3 ms·

Damnit. There goes my last holdout hope for exotic matter capable of powering the Alcubierre drive. Guess we're stuck here now.

Tadpole9181 3y ago
A-drives require negative mass, not Antimatter. Antimatter has positive mass, so there was always good reason to believe it would react to gravity the same as normal matter. Though, you should probably just assume it won't work given the fuel requirements even after optimization are insane for the exotic matter required. And it relies on a quirk in general relativity that may very well be plugged when we discover a unifying theory.
- westurner 3y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37227511 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37227511 : > SQG Superfluid Quantum Gravity says there needn't be antimatter; there is pressure and there are phases of matter in a varyingly Superfluidic cosmos. The Dirac wikipedia article also mentions SQG. "Gravity as a fluid dynamic phenomenon in a superfluid quantum space. Fluid quantum gravity and relativity." (2017) https://hal.science/hal-01248015/ https://hal.science/hal-01248015/ Fluid equations: Bernoulli's: Biot-Savart: Navier-Stokes: Anosov flows and CFD ((Quantum) Computational Fluid Dynamics) fluid predictability: https://github.com/dynamicslab/pysindy/issues/383#issuecomment-1678169624 https://github.com/dynamicslab/pysindy/issues/383#issuecomme...
- supportengineer 3y ago
  Would negative mass imply the mass doesn’t exist yet?
  - jfengel 3y ago
    Nope. If you time-reverse negative mass it doesn't act like regular mass. Time-reversed negative does fall down in a gravitational field, but it accelerates faster than positive mass does in the time-forward world. (Because positive mass slows down as it rises, while negative mass accelerates.)
- forgotpwd16 3y ago
  >Antimatter has positive mass Specifically we know it has positive inertial mass due to its reaction to electromagnetic fields. The paper and experiments done by the authors deal with its gravitational mass. Due to weak equivalence principle it's assumed those are the same and so far (for regular and now antimatter) experiments agree, but there's no theory unifying them. Hence GP's disappointment isn't entirely unjustified.

Tadpole9181 3y ago

A-drives require negative mass, not Antimatter. Antimatter has positive mass, so there was always good reason to believe it would react to gravity the same as normal matter. Though, you should probably just assume it won't work given the fuel requirements even after optimization are insane for the exotic matter required. And it relies on a quirk in general relativity that may very well be plugged when we discover a unifying theory.

westurner 3y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37227511 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37227511 : > SQG Superfluid Quantum Gravity says there needn't be antimatter; there is pressure and there are phases of matter in a varyingly Superfluidic cosmos. The Dirac wikipedia article also mentions SQG. "Gravity as a fluid dynamic phenomenon in a superfluid quantum space. Fluid quantum gravity and relativity." (2017) https://hal.science/hal-01248015/ https://hal.science/hal-01248015/ Fluid equations: Bernoulli's: Biot-Savart: Navier-Stokes: Anosov flows and CFD ((Quantum) Computational Fluid Dynamics) fluid predictability: https://github.com/dynamicslab/pysindy/issues/383#issuecomment-1678169624 https://github.com/dynamicslab/pysindy/issues/383#issuecomme...
supportengineer 3y ago
Would negative mass imply the mass doesn’t exist yet?
- jfengel 3y ago
  Nope. If you time-reverse negative mass it doesn't act like regular mass. Time-reversed negative does fall down in a gravitational field, but it accelerates faster than positive mass does in the time-forward world. (Because positive mass slows down as it rises, while negative mass accelerates.)
forgotpwd16 3y ago
>Antimatter has positive mass Specifically we know it has positive inertial mass due to its reaction to electromagnetic fields. The paper and experiments done by the authors deal with its gravitational mass. Due to weak equivalence principle it's assumed those are the same and so far (for regular and now antimatter) experiments agree, but there's no theory unifying them. Hence GP's disappointment isn't entirely unjustified.