In the latest Stratosphere Lounge (episode 258), Bill dismissed warp drive as magic. This included the so-called Alcubierre drive that I discussed in part 1. He dismissed it on the basis of it requiring the energy equivalent of “a galaxy” to operate. In the very same episode he regarded artificial gravity as non-magic, and he assumed that we through the use of the other fundamental forces could generate gravity (e.g. with electricity).
Bill is likely correct, but I would like to point out that an artificial gravity device is essentially the same as an artificial anti-gravity device, which in turn is essentially the same as an Alcubierre drive. If you can make artificial gravity, you can probably also create artificial anti-gravity and therefore FTL (it works by creating negative curvature, which is anti-gravity).
Thus, the only thing that makes the Alcubierre warp drive unrealistic/magic is its huge energy requirements.
I do understand this concern because the kind of spacetime warping to produce 1 g of gravity would be trivial. Creating a decent Alcubierre drive, however, requires the equivalent of making the gravity of a very heavy star, or even a black hole.
However, we must not forget that gravity is some 40 orders of magnitude weaker than electromagnetism. To illustrate this: it requires the whole Earth to hold an iron ball to the ground, but it only requires a tiny magnet to overcome the pull of the whole earth.
Thus, if we are somehow able to transform electricity into (anti-gravity), we should be able to create a very strong effect with relatively modest energy inputs, and by “modest” I mean within human capability, not an entire galaxy’s worth of energy.
I can even outline how this can be done. Currently much interesting work is done on electricity. In the late 1980s, cold fusion was a major news sensation for a while. Despite being debunked, work on it continued by serious research facilities, and they reported positive, reproducible results. With a relatively small electrical input, one could do nuclear physics at room temperatures and atmospheric pressures, which was previously thought to only be possible at extremely high temperatures and pressures.
Somewhat along these lines a commercial company called Brilliant Light Energy (Formerly: Black Light Energy) has produced something that if it works appears to be something akin to cold fusion. No-one knows exactly how it works, although they have their theories, but they have received massive funding by investors, and their process and results have been verified by independent universities. Whether it is a real thing remains to be seen, however.
Finally, there is the so-called SAFIRE project that tries to emulate the sun as an electrical process, and in their miniature sun model, they were able to achieve atomic element transmutation at low energies. No-one understands what is going on, but they too were able to reproduce their results predictably and reliably.
The point of this discussion is to show that we absolutely do not understand physics at all today, and that many physical barriers can be either circumvented or dramatically lowered by weirdo physics that is not yet understood.
If we can do nuclear physics at room temperature, then this implies that a similar improvement in efficiency would also be possible in generating artificial (anti-)gravity and hence also warp drive.
I would therefore urge Bill not to exclude FTL from his universe.
However, I must add that his discovery of the abundance of brown dwarfs is encouraging because it might indeed turn out that the universe is far more populated with invisible ordinary matter than previously thought. This opens up for lots of interesting story telling possibilities, regardless of FTL.
26 replies on “The New Worlds part 5: Warp drive revisited”
It seems like I read somewhere that Alcubierre managed to mathematically refine the power requirements to that of something akin to a small moon or something. I’ve always felt that FTL would probably come along as some sort of undiscovered loophole at the cutting edge of physics and engineering. In addition, I’ve always thought that a FTL ship would use a subtle & nuanced technique as opposed to brute force (relatively speaking. Haha, pun intended). As an analogy, I’d liken it to a martial arts master using skill instead of strength to achieve his goal. Of course, it’s all just speculation anyhow.
My primary argument (which is quite similar to Bill’s) is that gravity most likely is somehow connected to the other 4 fundamental forces of nature. Electromagnetism is some 10^40 times stronger than gravity. Thus, if you can somehow find a unified theory of gravity with the other forces (not unreasonable) then it stands to reason that you can also find a way to convert electricity into (anti-)gravity (and vice versa). Since it is so much stronger, it also stands to reason that you require much less electricity than raw matter to create artificial gravity.
