Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

AmIHigh t1_iyc154h wrote

I really don't know enough to say one way or the other, but they claim it's a real warp bubble, and they could use this research to make another one now that the structure works as predicted. And the picture in the article is supposedly a picture of the real experiment, a real warp bubble.

So seems like they did an experiment, recorded it all, and all the numbers worked out to be a warp bubble accidentally?

> “our detailed numerical analysis of our custom Casimir cavities helped us identify a real and manufacturable nano/microstructure that is predicted to generate a negative vacuum energy density such that it would manifest a real nanoscale warp bubble, not an analog, but the real thing.”

>“To be clear, our finding is not a warp bubble analog, it is a real, albeit humble and tiny, warp bubble,” White told The Debrief, “hence the significance.”

and by pure fluke too

>So, whether by pure coincidence or some sort of personal destiny, it appears that one of the handful of engineers on the planet who would immediately know what it was he was looking at when conducting his Casimir cavity research was in the exact right place at the exact right time to notice a striking similarity to his warp drive passion project and his current research, an observation that may have otherwise gone unseen.

Also this one has other details

>Through an incredibly serendipitous happenstance, it took an engineer conducting the research at the exact right time — one who was familiar with warp technology research and knew what he was looking at — to realize that this totally unrelated research had produced a warp bubble.

edit: Lots of edits, sigh.


the_zelectro t1_iycp76m wrote

His model is using negative energy. The only scientific models I know of that allow negative energy to exist in large amounts, without being woo-woo, are within black holes...

Another commenter here put this scientist's credentials into question. Additionally, they linked his original paper here, and the conclusions are pretty weak:

"The analysis also showed a possible intersection with a model developed in the context of general relativity to understand how hyperfast stellar travel might be manifested mathematically. The qualitative correlation would suggest that a chip-scale experiment might be explored to attempt to measure a tiny signature illustrative of the presence of the conjectured phenomenon."

Key takeaways: he doesn't have a mathematical model for FTL travel to work from (he also calls it "hyperfast", which could be an attempt to lower the bar). He only has a "possible intersection" where his experiment only gives a "qualitative correlation". This is weak for such bold claims... And, the phenomenon he's still looking to measure is only "conjectured".

I also saw a picture of his device, and it looks pretty scrappy for such precise electromagnetic measurements. The anomalies he claims to see could attributed be any number of mundane error.

I didn't read the whole thing, due to how weak the conclusion section was... But here's the article: