Advanced Propulsion Systems with Dr. Sonny White 

theres one from the 1930s going on about how these new-fangled aircraft carriers would be easy meat for battleships....

@@andyf4292 A story from my father, the aviation fan. An early demonstration of bombing ship from the air was…supposed to bomb. The gathered brass fully expected to laugh at pilots bombing some ol’ to-be-scrapped ships. Their expectations were the ships to still be floating and strong afterwards. The ships were ripped apart/ sunk by a few planes. The story it was pretty quiet in the stands then.

Yes, there is a similarity. But in this case the 'vehicle' is the sound itself, afaik (quasiparticles).

The sound barrier wasn't inextricably tied to causality.

@@peteclegg1578 For the last time, Warp Drives do not violate causality as they do not literally travel faster than light. Effective FTL and Literal FTL are two different things.

I agree with you but the phrase to groom has been tainted 😅

​@@THIS---GUYJust like the phrase Xe which was Xenon on the periodic table is now an alternative gender pronoun, and also CP as either Central Park on NY or Command Post if you like to play Star Wars Battlefront 2 (original version). Wish one could go back to those simpler times before both gets altered.

Really really hope we can get something together for at least decently relativistic speeds. Even if we slow crawl through the galaxy... It would be super cool

Dr. White did not say it was impossible. Only incredibly difficult.

That would be great.

This is covered in the discussion, Henrik. 😑

we can make sonic analogs of black holes, but being able to make an anaolg says nothing about being able to make the real thing

@@virutech32 Have you read the paper? Its not a sonic analog of a blackhole. Its literally demonstrating that sonic waves carry gravitational mass and are capable of demonstrating Negative mass under the influence of external gravitational fields. My quip about gravitational waves was to not that while we can not produce sonic waves in a vacuum similar configurations of gravitational waves are likely to produce Negative mass effects as well, Likely of a much higher order. The paper basically demonstrates capabilities of producing -0.1grams/Watt. Actual Negative Mass unless I am seriously missing something. I still have yet to find the other citation which goes into this phenomenon and its something I myself have been experimenting with and researching for the last couple years now.

@@virutech32 I get it if ya don't want to read the whole paper, Its a bit of a tough read and dry but at the very least its worth a glance as you will notice some interesting notes.

I think it pulls anything inside the field with it, and then drops it off again at the destination. It's not actually moving through space at high speed.

lol yeah but those people who you claim are goofing off actually DID know what they were doing, in any case, I highly doubt you'll get any one wanting to throw cash at something that frivolous and with no scientific aim. You need to treat things properly: Preamble-Aim-Method-Data-Results-Conclusion-references. a basic traditional scientific structure, otherwise you are wasting your time, although, it's yours to waste, just not other peoples money lol...

​@@psycronizer Sounds like you are grossly focused on misunderstanding the use of the word "Goofing" to be honest. I am not suggesting throw money at people to do whatever with at all. I am suggesting there are tons of "unqualified"( IE: No background and connections with Academia) people more than capable of performing proper scientific experiments despite not having a piece of paper and connections. Especially now that we live in a time where if someone wishes to be self taught they can accomplish as much as collage education could with ease. Hobbyist have a drive and interest in a subject likely well above students per-capita. As an example, while I am not 100% sure I don't believe Fraser has ever had proper education in this field however in my opinion he is more than worthy were he to decide he needed funding to test a hypothesis he might have. I also regularly coach young students myself who are getting their degrees in programming, as well as collage graduates, and help them with various problems they may run into yet I am 100% self taught from dozens of books and thousands, if not tens of thousands of websites for learning coding. In a similar fashion I have taught myself organic chemistry, some mathematics( the devil lol), physics and various other scientific topics. Polymaths who do it for the love of Science are the ones who make the greatest discoveries. Throughout all of this and despite Science being my passion in life( potentially compulsive disorder) I have had little to no drive to pursue an academic path. I never studied to prove superiority over another and I only do it because its what I love and what calms my mind and soul. These are the types of people you want to throw money at and who will genuinely discover big breakthroughs, not someone doing an experiment because its good for the cooperate backers.

