>requires negative mass/energy to operate to bend space the opposite way
>negative mass/energy makes mathematical sense but there is absolutely no reason to expect it to exist
>operating it would require more energy than has cumulatively been produced by humanity
Did I miss anything?
Y'all niggas need to accept that humanity is going to be using generation ships to get to other stars.
>Did I miss anything?
Nope. Actually the whole NASA Advanced Propulsion Program was a big fucking joke, that only existed to maintain a certain amount of jobs in key states.
I wish US representatives cared more about the goals of NASA than the pork they can bring to their sake via NASA.
It still continues to this day. There's a team of about 20 people at NASA working on antimatter propulsion, even though we need CERN-like infrastructure to create and capture just a few anti-hydrogen atoms. We're still decades -if not centuries- away from producing macroscopic amounts of antimatter, but someone at NASA though it was a good idea to waste time, ressources and people's careers on antimatter propulsion.
negative mass =/= antimatter
Not sure there even is proposed travel with antimatter, other than Star Trek that is.
>negative mass =/= antimatter
user didn't even imply that.
What about if I burn anti coal in an anti oxygen eviroment? Wouldn't that make negative energy?
This, anyone?
No.
Just... no.
Well kek'd. Don't give the children who lurk here ideas.
is negative energy/mass even a physically possible thing? sounds pretty fake tbqh
Itd make positive energy and antimatter water, soot, and co2, which would annihilate when you added to normal matter water, soot, and CO2
Even if negative mass were possible, it would be repulsed by regular mass. If it ever existed on earth it'd shoot up into space like a super helium balloon. If it exists naturally anywhere in the universe it'd find a spot far from regular matter and continually push matter away.
Hypothetically, could this be the force that's expanding our universe? Lets say when the universe was created it created regular matter and an equal amount of negative mass matter. Regular matter got thrown into space and negative mass matter became trapped in the epicenter and continues to push matter away with it's anti-gravity force.
And to think we'll never get nuclear rockets, not to even mention Orion drives, because nookular is evul m'ay.
>Not sure there even is proposed travel with antimatter, other than Star Trek that is.
Something much more mundane than Star Trek: projectrho.com
That's an incredibly inefficient design and it angers me that we would put effort into designing such a thing. A VAST majority of total energy produced isn't even used. it's just an engineering cop-out for lack of ability to control nuclear fusion with current technology.
>A VAST majority of total energy produced isn't even used.
projectrho.com
Perhaps it's still inefficient, but not for lack of trying.
>lack of ability to control nuclear fusion with current technology.
It uses fission nukes as far as I understand. Anyway, designs for fission rockets that don't involve riding explosions also exist, it's not like there's no middle ground between chemical rockets and going full fusion.
This, also, it may be an inefficient use of the total energy produced by the reaction but, compared to the delta-V which can be achieved for a given mass of fuel relative to the mass of the rocket it's a few orders better than chemical.
Well, some fields have imaginary mass, so... Who knows what kind of exotic particles are there.
A large fraction of the energy is being used
And how much is used/wasted is irrelevant compared to what it costs & what it provides
>Did I miss anything?
The Chung-Freese metric.
We might not need any actual negative energy density material.
>We might not need any actual negative energy density material.
I want to believe.
enjoy your ridiculously miniscule energy generation that would take years to light up a small led LMAO
DESU senpai, it was an economically feasible way to put city blocks into LEO with '60s tech and the bombs would have carefully shaped the direction of the blast using X-ray ablation of a small tungsten plate in the warhead. Not too inefficient, and a REDICULOUS specific impulse compared to other designs. Fusion rockets might have even more energy density pound for pound of fuel, but you won't see any of those lifting thousands of tons at once.
What the fuck
t b h f a m
got converted into "desu senpai"
t. newfag
sorry, usual /b/ /k/ /diy/ /mu/ frequenter here. Is this Veeky Forums specific? Did Emporer Hiroshima Nagasaki do this?
desu senpai
It also happens in /pol/ and Veeky Forums
*desu baka senpai
>Itd make positive energy and antimatter water, soot, and co2, which would annihilate when you added to normal matter water, soot, and CO2
So antimatter only annihilates on contact with the equivalent substance? I know particles only annihilate with the corresponding antiparticles, however the number of types of particles is so limited that I would think matter and antimatter even of different substances would undergo mostly complete annihilation.
Not to mention even if we got it working the particle build up in front would DECIMATE everything on your arrival
>this discovery will take a long time
>we better quit working on it
>we better fix our priorities and work on something that is more likely to work reasonably early
fixd. not to mention having figured out nuclear thermal rocket technology would necessitate solving some of the same engineering problems that antimatter rockets need
it's too bad we can't work on multiple problems at once
You can only work on a limited amount of problems at once, if you want NASA to work on antimatter propulsion then give them an adequate budget for it otherwise you're just pissing the money away.
I still think it's like living on a desert and trying to build a steam engine after having seen a single tree, while neglecting camel research just because they smell and crap in front of your tent.
Nope
>someone thought it was a good idea to waste time, resources, and peoples careers
what is R&D
They recently reevaluated the math and discovered you'd only need the same amount of energy as the voyager probe to propel an alcubierre drive. It's still possible, faggot.