22 replies to this topic

[Live Forever]

http://www.newscient...hyperspace.html

Article about an award awarded last year by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics about a hyperdrive that could revolutionize space travel. (to and from Mars in a matter of hours)

Of course, the theory is speculative at best, and the article uses the appropriate amount of skepticism at the idea, but experiments on it could become a reality soon to test if the idea is viable or not.

Interesting...

[knite]

Wow, earth-similar planets and theories like this, im truly stunned. I understand that its completely untested as yet, but the fact that it has already been used in important parts of science today lends it some credence that other theories of this nature lack. Truly stunned, I am glad I am entering physics in this golden age.

[Live Forever]

The most exciting part of the article (to me) was this part:

he suggests that a spacecraft fitted with a coil and ring could be propelled into a multidimensional hyperspace. Here the constants of nature could be different, and even the speed of light could be several times faster than we experience. If this happens, it would be possible to reach Mars in less than 3 hours and a star 11 light years away in only 80 days, Dröscher and Häuser say.

11 light years in 80 days? That would be spectacular. Unfortunately, the more I think about it and read about it, the more skeptical I am of the claims being made. I would definitely like to see some experiments as they lay out in the article, though, to test the feasibility. Until then, I will remain skeptical.

Edited by Live Forever, 27 April 2007 - 03:30 PM.

[Shepard]

Didn't they see what happened to the Robinsons?

But, yeah, I'm highly skeptical.

[xanadu]

Looks like more nonsense and speculation to me. That article is all about what ifs and so on. It's a theory of 6 dimensional space and the only part I saw about a space drive was this

""Our theory is not about anti-gravity. It's about completely new fields with new properties," he says. And he and Häuser have suggested an experiment to prove it.

This will require a huge rotating ring placed above a superconducting coil to create an intense magnetic field. With a large enough current in the coil, and a large enough magnetic field, Dröscher claims the electromagnetic force can reduce the gravitational pull on the ring to the point where it floats free. Dröscher and Häuser say that to completely counter Earth's pull on a 150-tonne spacecraft a magnetic field of around 25 tesla would be needed."

Ho hum, the old magnetic field trick. That's about a zillion years old. I thought there was something new here? Another example of the old newspaper trick of taking something old, proclaiming it new and then telling us it's revolutionary and will do some sort of marvelous thing. Tesla came up with better stuff over a hundred years ago. How many of you fell for it?

[knite]

a zillion huh? how many zeroes is that? btw it wasnt the newspaper bringing something back, it was about the AIAA recognizing a theory. congrats on understanding a theory that top physicists are having trouble with btw.

[xanadu]

Yeah, a brand new theory of space travel by means of... what was that again... magnetic rings? Yeah, that's really new. I'm sure that will work. What else is there of interest in all the other stuff? Maybe some day something will come of it but right now there is zip that I can see. But maybe you can point out what I overlooked?

[basho]

Looks like more nonsense and speculation to me.

What differentiates Heim's theories from crackpot ideas is that there are testable predictions.

In fact, some have been tested. So what were the results? If we can trust the Wikipedia entry on Heim Theory, then the application of this theory to derive particle masses gets closer than any other theory to the measured masses. In fact, it is the only theory that gets close to the measured masses when derived from first principles.

I also found this interesting comment at BetterHumans.com:

hdeasy says:

Advantages of Heim
Now I've been following the theory of Burkhard Heim for a few years now - I know someone in the Heim Theory group, and advised the journalist on the New Scientist article. I also wrote the original Wikipedia pagges on him, though they've undergone many changes - notably a French version suddenly appeared after the NS article last week! Besides the space drive the amazing thing is the mass formula - I have a copy of a shortish piece of code which takes the set of integer eigen-values from part I of the set of mass equations and generates from them the masses of 16 of the known particles to within six signifigant figures! This is amazing, as no other theory comes even close - the standard model has lattice QCD, which uses massive CPU time on most powerful computers to approximate some baryon masses - they were delight to get withing 10%! Heim gets to within 0.01% and also for leptons and other particles, on simple Sun wokstation in a fraction of a second of CPU.