I like this argument, and Bill uses it to argue for the viability of anti-gravity. If you accept that anti-gravity is so easy that you can install it in a starship and make it work on a low energy budget, then surely you can create very strong (anti-)gravity with more energy that allows you to create an Alcubierre drive that enables FTL.
I understand that the Alcubierre war drive looks physically possible if you have negative mass matter. And with the Casmir experiments we seem to have created negative energy which, if you squint really hard while saying E=mC^2 over and over looks like negative mass. However we are still a LONG way from being able to say it could be used for transportation. There are concerns, for example, that the radiation emitted from the apparent event horizons created along the line of travel would fry the contents of the warp ( https://arxiv.org/abs/0904.0141 ). Maybe and maybe not, but my point is it is way to early to say what the practical limits might be. We don’t even have the tools to make the tools to make the tools to manipulate the material and energy involved. If Bill wants to exclude FTL for story reasons but keep gravitics, then the virtual particle reason or the limits on negative mass availability or any number of other things could justify it. If he wants FTL then warp drive is at least as plausible as a stable wormhole without as many story breaking secondary effects. It comes down to whatcha side of it the writer wants to the story to go.
In the end, it is just a story. Making it real is the hard part.
If pigs could fly, we could have ham flavored buffalo wings.
It is easy to paint fantastic word pictures by using enough speculative ifs but making it real is a much harder deal. You really do have to know, understand, and act accordingly. The “how to” is necessary. Otherwise it is nothing but an information free word salad. Do you want Oil and Vinegar, Ranch, or Italian dressing with your salad?
As a physicist, I have no problems constructing some sort of physical justification for how a warp drive can be made real. Yes, it’s speculative, but that is why it is called science FICTION. Part of sci-fi is to extrapolate science and technology into unchartered territory, and I think a sufficiently sciency sounding case can be made for FTL. I say that as a physicist. The fact that the Alcubierre drive is consistent with the equations of general relativity is a major credibility boost to that concept.
Quoting myself: “It is easy to paint fantastic word pictures by using enough speculative ifs but making it real is a much harder deal.”
Right now we need a lot of magical *somehow* to make your speculations real. A little matter of accumulation of the energy of a galaxy, containing it, and turning it into negative mass or some such. Reality gets in the way of making your speculation a reality. It takes real world engineering. Until you do the necessary engineering, it remains only speculative fiction. Entertaining perhaps but of little other value.
Your equations don’t and can’t create reality. They are at best an attempt to describe how reality works. Sometimes they are good enough for building a house and sometimes a little better. Otherwise they are incomplete or wrong in important detail. Thus you will need some new and better equations.
PS: I have over 250 hours of university science: physics, chemistry, mathematics, physiology, pharmacology, anthropology, psychology…. Almost half of it at the graduate level. I did it to become an inventor to make things that work for real people with real needs. I don’t write science fiction and don’t want to.
“It is easy to paint fantastic word pictures by using enough speculative ifs but making it real is a much harder deal.”
I agree, and if the task was to create a documentary from real life or to make an actual blueprint of how to create FTL, you would have a point. Fortunately, the task is only to write science fiction. If your demands for realism was applied to this genre, then pretty much ALL sci-fi would have to be scrapped, including all Star Trek series.
I think realism is important in sci-fi but only up to the level of plausibility. That is, if one is able to create a good explanation that sounds convincing to 99% of the people who ever see the show, then it is Good Enough ™.
Now, what separates the FTL warp drive I propose here from the one used in e.g. Star Trek is that it there basically comes for free. All technology comes at no cost. Replicators can make anything at no cost. Warp can be done as easily as driving your car etc.
Now, clearly that is not realistic, i.e. it goes far beyond what is plausible. An Alcubierre drive that allows to travel significantly faster than light at the cost of, say, 5-10% of Earth GDP per trip, IS plausible. It comes at an enormous cost, and that brings realism into the dynamics. Although the exact mechanism is not known to the viewer, the fact that it costs an arm and a leg sounds reasonable.
What kind of “magic” is required? As I explained, it requires a way to efficiently create gravity (and also anti-gravity) with far less energy than is needed with the “real” thing. To create gravity corresponding to earth, you need a planet the size of earth. With electricity, however, we can create that kind of force with a tiny battery and a little electric device TODAY. Thus, it is not unreasonable that IF we can generate artificial gravity using the other fundamental forces, then we can do it at far less energy expense than would otherwise be needed.
If your task is simply to write science fiction, you get to conjure the laws of reality so that your story can pretend to be plausible. Then if it sells, you can possibly get rich and never have to work again. However, if you attempt to live and work in such a world, you are stone cold out of luck.
The problem today, too many people tend to believe we live in such a science fiction world where “anything is possible”. Then get very angary that it is not and cannot be so. Followed by riots, louting, burning, and general vandalism. Wealth is destroyed and everyone gets hurt. See the demented left of left for a case in point.
The reality is that not everything is possible. Somethings that are possible consume more wealth than mankind has yet generated to make happen. Other things are just very difficult to make happen because we lack the knowledge of “how to”. You can only fake it using CGI. Entertaining perhaps but you can’t live there and long survive.
I understand what you are saying, BUT I do occasionally like to read books that don’t start with a table telling me what all the Greek letters will be defined as. And when I do get to read science fiction, I like it to be well-thought and easy to suspend disbelief, not fantasy with rockets in place of horses. Helping a writer put some thought into what is plausible as future tech and what the implications of it are is fun. And as soon as I hit “post comment” I have to get back to work inventing new technology (on spec, for a client, tight deadline, biomedical). And then on my lunch break, if I’m burned out with some problem I’ll hopefully spend a few minutes reading Onar’s next speculation for fun. If you don’t, that’s fine. I don’t particularly like to watch sports, but I know other people do (both athletes and non) and I don’t comment on their discussions telling them that they shouldn’t do that, they should only ever play in person.
I can’t guarantee that if anyone does invent an FTL drive they will also like to read fiction or play such “what if” games… but I can tell you that my colleagues working on it right now do whenever they can get some downtime. (I know one, Marc, makes some pretty cool spaceship models too… but I don’t think he’s had the free time to do so in years).
Your choice.
Actual entertainment and “down time” is important but it is NOT life. It is only a small part of it.
Lionel: At what point did anyone in this thread say that their fiction was meant to be real or even meant to become real? Your responses are non-sequiturs. It’s fiction.
And who said entertainment and down time were all of life? FFS…
If I had intended my comment to be about you, I would have said so. I didn’t say you saw things that way. It is exactly the way I see the demented left of left expecting it to be. Its impact goes way beyond that of a few people who like a different class of fiction than I do.
They redefine reality, find that reality does not obey their wishes, and turn their cities into a crime ridded hellholes. They want x, want it now, and are unwilling to do the work to make it happen without violating the individual rights of those who are expected to make it so. Then the MSM and leftist politicians say they are mostly peaceful protesters. This is pure social fiction made real. Dare I say it is a prequal to 1984? It is nothing but destruction for the sake of destruction.
The original discussion about FTL space ships was based upon the speculation that they can and will become real. I simply pointed out that it takes a lot more than wild speculation, wish, and a few manipulated equations to make such things work.
It will take actual knowledge, engineering, resources, effort and a lot of each. I have no problem with your paying part of the tab for it. I do object that I be force to pay for what I will never see happen nor will never be able to use. I owe society respect for their individual rights but I don’t owe society one nanosecond of my life.
I didn’t say it was about me. Why do you keep reading things that aren’t there into what people say?
This is tiresome. YOU are the one personalizing what I said and implying I said what I said about you. Apparently, it is true about you and you don’t like I pointed out its error.
If the shoe fits, wear it. Take responsibility for your own existence. You and your emotional state is NOT MY FAULT. It is only and exactly yours!
Listen, this is not Twitter. We are among friends here. There are no crazy leftists here. There is no need to bring that negativity from the Twitterverse into this place. So please, let us try to stay civil and friendly.
I now re-read one of your original comments, Lionell, and I think I see where this thread went wrong:
“If pigs could fly, we could have ham flavored buffalo wings.
It is easy to paint fantastic word pictures by using enough speculative ifs but making it real is a much harder deal. ”
It seems that you are under the impression that I am discussing how to actually MAKE an FTL drive for real. If that is your impression, I apologize for not making it clearer: this is ONLY meant as story telling, not an actual discussion of how to really make it in real life.
Alternatively, it seems that you are saying that unless someone can provide a detailed specification of how to build a technology in real life, then it doesn’t belong in a sci-fi story. I am sorry, here I must simply disagree. All fiction involves some degree of creative license, because without it, there would not exist a single fictional story.
Although I cannot specify in detail how an FTL will work, I *am* actually a physicist. Physics is my specialty, and therefore, if I as an expert in physics say to you that a plausible case can be made for FTL sometimes in the future, I really think you should listen to that.
I can provide a detailed explanation of why I believe it will be possible (and I have tried to fill in the details in my various comments and articles), but my point has always been that a good story is never ever supposed to be an instruction manual for how to assemble a technology. Technology is just a background setting, an AID to story telling. Therefore the technology explanationonly has to be GOOD ENOUGH to allow the reader/viewer to suspend his disbelief.
This is even more tiresome. The original thread was not about making stories, it was about FTL for real. It was to that I was commenting. If it had been about making science fiction stories, I likely would have ignored it. Even bad science fiction stories.
For example, I see Buck Rogers as really bad science fiction. While Star Trek as rather good. Both use totally fictional engineering but the fictional engineering for Buck Rogers is front and center and almost totally magical. The fictional engineering for Star Trek is background for stories about people in different and sometimes difficult situations. In other words, for me, a good story has to be a good story and not just superficial sciency flash bang special effects.
Sadly the discussion on this thread rapidly descended to the magical underlined by reality being ignored as irrelevant.
“The original thread was not about making stories, it was about FTL for real.”
Ok that clears up a whole lot of misunderstanding on my part. I thought I had made it very clear in the article series that this was part of the proposed “worlding” of the science fiction series that Bill wants to work on. I should perhaps have been clearer, but now you know.
If you are not interested in discussing science fiction then there is no reason for you to bring negativity to the comment section. There is enough of that out there with crazy leftists. So please be respectful. There is no need for rudeness just because we are not talking face to face.
I, for one, find your comments very offensive. They consists of a personal attack and do not deal with the core ideas discussed.
For example the issue that reality is real, it is what it is, and isn’t what it isn’t. No magic can make it otherwise. No matter how convenient or entertaining it might be. In this age of demented left of left politics where anything can be anything else by decree of the so called thought leaders, this cannot be stated often enough, clearly enough, or loudly enough.
I cannot and will not take responsibility for your tender injured feelings. In fact I don’t care about them. They are your problem not mine. You don’t get to determine what I say on this list or how I say it. That is up to Bill and co. If they don’t like it, it is up to them to say so.
I suggest that if you don’t like what I have to say and how I say it, don’t read it and we won’t have a problem. It is not as if I hide it.
“I, for one, find your comments very offensive. They consists of a personal attack and do not deal with the core ideas discussed.”
I have not for a second had as my intention to offend anyone. One of the reasons I became a Bill Whittle member is to avoid the Twitterati nonsense and hate. Here we are all friends and allies.
As to not dealing with the core ideas being discussed, please have in mind that I am the author of this article series. I am the one who is setting the agenda of what ideas are being discussed. If you have a different agenda, that is fine, but then at least you should make that clear.
