The Warp Drive in invented tomorrow. What happens next?

[justidutch]

The Warp Drive is invented tomorrow. What happens next?

Khan steals it.

[HoloYolo]

khan steals it.

khannnn!

[GeneralVeers]

Oh, the *alliance party* *campers* are in the *now space*.

It is *happy spices*. Why are you there?

I am *squeezing* the *juice*!

+ Rep for this all by itself.

Could you substantiate how this 'advancedness' is measured in your book and what numbers you attach to it for the various nations mentioned?

Sure. The number of people who have walked on the Moon, and where they're from (twelve, all from the U.S.); number of space shuttle launches; caliber of the world's most powerful rockets (the Saturn V, and coming soon, the Space Launch System). The ability to hit incoming objets in orbit (not perfected yet, but getting there, and nobody else is even close). Fully operational laser weapons. Drone technology. Autonomous craft (NOT remote-controlled--SELF-controlled. Also "not perfected yet but getting there").

There's a long list of things the U.S. has that nobody else has. Stuff that will give us a head start come interstellar space race time.

You are missing the point. The question was whether it will shift power and I said it will.

And I said it won't, and I explained why. I did not miss the point--rather, you missed the fact that I didn't miss the point.

Under the rules specified in the original post, a warp drive ship would not be killable "after a while" as you put it. It would be killable right now. Remember, the OP specified that objects accelerated in warp drive tests still traveled at finite speeds. They don't "blink" to the destination, they simply travel to it really fast and without accelerating via application of force ("translation, not acceleration" as he said it).

So a warp drive ship as described in this thread will still have to deal with air resistance--and that's the number one speed limiter on jet aircraft today. Even specialized space shuttles, with appropriate heat shielding, can only travel so fast, and warp drive cannot improve that without incinerating the ship. Such a warp drive ship does not confer tactical advantage in atmosphere. Only in space. A warp ship in atmosphere would be as easy to shoot down as a jet bomber. Use a warp ship to fire missiles from space? Longer travel time, therefore more warning for the target. Better to use a land-launched or submarine-launched missile. I already covered this in detail: we have cheaper and more reliable ways to blow stuff up, without ever leaving the atmosphere.

A warp ship will allow a nation to hide away things (read: weapons, possibly supplies or people) for other nations in a place they, without warp drives, can never ever reach.

The U.S. already has such a place. It's called the United States. Our borders are absolutely safe from military invasion by everybody else on Earth. I know that because there's plenty of dirtbags worldwide that want to destroy the U.S.; they would if they could. But they don't. Which means they can't. So no need to spend lots of money for a strategic advantage we already have.

The whole MAD 'stability' relies on both nations being able to push the button. As soon as that balance shifts, the whole thing shifts.

Just don't go there. Mutually Assured Destruction was one of the world's biggest mistakes. I know because I lived in it for half my life. It was something the entire world was trying to put an end to, and everyone breathed a sigh of relief when the Cold War ended with the Soviet Union going bye-bye. Which just does to show, it wasn't "mutually assured". The Soviet Union's nukes did not protect them.

Warp drives will not "shift" the balance of power. U.S. technology, economy, and past practice in space travel will allow the U.S. to make more effective use of warp drive than everybody else. And that's a good thing, because the U.S. is much less likely to abuse warp drive than, say, Vladimur Putin or ISIS. Rather than shifting the balance of power, warp drive would simply keep it where it is, only "more so".

Edit: Uhh, Gregrox? Something I gotta ask about the warp drive you theorized in your original post. Does it create a field of some kind that envelops the ship? (The OP kind of suggested "no", but wasn't clear on this) Or does the drive simply "translate" the ship attached to the drive?

The reason I ask is: if it's the second one, then a very real limit has suddenly been slapped on this new warp drive--because any movement or turn faster than around 9 G's would kill the crew.......

Edited August 3, 2015 by WedgeAntilles
Question to the Original Poster, GregroxMun

[ZetaX]

Sure. The number of people who have walked on the Moon, and where they're from (twelve, all from the U.S.); number of space shuttle launches; caliber of the world's most powerful rockets (the Saturn V, and coming soon, the Space Launch System). The ability to hit incoming objets in orbit (not perfected yet, but getting there, and nobody else is even close). Fully operational laser weapons. Drone technology. Autonomous craft (NOT remote-controlled--SELF-controlled. Also "not perfected yet but getting there").

There's a long list of things the U.S. has that nobody else has. Stuff that will give us a head start come interstellar space race time.

For weapons, yes (I am by the way doubtful of the fully operational laser weapons, unless you actually talk about those cute 1kW IR lasers that boil things after some minutes). But their best space achievements are from the 60s and 70s; if those actually are a basis for an edge in space, then surely the USSR had an even bigger edge from Sputnik, Gagarin and such. The USA always talk about how better as a space nation they are by omiting the achievements of everyone else... really, one could easily make a similiar list with sowjet/russian achievements (starting with "the only nation that currently can send people to the ISS" and ending with a lot of things from the 50s); simply put, impressive lists from the past and even the present are meaningless on their own.

The SLS is hopefully becoming a thing, but it is more of a question of costs than of technology. China and the EU (and possibly Japan and Russia) could also build such a thing if they would want to put the money into it. Currently they see no reason to do so.

So a warp drive ship as described in this thread will still have to deal with air resistance--and that's the number one speed limiter on jet aircraft today. Even specialized space shuttles, with appropriate heat shielding, can only travel so fast, and warp drive cannot improve that without incinerating the ship. Such a warp drive ship does not confer tactical advantage in atmosphere. Only in space. A warp ship in atmosphere would be as easy to shoot down as a jet bomber. Use a warp ship to fire missiles from space? Longer travel time, therefore more warning for the target. Better to use a land-launched or submarine-launched missile. I already covered this in detail: we have cheaper and more reliable ways to blow stuff up, without ever leaving the atmosphere.

You don't simply shoot down a warp projectile. Apart from it possibly being rather small (most of it is a spacetime distortion that you can't really "hit" due to a lack of matter) it would not help you much. Depending on how this thing works, that warp projectile may carry enormous amount of energy and impulse. By hitting it you turn the ultra-energetic single object into a very narrow spray of ultra-energetic grains. They would still hit you; actually, a weapon would probably use the spraying method to cover more land more completely.

There also were two(¿) xkcd what-if's on related things.

The U.S. already has such a place. It's called the United States. Our borders are absolutely safe from military invasion by everybody else on Earth. I know that because there's plenty of dirtbags worldwide that want to destroy the U.S.; they would if they could. But they don't. Which means they can't. So no need to spend lots of money for a strategic advantage we already have.

This logic is flawed. (as is the one you are arguing against). By your logic, no one could destroy all but a few countries. Which is plain wrong. But things like MAD during the cold war and capitalism & world politics now give a pretty good incentive not to.

[Camacha]

For weapons, yes (I am by the way doubtful of the fully operational laser weapons, unless you actually talk about those cute 1kW IR lasers that boil things after some minutes). But their best space achievements are from the 60s and 70s; if those actually are a basis for an edge in space, then surely the USSR had an even bigger edge from Sputnik, Gagarin and such. The USA always talk about how better as a space nation they are by omiting the achievements of everyone else... really, one could easily make a similiar list with sowjet/russian achievements (starting with "the only nation that currently can send people to the ISS" and ending with a lot of things from the 50s); simply put, impressive lists from the past and even the present are meaningless on their own.

The SLS is hopefully becoming a thing, but it is more of a question of costs than of technology. China and the EU (and possibly Japan and Russia) could also build such a thing if they would want to put the money into it. Currently they see no reason to do so.

Japan and Europe certainly are capable of building exactly such a rocket, though, as you say, they currently have no reason to do so. Why that is is too much of a political discussion, which is against forum policy. The facts also do not substantiate the suggestion that it would be otherwise - just look at the ISS, which is a joint and international endeavour. Europa, Japan, Canada, Russia - they all partake.

Just to be clear, I agree with you here

Under the rules specified in the original post, a warp drive ship would not be killable "after a while" as you put it. It would be killable right now. Remember, the OP specified that objects accelerated in warp drive tests still traveled at finite speeds. They don't "blink" to the destination, they simply travel to it really fast and without accelerating via application of force ("translation, not acceleration" as he said it).

So a warp drive ship as described in this thread will still have to deal with air resistance--and that's the number one speed limiter on jet aircraft today. Even specialized space shuttles, with appropriate heat shielding, can only travel so fast, and warp drive cannot improve that without incinerating the ship. Such a warp drive ship does not confer tactical advantage in atmosphere. Only in space. A warp ship in atmosphere would be as easy to shoot down as a jet bomber. Use a warp ship to fire missiles from space? Longer travel time, therefore more warning for the target. Better to use a land-launched or submarine-launched missile. I already covered this in detail: we have cheaper and more reliable ways to blow stuff up, without ever leaving the atmosphere.

How are you going to hit a warp ship that is well beyond the range of any conventional missile? You cannot. That was my point exactly. It takes too long to launch from space? That is true - for conventional satellites with conventional engines. Those need to wait until they are in position and then de-orbit their payload. Add a warp capable ship that can appear anywhere almost instantly, possibly even with missiles that are themselves warp capable and that means you have no place to hide any more. As an enemy, you will get hurt and there is nothing you can do about it, and that is certainly going to upset things quite a bit.

Just don't go there. Mutually Assured Destruction was one of the world's biggest mistakes. I know because I lived in it for half my life. It was something the entire world was trying to put an end to, and everyone breathed a sigh of relief when the Cold War ended with the Soviet Union going bye-bye. Which just does to show, it wasn't "mutually assured". The Soviet Union's nukes did not protect them.

Like how the nuclear missiles of the US protected the nation from the near economic collapse it is currently in? This is in many ways exactly the same what happened to the Soviet Union. MAD was never designed to protect against that, to even consider that is folly. MAD was (and in all reality still is) designed to provide a very tense military balance political balance of power.

The U.S. already has such a place. It's called the United States. Our borders are absolutely safe from military invasion by everybody else on Earth.

[...]

Warp drives will not "shift" the balance of power. U.S. technology, economy, and past practice in space travel will allow the U.S. to make more effective use of warp drive than everybody else. And that's a good thing, because the U.S. is much less likely to abuse warp drive than, say, Vladimur Putin or ISIS. Rather than shifting the balance of power, warp drive would simply keep it where it is, only "more so".

Ignorance is bliss. Please refrain from making this a discussion about the US versus country X or region Y. Nothing good can come of that.

Edited August 3, 2015 by Camacha

[GeneralVeers]

You don't simply shoot down a warp projectile. Apart from it possibly being rather small (most of it is a spacetime distortion that you can't really "hit" due to a lack of matter) it would not help you much. Depending on how this thing works

That's just the thing--Gregrox didn't specify exactly how it works. We need to stick to what he actually said: that test projectiles translated with a warp drive still travel at finite speed and still crash into things. He didn't say anything about the test projectiles disintegrating the local scenery with theoretical warp fields. If a projectile can crash into something, other things can crash into it. Such as bullets. Or a laser weapon mounted on a Boeing 747.

For weapons, yes (I am by the way doubtful of the fully operational laser weapons, unless you actually talk about those cute 1kW IR lasers that boil things after some minutes).

I wasn't. The above-mentioned laser weapon on a Boeing 747? That's already been field-tested. Successfully. It can shoot down missiles in boost phase. The U.S. has also tested (successfully) a laser weapon mounted on a truck, six times the size of a bus, that can shoot down incoming artillery shells. Both of these projects have been shelved, but they were tested and they worked.

This logic is flawed. (as is the one you are arguing against). By your logic, no one could destroy all but a few countries.

You're seeing meanings in my words that aren't actually there. What I said was, there are a number of entities that want to destroy the United States. They want to do it, but they don't do it. Which means they can't. This doesn't mean nobody can destroy the United States (or "all but a few countries"). There are several entities in the world that can--they just don't want to.

How are you going to hit a warp ship that is well beyond the range of any conventional missile? You cannot.

The same way as with every other weapon on the planet. You wait for it to attack and then shoot it down.

How are you going to hit a Seawolf submarine (which isn't technically a boomer but which can fire nuclear weapons!) when you can't even find it? You cannot. How are you going to hit a nuclear missile silo in North Dakota that is also well beyond the range of any conventional missile? You cannot. How are you going to hit a stealth helicopter that's flying into Pakistan to capture Osama bin Laden? You cannot. Well, that last one is more of a "you did not"......

There's a good reason why a surgeon uses a scalpel instead of a katana. You don't need big and fancy when tiny and practical already does the job perfectly.

That was my point exactly. It takes too long to launch from space? That is true - for conventional satellites with conventional engines. Those need to wait until they are in position and then de-orbit their payload. Add a warp capable ship that can appear anywhere almost instantly

You're making the same mistake lots of other people did in this thread. Gregrox's warp drive doesn't work that way. It doesn't teleport things. It translates them, without acceleration, through normal space at a finite velocity. He made that clear in his original post, before he updated it. And he updated it with the rule that the warp drive can only produce a few hundred miles per hour within the gravity well of a planet. So, basically, Gregrox recently handwaved your argument out of existence.

Like how the nuclear missiles of the US protected the nation from the near economic collapse it is currently in?

You presume (incorrectly) that the U.S. is in an economic near-collapse. This is called a "loaded question". A favorite of politicians.

Ignorance is bliss.

And knowledge is power. I'm the Thanos of online chat forums. Well, except a lot handsomer, and without that fashion-failure gauntlet thingy. Seriously, why doesn't he use some of his superpowers to give himself a makeover??? Sheesh.

Please refrain from making this a discussion about the US versus country X or region Y.

I didn't. You did. With the third post in the thread. As soon as the "balance of power" issue came up, the question of The Superpower Against Everybody Else was bound to crop up.

[DestinyPlayer]

You presume (incorrectly) that the U.S. is in an economic near-collapse. This is called a "loaded question". A favorite of politicians.

As a finished high-school student, I can say that collapses are a natural part of the modern economics system. It is a cycle of rising and falling.

And to stay on topic - I forsee the KSP community trying to get the Warp Drive blueprints with all their might, and if we get them, we're going to methodically, scientifically, but still passionately go where no probe went before.

[ZetaX]

That's just the thing--Gregrox didn't specify exactly how it works. We need to stick to what he actually said: that test projectiles translated with a warp drive still travel at finite speed and still crash into things. He didn't say anything about the test projectiles disintegrating the local scenery with theoretical warp fields. If a projectile can crash into something, other things can crash into it. Such as bullets. Or a laser weapon mounted on a Boeing 747.

You are missing my point. Shoot a 0.99999999c bullet at anything. That anything will die unless it gets out of the way (and countries generally can't do the latter). It won't help if someone shoots lasers or entire Boeings at it, their kinetic energy is absurdely small compared to that thing. At the aforementioned speed I am not even sure what would happen to the planet itself. Even if you somehow get another bullet to that speed (the incoming one had lots of time to reach speed, while you have mere seconds), then the resulting blast from the Large Bullet Collider might still obliterate you.

And now add the fact you are required to actually hit that bullet (with much higher speed than a normal one) with another bullet. Or a rocket with a rocket, isn't that much easier actually (one of the reasons why the US nuclear shield is not as good and much more complicated than the military wants).

The same way as with every other weapon on the planet. You wait for it to attack and then shoot it down.

Superluminal weapons have the (dis)advantage of not being visible before impact (or before whenever they become slower than c). But to actually discuss this one would need a much much much more detailed description of "warp drive".

[DestinyPlayer]

Superluminal weapons have the (dis)advantage of not being visible before impact (or before whenever they become slower than c). But to actually discuss this one would need a much much much more detailed description of "warp drive".

A slightly primitive comparison: You can't shoot down a bullet with a grenade.

[SargeRho]

I beg to differ. Some Active Protection Systems use small grenades to deflect or destroy incoming fire, and they can in theory also shoot down bullets.

[ZetaX]

The only problem is that using counter-bullets or grenades to stop hypervelocity bullets close to you (read: lightmilliseconds to lightseconds, depending on the speed) will simply lead to SAD (self-assured destruction).

[GeneralVeers]

As a finished high-school student, I can say that collapses are a natural part of the modern economics system. It is a cycle of rising and falling.

Which is irrelevant to the question Camacha asked, of whether the U.S. is in one.

You are missing my point. Shoot a 0.99999999c bullet at anything.

Atmospheric friction vaporizes the bullet. End of problem.

Superluminal weapons have the (dis)advantage of not being visible before impact (or before whenever they become slower than c). But to actually discuss this one would need a much much much more detailed description of "warp drive".

Gregrox (the guy who started this thread) recently updated the original post, and handwaved your argument. He says the warp drive only operates at a few hundred miles per hour within the gravity well of a planet. It only works in space, and if it's "fired" into atmosphere from space, it slows down. So a "warp missile" is now no more effective than a conventional missile.

I beg to differ. Some Active Protection Systems use small grenades to deflect or destroy incoming fire, and they can in theory also shoot down bullets.

The Israeli military's ASPRO-A defense system. Has been used successfully in combat situations, defending Merkava battle tanks against missiles, rockets, and RPG's.

[PB666]

Does the Warp Drive also require constant power when operating, as inertia doesn't exist in hyperspace? And would we have to be wary of the *happy campers*?

What is hyperspace, is that space that needs riddlen? Seriously don't believe any of this sci-fi lingo, otherwise we can start begging Squad to give us ZPMs at the Start.

- - - Updated - - -

There's a long list of things the U.S. has that nobody else has. Stuff that will give us a head start come interstellar space race time.

While not discounting the US, the soviets and germans have their own list, let us not forget the V2, rocket and sputnik. The soviets also perfected automated dockings (their manual docking left much to be desired).

Under the rules specified in the original post, a warp drive ship would not be killable "after a while" as you put it. It would be killable right now. Remember, the OP specified that objects accelerated in warp drive tests still traveled at finite speeds. They don't "blink" to the destination, they simply travel to it really fast and without accelerating via application of force ("translation, not acceleration" as he said it).

But if you had a craft that to say pluto in one day with only constant energy to run say the warp engine and life support you would not want to take the craft back and forth to earth. You would return it to a 35,000 mile orbit, pick up a lander on a suborbital trajectory, take it to pluto let it land, and return to the same position above earth and wait for the next task. If it travels at finite velocity meaning v < c then if it going to a habitable place with passengers, its going to take a couple of decades, here again, why would you return it into the atmosphere.

The problem arises when you get to planet X with humans or you have samples you need to return, which is something I see as silly. What you really want are suicidal scientist or machines that can think and work like geologist and biochemists. You don't want to return the samples, because you assume that anything they can analyze you could replicate on earth. (Pretty much, since I have made proteins in a reaction vessel starting with fmoc-amino acids, and the like you could make and test aspects of biology). This is what we do today. If you find strange species x has a factor that interesting, you clone its gene into an expression vector and express the gene in a host (say e-coli) and then assay the activity of the expressed gene. So if you know the hereditary material, you know the codon table for conversion to expressed products, then you can send the information in cute little digital packages to the warp ship and send it back with the info.

The bigger problem is that to terraform that warp ship is going to need a major biological capacity. Im not talking about spiralina and brineshrimp eggs, this is about ecosystems of bacteria, some are very sensitive to environmental fluxes and have been hard to characterize in the lab. If you can get these things to planet X and get planet X habitable, then you don't need a return ticket. This is something I see needing an 'earth ship', because the terraformers will need to camp over the planet for years before they can land.

With regard to MAD: Think 1914 to 1918, 1937 to 1945. The cold war in all its failing, was fortunately a failure at the comparative destruction that preceded. And I would argue that the Soviets were an ememy you secretly wanted, certainly Gorbachev can be compared favorably with the half dozen or so leaders of ex-soviet countries. The east-west divide . . . . . . . now look at it Libya/Egypt, Lebanon/Syria/Iraq, Afganistan/Pakistan . . . .yeah things all turned out well after the fall of the Soviets. We don't create another big powerful weapon, its here, think Coal, Pan evaporation rates, Social media addiction, Junk food, Water hoarding, Unsustainable fertility rates in impoverished countries.

Edited August 4, 2015 by PB666

[ZetaX]

Atmospheric friction vaporizes the bullet. End of problem.

No. Atmospheric friction is about as ridiculous as shooting a counter-bullet. It won't stop it. It effectively won't even slow it down. It might turn into plasma, but that plasma still moves towards its target at tremendous speed.

[Camacha]

How are you going to hit a Seawolf submarine (which isn't technically a boomer but which can fire nuclear weapons!) when you can't even find it? You cannot. How are you going to hit a nuclear missile silo in North Dakota that is also well beyond the range of any conventional missile? You cannot. How are you going to hit a stealth helicopter that's flying into Pakistan to capture Osama bin Laden? You cannot. Well, that last one is more of a "you did not"......