What's more, the mass formula doesn't rely on a Higgs Boson. In the theory, mass arises as a consequence of the geometrical twists in space, which constitute the particles. Note that Heim's space is a lattice of 6-D surface elements of dimension h*h (Planck's constant squared). So the 'aether' is a lattice of these 'metrons' or surface elements - a bit like the spin lattice in Loop Quantum Gravity.

Finally, Heim is consistent with special and General Relativity, since his theory is a union of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. In quantising General Relativity, Heim did, 40 or 50 years ago, a thing similar to what Loop Quantum Gravity is doing now. The difference is in at which stage the quantisation is performed - for Heim it's the Chtistoffel symbols and Ricci tensor - for LQG something else (which explains why the latter doesn't get the same results of Heim: but their similar origin in Relativity means that both theories are 'background independent' - an advantage over String theory, which treats space as a passive background upon which the particles move).

So all in all Heim theory is really exciting and it's great that it's finally getting publicity again - Heim made the cover of Stern and other mags in the 1950's and Ithink it was Time magazine or Paris Match that did a feature on him in the 60s. But then he retreated from pubic scrutiny until all the major scientists that recognised his genius (Heisenberg, Jourdan etc.) had died away - then 20 or 30 years later he popped up with the mass formula! A bit like Newton in his secrecy, hiding his results from his 'year of miracles' until Leibnitz threatened to steal his glory... So slowly the results of his isolated activity is coming to fruition. He reminds me of Mozart, as this is Mozart's year, in that the latter composed symphonies complete in his head and just jotted them down without error. Similarly Heim worked it all out in his head (he was nearly blind, deaf and handless) until the 'readout phase'.

[basho]

Some more details from the AIAA paper below. This paper is well worth skimming through.

Abstract: Spacetime physics includes general relativity (GR), quantum theory, quantum gravity, string theory (additional external dimensions), and gauge theory (additional internal dimensions) as well as some modern variations. The paper will discuss the requirements on future propulsion systems stemming from the demands for routine missions to LEO, the moon, or planetary missions within the solar system, as well as interstellar flight. These requirements are compared with the limits imposed by the physical laws of GR in conjunction with the physical theories listed above. The physical consequences of these field theories in curved-spacetime as well as string and gauge theory, are discussed. Moreover, recent developments in the structure of spacetime are presented, and their consequences for advanced propulsion systems are outlined. In particular, a novel experiment (ESA, March 2006) reporting about the generation of an artificial gravitational field in the laboratory is discussed. This experiment, if confirmed, could serve as the basis for a field propulsion device. Since a thorough understanding of the underlying physical principle as provided by Extended Heim Theory (EHT) is of prevailing importance, both the theoretical and quantitative analysis of this experiment are presented. Utilizing the experimental data along with the insight gained from theoretical considerations of EHT, the concept for a field propulsion device is briefly outlined. Preliminary results of the propulsion capability of this device are also given. Finally, an outlook on the necessary experimental and theoretical prerequisites is presented, to comprehend the novel physics regarding the two different coupling mechanisms for fermions and bosons. Finally, the technical requirements for such a propellantless propulsion device are briefly described.

...



Fig. 9 depicts the experiment of Tajmar et al., where a superconducting ring is subject to angular acceleration, which should lead to a gravitophoton force. EHT makes
the following predictions for the measured gravitational fields that are attributed to photon- gravitophoton interaction, the fifth interaction.

- For the actual experiment pictured in Fig. 9, the gravitophoton force is in the azimuthal direction only (Tajmar et al.) caused by angular acceleration
of the superconducting niobium disk. The acceleration field is opposite to the angular acceleration, obeying some kind of Lenz rule.

- For the gedankenexperiment of Fig. (10), a force component in the vertical direction would be generated.

It will be shown in the following that the postulated gravitophoton force completely explains all experimental facts of Tajmar's experiment, both qualitatively and quantitatively.

And from the conclusion:

On the other hand, the recent experiment by Tajmar, if confirmed, has shown some evidence that a coupling between electromagnetism and gravitation might exist, which would allow the generation of artificial gravitational fields. Extended Heim Theory has predicted this effect as the fifth physical interaction, and was used to successfully describe and to quantitatively calculate this experiment. In addition, EHT also allows to devise a gedankenexperiment that produces a gravitational field along the axis of rotation of a rotating ring that is self-propelled, and thus can be used to build a propellantless propulsion device.