@@seditt5146 While you enthusiasm is commendable surely you don't think that some backyard scientist is going to actually be "the one" to make some stupendous discovery that opens the way to some new "warp drive" or new field of physics. Here's what's going to happen regarding propulsion. Thrusters like VASMR ion drives etc. will be the only game in town for sustained efficient long range travel, until fusion tokamaks utilizing REBCO come along, and then those get used as the core for a NERVA like rocket to provide all the thrust you could ever want. Any new kind of sci fi like warp drives or other fantastical drive, if they ever happen, won't be a reality for a very, very long time. We might have the standard model of particle physics but our ideas on gravity are screwed, so developing anything in that vein is a long way off, MOND is probably closer to the truth in my opinion but I certainly do not subscribe to pointless research into crap that uses exotic matter etc. when we don't even have a T.O.E. we will be similar to "The Belt" rather than "Star Trek" for quite some time..and there's nothing wrong with that. I do not think anything worth while will come from anyone's garage, not at this level

@@psycronizer If they were funded even half as much I indeed to believe they are the ones who would make those discoveries so sorry I think we have reached a fundamental level of disagreement that is unlikely to be rectified. Citizen Scientist are more than capable of laying groundwork for successful experiments and grants are given out for them all of the time. I am not sure if you are unaware of this or disagree with it entirely and clearing that up would help me understand where your stand a bit better.

@@seditt5146 oh lol, I will gladly explain my position ! In the past 300 years or so, many intelligent men, as you know of equal intellect to those of today (just missing the mountain of knowledge we have, discovered in steps) teased out the mathematical underpinnings of the natural world around them, Volta, Newton, Maxwell, Einstein to name a few. They all did it with keen minds and very limited physical interaction with the world to prove their ideas, due to the limitations of the day. Here's the key part, all of the forces and little oddities of nature that required a mathematical proof to show we understand them , have already been done ! From Maxwell's field equations to Einstein's theory of special relativity, all of it is done, there isn't a single thing that happens on this earth that cannot be demonstrated by what we know.. In a rough sense, it was all the low hanging fruit, and it has been picked off by smart men using observation, imagination, and math, and it is DONE. Any physicist will tell you that. There is nothing left to find there. This is why around the 1940's and 50's when they knew that they had cracked as much as they could they needed atom smashers to see what spills out of atoms when you hammer them hard enough, with high energy kinetic energy, know any back yard scientist's who just happened to build a cyclotron, synchrocyclotron, storage ring, linear accelerator ? no neither do I. QCD is successful and could never have been arrived at by a backyard experimenter. The same was true for the Higgs, although even higher, much bigger machines were needed for that. So that's the mass explained, and gravity being even weaker has required stupendous machines to glean something. Laser interferometers, LIGO, your back yard boys built one of those ? didn't think so. Our current theory of Newtonian gravity isn't cutting it, sure, it works down here, on this pathetically small scale, but it doesn't work out there, MOND might be the answer, anything to get people to junk dark matter, as it's a joke. We have gravity wrong, there are far too many problems with it on the macro scale. The instruments needed to test new ideas to figure out what it is that we don't yet get about gravity will probably be space born, and large, and the level of education behind building and understanding these new tools, just like all the previous ones, won't be back yard stuff, and it is naïve to think it will.

Only if it was repeatable.

We have not been to the lunar surface in like 45 years and returning is eating up much of the Nasa budget.

Oh yes I can

eventually...decades from now

I may have said that poorly the laser anchors the spacecraft.

You still have to make a black hole first. Firing Tungsten telephone poles at near C into each other from multiple directions using nukes _may_ be possible with advanced enough computation but, it's a hard task, to grossly understate. Once you have one you can do Kugel-Blitz drives and other interesting things but, starting with the premise that you have a micro-black hole is kind of a leap. You might as well start with "low speed" Warp Drive as an assumption.

Violates causality and not physically possible.