We were talking about how warp would upset the balance of power. Any missile screen is useless against 1c+ type weaponry, and weaponized deep space warp ships are basically nuclear submarines taken to an extreme. You beautifully illustrated why any warp capable nation will have the military edge over a nation that does not, or would at the very least upset the balance of power.

You're making the same mistake lots of other people did in this thread. Gregrox's warp drive doesn't work that way. It doesn't teleport things. It translates them, without acceleration, through normal space at a finite velocity. He made that clear in his original post, before he updated it. And he updated it with the rule that the warp drive can only produce a few hundred miles per hour within the gravity well of a planet. So, basically, Gregrox recently handwaved your argument out of existence.

I am not sure where you get this teleporting idea from, but it seems you misunderstood the arguments. For all intents and purposes, a finite but well beyond 1c speed is appearing at any given location at will. Even if you take the new 'rule' of lower speed deeper in gravity wells into account, you still have weapons that can be shot from deep space at speeds that will not only disallow any conventional laser or other technology to intercept it, but also will arrive at a speed so high you do not even need a warhead to yield massive destruction. A simple kinetic object is enough, which coincidently greatly reduces the opportunity to take a structure out with screens and lasers.

You presume (incorrectly) that the U.S. is in an economic near-collapse. This is called a "loaded question". A favorite of politicians.

Okay, let me put it another way. The US is owned, litterally owned by others. The debt is so infeasibly high that every last man, woman, elder and child owes 60,000 dollar to creditors and foreign nations. Chinese have been banned from buying more companies and other property in some sectors to stop them from owning too much of the pie. Worse still, this debt is increasing by the second, and accelerating to boot.

For all the power the US has, that power is largely owned by others. Any nation in the same situation is in trouble (I am looking at you, Japan).

Edited August 4, 2015 by diomedea
something better hidden

[PB666]

Okay, let me put it another way. The US is owned, litterally owned by others. The debt is so infeasibly high that every last man, woman, elder and child owes 60,000 dollar to creditors and foreign nations. Chinese have been banned from buying more companies and other property in some sectors to stop them from owning too much of the pie. Worse still, this debt is increasing by the second, and accelerating to boot.[\QUOTE]

So a weakening US is required to make a Warp-bomb work? If the drive is not immune to forces of drag, you try to warp through the upper layers of the atmosphere at 0.1c and you go kaboom.

The US economy right now is pulling the rest of the world along. If we took some of our money, and bought out Greece, propped up the economy and infiltrated the government with pro-US lakeys you could push the Eurozone back on its feet or alternatively you could sway Greece in the direction of the non-Eurozone and watch the Eurozone fall. Debt is not the great woe that everyone makes it out to be, if we did not allow the Chinese to buy US treasuries (at hideously low returns on investment) their economy would collapse and they would be back in the Mao/Deng transition. The Europeans are being penny-wise and pound-foolish about the debt crisis, marginal returns on investment are critical at the margins, if you put your foot on a buyers neck, their purchasing power loss may be critical for your profit margin and the pain may be felt 3 or 4 times more on your own neck. So that if you force Greece to their knees, then your really need to immediately start cutting your own work-force and shuttering factories in order to lower your own breakeven point and increase your profit margin.

The whole futility of this argument now is apparent.

1. The science is just bad. Rotten from the start.

2. You want to weaponize it but the conditions on its use are highly subjective (illustrative of the bad science)

3. And you need to throw in the great weakening of a world superpower to turn it into a Mad-max movie.

I am going to fix your warp weapon for you.

Find an asteroid, not a big one, a 100meter asteroid will do, warp to the snow-ball asteroid on an earth crossing orbit but on the other side of the sun, and surround the asteroid with a warp-feild. Then warp at a position a million km above a major capital or financial center about 8 hours before that cities angle to prograde = 0 (adjusting normal velocity to correct for the cities latitude), when it de-warps it will be traveling at 2*planets orbital velocity and will have an almost strait line trajectory. Its strait down trajectory will be so that once the interior overheats it will almost be on the ground causing an explosion several thousand fold greater than an H-bomb. You would do alot of expansion damage but little ejecta and atmospheric issue.