[Shannon Vyff]

I put a 'hyperdrive' in my book Sucks having to come up with ways to get to other planets that are halfway decent, I'll go with some credible speculation

[DJS]

In fact, some have been tested.  So what were the results?  If we can trust the Wikipedia entry on Heim Theory, then the application of this theory to derive particle masses gets closer than any other theory to the measured masses.  In fact, it is the only theory that gets close to the measured masses when derived from first principles.

I also found this interesting comment at BetterHumans.com

Thanks for the link. Very interesting stuff, though the physics is way over my head... [glasses]

he plays around with a quantised version of the Ricci tensor and does a double transform involving curvilinear coordinates. This leads to a set of operators whose eigen-vectors give the mass spectrum of elementary particles. That alone is fiendishly complex and involves the 6-d version. The 8-2 (or 12-d) version gives additional grav forces including one for transforming photons to 'gravito-photons' = one type of which interacts with electrons and the other with nucleons - the latter has the largest cross section and has an anti-gravity effect. THus a sort of symmetry breaking leads to net anti-gravity. That's more or less the principle behind the space drive - you need strong magnets rotating to get the gravitophotons.

[xanadu]

A heap of nice talk but no propulsion drives. You can tweak the figures until they come close to what they are supposed to be if you know what they are supposed to be but the proof you have something is when you can demonstrate in the real world. We were told that there is some sort of drive and it links magnetism with gravity or some other mechanism. At this point it's all talk. When and if they come up with something demonstrateable, I will become a believer too.

This reminds me of the quantum computer and cold fusion. Neither of them has produced a workable model yet.

[DJS]

I...don't understand. Do we all get gold stars for militant skepticism? [lol]

Interesting theories are just that - interesting theories. Why is there a need to get worked up over levels of abstraction that are well beyond most of our layman's ability to understand? Time will tell. "Yeah"

[Brainbox]

Do we all get gold stars for militant skepticism?  [lol]

That would be quite contradictory, wouldn't it? Who's side are you on anyway? Damn it. [lol]

[Brainbox]

Neither of them has produced a workable model yet.

Neither did next week pass by yet. ;-)

[Athanasios]

Interesting that they mentioned sandia, as they have just released a bit of news too:

http://www.sandia.go...fire-pulse.html

[xanadu]

Last time I fell for the latest gee-whiz invention of the month was when cold fusion was announced. Since then I've come to notice that on a regular basis they hype something and tell us it's the next cold fusion. Actually, that would give it away so they call it something better. I'm waiting for them to recycle Tesla's stuff and tell us it's the latest new wrinkle. Last month they said that extracting oil from shale using heat was cutting edge technology and the energy crisis was over. The month before that it was quantum computers. Heard anything about them lately? Neither have I. But I guess I'm just a skeptic.

[DJS]

Sorry for following the general trend of being a prig, but how does one "fall for something"? By artificially inflating confidence levels? So, the proposed solution is to artificially deflate them instead? When dealing with the frontiers of science, which most of us are in no position to evaluate properly, why move our judgement indicators either way?

As per Kuhnian epistemology, barring a relative level of expertise which would allow one to be "properly invested", the prevailing sentiments/responsiveness of the scientific mainstream should be used as a barometer for judging what does and does not constitute psuedo-science (the gold standard for what demands our strong skepticism). Disbelief is still a belief, and unwarranted in this particular instance since, as far as I can tell, there aren't yet any theoretical physicists throwing out the red card.

[xanadu]

Disbelief is the default position on everything. It has to be proven, not just a slick sounding presentation. That's what I'm trying to get across. If you don't know if what you are being told is correct or not, then it's just a mildly interesting line of research.

I mean come on, do you have to be a rocket scientist to realize that "Hyperdrive Engine travels through other dimensions" is a piece of science fiction? If it seems to good to be true, it's not true. That is my fall back position unless and until it's proven true. Now if they say they found a way to do something 2% more efficiently and this will create modest improvements, my BS alarm does not go off. It may be true, it may not but when they start tossing out hyperdrives and or cold fusion, you do not say "really?!!!!" and fall for it hook line and sinker. Maybe after about the tenth time you too will become jaded next time the greatest thing to ever come along, comes along. How is the quantum computer doing?