“For example the issue that reality is real, it is what it is, and isn’t what it isn’t. No magic can make it otherwise.”
As an Objectivist who very strongly believes in reality, I concur. So you seem to somehow have gotten the impression that I am advocating magic or unreality. That is not true. Maybe I didn’t clarify that enough, so therefore I clarify it with absolute clarity now. No magic allowed.
“In fact I don’t care about them. They are your problem not mine.”
That’s fine, but it IS in your long term rational self-interest to make allies with likeminded individuals.
Excuse me, it is clear we are not “likeminded individuals”. Hence, I see no value in making an alliance with you.
I am going to take my own advice, I will no longer read anything you have to say.
I wouldn’t mind that at all. I am not in this place to encounter grumpy old men, so if you feel that you do not want to share your dark, sour comments on my articles, that’s alright with me.
While I brought up the possibility of some type of Unruh or Hawking radiation frying the occupants, I wasn’t saying that would definitely happen, I was merely giving that as an example of how IF Bill wants to avoid FTL (which I think is a brave story choice… it makes things harder, but is more novel because it seems much more common for sci-fi writers to assume FTL) that there are many excuses to do so even though the Warp Drive seems to be physically possible. Also, it could be physically possible but just not technically achievable by any race in the story yet. Maybe it could be done in 200 years, but in the 1950s they thought fusion might be done in 20 years. Maybe some future kids sitting in a physics class in an orbiting ONeill will also be told that Warp Drive may be possible in a century or two.
One possibility could always be that if Bill runs out of ideas in a non-FTL universe that someone could get the warp drive (or other FTL like quantum tunneling … but I’d advise against wormholes for story reasons as they too much of a “can of worms” if you’ll excuse the pun.) to work. Either some mystery alien ships start showing up in the galaxy that none of the established aliens recognize that seem to have FTL capability and figuring it out could be the plot for “season 4″… or suddenly a Terran ship appears at the distant colony completely unexpectedly to announce “yeah, we figured this out a couple of years ago. You should get the radio message about that in a few more years. Meanwhile, here are a bunch of tourists.”
I have tried to twist my brain to see if it is possible to tell a good and entertaining story without FTL and essentially the answer is no. The idea that you have to go to sleep for 20 years per trip and come radically out of sync with everyone is to me a show-stopper. It just doesn’t work.
Now, I offer the next best thing to no FTL, namely an extremely expensive FTL that provides a realistic limitation that does not involve time (but energy and money). By transforming the problem from time into money/energy, we can tell very very good stories without any problem, and without any of the magic that plagues sci fi in general.
Of the FTL options that I know might be possible, I like the Warp Drive best of all from a story standpoint. OTOH, I can also see how you could have the hibernation method be a source of interesting story elements itself. You could have some group of explorers not too far in the future that we couldn’t identify with them that goes to sleep and travels for a century to reach a new star to explore. While they are asleep a colony ship that could reach the star in just decades via. Mach thruster drive sets out to settle the star. Even later, the colony’s charter company back on Earth fires tiny starwisp self-replicating robots to the star at 90+% of the speed of light that can give the colony a jump-start by latching onto any small body in the destination solar-system and converting it to more of themselves, and then ulitmately into useful things for the colonists like O-Neil habitats or fusion laser power stations. By the time the characters we identify with wake up, the star system they were going to explore is already a quickly growing collection of frontier towns. But… I understand that might not be the story Bill or you were envisioning. It is just an example of how you could use the travel time problem to put multiple groups from different eras together in the same pot and stir them up.
I completely agree that it is possible to tell A story within the time-shift universe that is both intriguing and entertaining, but as you say: the purpose of the story is not really the sci-fi but the settler struggle + the political struggle. I think that is not possible in a time-shift universe, unless you limit the whole story to a single planet for an extended period of time.
I don’t like Star Trek warp and other magic technologies. My definition of magic is something that is gained for free without work and/or has no limitations.