@@peteclegg1578 🤦‍♂️

Lol. Warp drive to the moon. How about warp drive to go shopping on the other side of town.

Imagine one day being able to create and harness the power of the sun like a horse on the front of a chariot.

for the first question we have no idea but the second is a misunderstanding of what cosmic inflation is. The cosmos isn't expanding into anything. Space itself is expanding. Kinda like if you have a graph. Making the the boxes or graduations bigger makes the available space bigger but it isn't expanding into anything. Pretty hard to get ur head around but then again a lot of physics & cosmology is like that.

🤭

It's a great idea and has been considered. You could send fusion pellets in a chain ahead of your spacecraft, and pick them up as you go.

WELL IF YOU DID SEND ANY KIND OF FUEL AHEAD ... THE FIRST ONE WOULD HAVE TO BE GOING THE FASTEST ....THEN EACH ONE SLOWER ON DOWN THE LINE....I THINK THATS WHY THE NEVER CONCIDER DOING IT ..... BUT WHAT ABOUT THE IDEA OF SCOOPING UP HYDROGEN AS THEY MOVE ALONG ... IM SURE A NUCLEAR REACTER AND A ONE KILOMETER ELECTRIFIED Apparatus IN THE FRONT HANDLE THE JOB @@frasercain

You really think thousands of G's won't brake metals and plastics?

We actually still don't know if they repel each other. There have been a few experiments done and the results have been inconclusive. It would be really interesting if they did.

@@frasercain Yes I know that we don't know, that is why I was hypothesizing ;)

Game over

Would you even collide with anything at all? You're not actually going faster than C, you're just warping space around you, so wouldn't it just collide with the warp bubble?

@@waspsandwich6548 The bubble is based on empty space. Matter will disrupt the bubble.

That's really interesting, thanks a lot. I live in Canada so we see a lot of French names and learn to pronounce them that way.

Noethers time-energy conservation.

They're brand new and fairly well funded, but I haven't dug into the specific funding rounds they've handed out. I asked Sonny to let me know the next time the release a new round so we can investigate the various projects.

or we’re in a zoo of sorts - which is likely considering

Or we are so backwards we are not worth their time.

We're not worth their time. Warp is possible, but its foolish to think we'd be worth the hassle in our current stage.

I think the challenge for a population of people who have mastered artificial gravity propulsion is - well put it this way - an analogy: 1) there is a zoo in a nearby town 2) the orangutans and chimpanzees got hold of firearms and are extremely territorial How many tickets would be sold to zoo visitors? Probably zero. Humanity, right now: 1) is extremely territorial - lots of disparate groups 2) the disparate groups are heavily armed This could well be the reason for lack of visitors. .

A physics professor, who also runs a youtube channel named "Cool Worlds" made a video where he proves that this would indeed be the case. Check him out! He also made the best video out there on rotational artificial gravity and otherwise some philosophical videos on the Drake equation/Fermi paradox.

@@andreaspeters8602out racing photons doesn’t equal time travel, it just looks like time travel because you’re out racing the photons you emit.

​@@mnrvaprjct In right circumstances it absolutely will be time travel. Let's say you have a warp ship capable of 60 c (a light minute per second). You turn the drive on for a second and arrive a light minute away from where you started, if during the time that's left of the past minute you decide to warp back where you started, you will arrive before you originally left

@@wildcardbitchesyeehaw8320 yes, but that circumstance requires another observer seeing you do that while they’re already moving .99c in their own reference frame. There are ways to balance a space-time diagram to fix this, though admittedly it’s a similar workaround to applying time travel shenanigans in the first place.

@@mnrvaprjct Why does it require another observer? In my example scenario you literally return to where you started before you originally left, so that's just literal time travel where you could interact with your past self

spinning a merry go round backwards still flings you outward

@@virutech32 Thank you

Weightwatchers are interested in investing

So there's this thing called a radiator. We actually have some pretty cool & effective designs that can handle some pretty low reject temps for high efficiency. If the mass budget doesn't allow for radiating at a certain temp you raise the rejection temp & take the efficiency hit