[jc1991]

Hyperdrive Engine travels through other dimensions

While this line my be science fiction, it is also a horrible summary of what a drive operating on the principles of Heim theory would do. (It is a very good summary of what a drive operating on Heim-Dröscher theory would do, but Heim-Droscher theory is, for the moment, much less well founded than Heim theory.) The drive would operate by (indirectly) converting local gravity (or the local particles of gravity; IE:Gravitons) into electromagnetic energy, thus reducing local gravity.

We were told that there is some sort of drive and it links magnetism with gravity or some other mechanism.

The drive doesn't link electromagnetism to gravity. Part of Heim theory postulates a link between electromagnetism and gravity.

Heim theory is one of several attempts to fix the inconsistencies between general relativity and quantum theory, by creating a "substance" of space-time. In this regard, it is similar to the various string theories, although it operates on different mechanisms. Also like string theory, it is testable but not yet fully tested, so moderate skepticism is understandable.


As for quantum computers, not only have workable models been created (not economically viable models perhaps, but certainly workable) there's been quite a lot of talk recently about D-Wave Systems. (Their computer may or may not be quantum, but it appears to be for now, and we have to get something that appears to be before we can get something that is.) The concept of a quantum computer is, anyway, based on very solid scientific research that is the underpinning of most modern physics, for the moment.


I can understand why skepticism about this subject is needed, but I can also understand that further research and testing must be performed before anyone can dismiss it out of hand.

[xanadu]

jc, that is a reasonable way to look at things. I'm not saying nothing will ever come of this, something may someday. I'm merely pointing out that at this point it's all talk and speculation. What I object to is the hype which usually leads to a groundswell of belief that something has been invented or produced. They are careful to never actually say anything that is clearly false but they say or imply that these amazing things are just around the corner. I'm not opposed to optimism and certainly not against research. We need more research, not less.

Also like string theory, it is testable but not yet fully tested, so moderate skepticism is understandable.

A whole LOT of skepticism is needed to counter the "gee whiz look what we've got!" mentality that forms out of speculation and press releases.

As for quantum computers, not only have workable models been created (not economically viable models perhaps, but certainly workable)

They are closer to reality than any hyperdimensional drives, I'll give you that much. However, no such computer has ever been built to date. The concept is good and the theory is interesting but no computers. It may turn out that there is something which prevents them from operating reliably. It may be that all problems and obstacles will be overcome in time. It may be that some day we will have cold fusion and all these other nice to have goodies. But that day is not today and it looks to be a long time before they arrive if they ever do.

That is my point. That and the fact that the media, which now includes the blogosphere and internet, tends to operate on hype much like cars operate on gasoline. They are always trying to sell you something which usually involves lying to you in some degree. Arm yourself with skepticism against overweaned expectations while working toward what is doable. That is what has brought us to where we are today.

[modelcadet]

The most exciting part of the article (to me) was this part:


11 light years in 80 days? That would be spectacular. Unfortunately, the more I think about it and read about it, the more skeptical I am of the claims being made. I would definitely like to see some experiments as they lay out in the article, though, to test the feasibility. Until then, I will remain skeptical.

Remember when it took us 80 days to travel around the world? Well... 81... but still!

Although I'm hesitant about this, if we really examine this "hyperdrive engine" in context, it really isn't too far-fetched. After all, we were supposed to have flying cars years ago.

[DJS]

Disbelief is the default position on everything. It has to be proven, not just a slick sounding presentation. That's what I'm trying to get across. If you don't know if what you are being told is correct or not, then it's just a mildly interesting line of research.

I mean come on, do you have to be a rocket scientist to realize that "Hyperdrive Engine travels through other dimensions" is a piece of science fiction? If it seems to good to be true, it's not true. That is my fall back position unless and until it's proven true. Now if they say they found a way to do something 2% more efficiently and this will create modest improvements, my BS alarm does not go off. It may be true, it may not but when they start tossing out hyperdrives and or cold fusion, you do not say "really?!!!!" and fall for it hook line and sinker. Maybe after about the tenth time you too will become jaded next time the greatest thing to ever come along, comes along. How is the quantum computer doing?

Whatever floats your boat. My default position is "hhhmmm, that's interesting, hope it works out." I reserve the type of response your exhibiting for things like Alex Chui's magnetic immortality rings, but then again I've been mellowing out as of late. )