| Submit your comments on this article |
| Science & Technology |
| Serious interest in a theory that could lead to hyperspace transportation within a decade |
| 2006-01-06 |
| EVERY year, the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics awards prizes for the best papers presented at its annual conference. Last year's winner in the nuclear and future flight category went to a paper calling for experimental tests of an astonishing new type of engine. According to the paper, this hyperdrive motor would propel a craft through another dimension at enormous speeds. It could leave Earth at lunchtime and get to the moon in time for dinner. There's just one catch: the idea relies on an obscure and largely unrecognised kind of physics. Can they possibly be serious? The AIAA is certainly not embarrassed. What's more, the US military has begun to cast its eyes over the hyperdrive concept, and a space propulsion researcher at the US Department of Energy's Sandia National Laboratories has said he would be interested in putting the idea to the test. And despite the bafflement of most physicists at the theory that supposedly underpins it, Pavlos Mikellides, an aerospace engineer at the Arizona State University in Tempe who reviewed the winning paper, stands by the committee's choice. "Even though such features have been explored before, this particular approach is quite unique," he says. The theory this is based on predicts the mass of the fundamental particles to 6 decimal places... our current theories can't even get to within a factor of 10 of the measured values of the fundamental particles. In other words this theory is hundreds of thousands of times more accurate based on experimental results. Read the rest at the link... more here http://news.scotsman.com/scitech.cfm?id=16902006 |
| Posted by:Damn_Proud_American |
| #10 ''The nation that controls magnetism controls the universe.'' Chester Gould |
| Posted by: bruce 2006-01-06 22:31 |
| #9 Jeanter: The "Big Boys" are off in la-la land with strings. They don't talk to us experimentalists much. |
| Posted by: James 2006-01-06 19:49 |
| #8 Where do I buy a ticket? |
| Posted by: Hyper 2006-01-06 18:52 |
| #7 I think comparing this to improving existing technology is not really relevant... I mean they're talking about going faster than 1000 * the speed of light. The thing that I think is really cool about it is that they're not talking about stuff we can't even begin to comprehend how to test... this is all very testable in a short time frame to see if it's worth further investigation. Odd of success... 2% ;) |
| Posted by: Damn_Proud_American 2006-01-06 18:02 |
| #6 When trying to guesstimate if vapor-science is serious, look at how much they promise. i.e., if the new carburetor promises 10 more mpg, it is much more likely than if it promises 100 more mpg. Next it pays to look at materiel. That is, ramjets would be spectacular if they didn't both consume fuel at a terrible rate and tear most engines to pieces. Third, it is much less likely that "all brand-new" technology will work compared to an improvement to existing technology. In this case, a "hyperdrive" engine compared to say, making a better ion drive engine (which has also happened in the last week). |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2006-01-06 17:51 |
| #5 *cough* So how are the big boys doing in coming up with the "Unified Theory" these days? |
| Posted by: Jeanter Jimble4636 2006-01-06 16:59 |
| #4 Mojo, I was around during that cold fusion period and hanging out with my physicist neighbor and his friends. Once you got through their talk dispariging "chemists" (think how the English talk about the Irish) they all agreed that a) they made fun of Einstein too and b)the implications sure were neat if it WAS real c) unfortunately the odds on it being real were considered to be, shall we say, rather slim. Me, I don't know but it's a blast to think about. |
| Posted by: AlanC 2006-01-06 15:50 |
| #3 "and most of those contacted by New Scientist said they couldn't make sense of Dröscher and Häuser's description of the theory behind their proposed experiment. Following Heim theory is hard work even without Dröscher's extension, says Markus Pössel, a theoretical physicist at the Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics in Potsdam, Germany. Several years ago, while an undergraduate at the University of Hamburg, he took a careful look at Heim theory. He says he finds it "largely incomprehensible", and difficult to tie in with today's physics. "What is needed is a step-by-step introduction, beginning at modern physical concepts," he says." Not a good sign. Pity. A spindizzy would be nice to have. |
| Posted by: James 2006-01-06 15:46 |
| #2 Two words: Cold Fusion |
| Posted by: mojo 2006-01-06 14:20 |
| #1 Hey, I'll have it perfected in 58 years. |
| Posted by: Zefram Cochran 2006-01-06 13:53 |