speaker 1: was one of the interesting things that how stuff works.
Speaker 1: Dot Com if you read how Warp how warp speed works,
Speaker 1: which John Fuller wrote a few years ago. I said,
Speaker 1: I sat next to John and I gave him helpful hints,
Speaker 1: and he still didn't include my bit about the Jeffreys tubes. Um.
Speaker 1: But anyway, he had asked me a couple of questions
Speaker 1: as he was working on this article. Uh, he taught it.
Speaker 1: He actually did some research and found that scientists were
Speaker 1: talking about how impractical it would be because a ship
Speaker 1: the size of the Enterprise would require a certain amount
Speaker 1: of energy in order to move just at impulse uh
Speaker 1: speeds impulses like it's it's slower than the speed of light.
Speaker 1: It's not. It's pretty fast, but as I recall, its
Speaker 1: um less than warp one. So, but impulse drive would
Speaker 1: be it would be enough to require more energy than
Speaker 1: what the Enterprise could feasibly supply, let alone the energy
Speaker 1: you would need to fuel a warp drive. Uh, you know,
Speaker 1: propulsion system. So uh, that seems to still be well
Speaker 1: within the realms of science fiction. So even if we
Speaker 1: were able to prove that this is a possibility from
Speaker 1: an actual uh like being able to really create a
Speaker 1: warp bubble, like that's actually a thing we could do.
Speaker 1: It may not be something we can practically do as
Speaker 1: a means of transportation. Uh. At the same time, while
Speaker 1: we want to be careful not to overhype, we also
Speaker 1: shouldn't laugh this off. I mean I encourage this research,
Speaker 1: oh sure, I mean, well, if nothing else, it teaches
Speaker 1: us more about how spacetime itself is constructed, right, and
Speaker 1: it may it may tell us more about things like
Speaker 1: the the the the conditions the universe was in in
Speaker 1: the instant after the Big Bang. You know that that
Speaker 1: will be amazing stuff to learn, you know, just from
Speaker 1: making observations through this kind of stuff. And who knows,
Speaker 1: maybe there is some way we can harness this in
Speaker 1: a way to either have communications or transportation in some
Speaker 1: future implementation. It would be phenomenal. Um as all, we don't,
Speaker 1: you know, blow up whatever it is we're trying to
Speaker 1: call fingers crossed. Yeah, yeah, that that that NASA research
Speaker 1: team is is talking about trying to implement this on
Speaker 1: the quantum level. As you know, many things are talked
Speaker 1: about being implemented in in this kind of theoretical physics.
Speaker 1: But but, but, but even that, if if they could
Speaker 1: pull something like that off of creating a warp bubble
Speaker 1: on quantum particles in the next few years. That's that's terrific. Yeah. Well,
Speaker 1: I mean, not to beat a dead horse, but we
Speaker 1: keep revisiting this idea. Go a hundred years back and
Speaker 1: show them all the technology we have now. It is magic. Yep. Yeah,
Speaker 1: well heck. I mean, if I just have a conversation
Speaker 1: with some of my extended family members, they think that
Speaker 1: that I've harnessed some sort of weird magical power. But uh,
Speaker 1: you know, I grew up in rural Georgia. So all right, well,
Speaker 1: do you guys have anything else you want to say
Speaker 1: about warp drive before we sign off into the sunset?
Speaker 1: That's that's all I got. All right, Okay, well we're
Speaker 1: gonna wrap me up. Let's wrap up warp So guys,
Speaker 1: that's it. Make sure you go and visit our website
Speaker 1: f W thinking dot com. That's where we have all
Speaker 1: the videos and blog posts and articles that you can
Speaker 1: peruse and enjoy. There's some amazing stuff on there. I
Speaker 1: highly recommend you go check that out, and remember you
Speaker 1: can find us on Twitter and Facebook. Our handle is
Speaker 1: FW thinking and we will talk to you again really
Speaker 1: soon for more on this topic. In the future of technology.
Speaker 1: Visit forward Thinking dot Com brought to you by Toyota,
Speaker 1: Let's Go Places,