There, you have your warp weapon, happy. There is not relevant science other than if I have magical faery power I can whizz something from one inertial reference frame to the exact opposite without spending the 100,000,000 joules/kg.

"I can run wild for six months … after that, I have no expectation of success" (English paraphrase) if you know who and when this was said, then you know why MAD is better often than using a weapon of great destruction. Inevitably the WMD was used against this persons people, arrogance has its own special reward.

[Camacha]

So a weakening US is required to make a Warp-bomb work?

I never claimed such a thing. I am sorry you misunderstood my arguments, let's keep politics out of the discussion from now on.

[PB666]

I never claimed such a thing. I am sorry you misunderstood my arguments, let's keep politics out of the discussion from now on.

MAD and a sneak attack are two different things. MAD is to preserve the peace and prevent sneak attacks there is a social consequence to living with MAD. When you talk about a sneak attack you follow this most prophetic analysis:

A military man can scarcely pride himself on having "smitten a sleeping enemy"; it is more a matter of shame, simply, for the one smitten. I would rather you made your appraisal after seeing what the enemy does, since it is certain that, angered and outraged, he will soon launch a determined counterattack -Isoroku Yamamoto Asahi Shimbun (9 January 1942)

So right, can we devolve this sub-forum back to actual science and not speculation.

[Camacha]

MAD and a sneak attack are two different things. MAD is to preserve the peace and prevent sneak attacks there is a social consequence to living with MAD. When you talk about a sneak attack you follow this most prophetic analysis:

Again, I never spoke of a sneak attack. I spoke of the shifting balance of power, which very much has to do with weapons that can hit you without the capability of hitting back.

So right, can we devolve this sub-forum back to actual science and not speculation.

Impossible. We are talking about warp drives, which do not exist. Everything is speculation.

[Whirligig Girl]

Edit: Uhh, Gregrox? Something I gotta ask about the warp drive you theorized in your original post. Does it create a field of some kind that envelops the ship? (The OP kind of suggested "no", but wasn't clear on this) Or does the drive simply "translate" the ship attached to the drive?

The reason I ask is: if it's the second one, then a very real limit has suddenly been slapped on this new warp drive--because any movement or turn faster than around 9 G's would kill the crew.......

The spacecraft and crew does not "feel" any acceleration (perhaps unless the field is unstable and starts shaking apart the ship).

[GeneralVeers]

The spacecraft and crew does not "feel" any acceleration (perhaps unless the field is unstable and starts shaking apart the ship).

Thank you. Got another question: since, as you described, the Gregrox drive doesn't accelerate the object (as you put it, "translation instead of acceleration"), what happens when the drive loses power? I'm guessing the "translation" process would cease, therefore the ship would stop instantly. Fortunately without giving the crew a MASSIVE whiplash!

Other other question: does the warp field affect anything except the ship? Can it grab pieces of the scenery and pull them along with the ship? Drill holes through objects it impacts? Or does the field only affect the ship itself? (I'm guessing the last one, because your original post did describe test vehicles crashing into things, apparently without the warp field disintegrating pieces of whatever was crashed-into)

No. Atmospheric friction is about as ridiculous as shooting a counter-bullet. It won't stop it. It effectively won't even slow it down. It might turn into plasma, but that plasma still moves towards its target at tremendous speed.

Disagree entirely. The Earth is constantly getting bombed, every day, by large numbers of asteroids--most of them the size of grains of sand. The large asteroids are the only ones that stand a chance of hitting the ground; all the others are incinerated, and the smaller they are, the faster they burn up. The resulting plasma/molten rock is then quickly dispersed, also by atmospheric friction. A near-light missile accelerated with a Gregrox drive would be subject to thousands of times more heat and would disintegrate proportionately faster.

We were talking about how warp would upset the balance of power. Any missile screen is useless against 1c+ type weaponry

Apparently you missed the part where I pointed out to you that Gregrox recently modified his original post and murdered this argument. Gregrox added the rule that the warp drive doesn't work at more than a few hundred miles per hour within the gravity well of a planet. Superluminal weapons made with this warp drive do not work on or near Earth. If you fire a missile from outside the gravity well and then turn off the warp drive? The weapon disintegrates as soon as it hits atmosphere, due to atmospheric friction. Which I (and at least one other person) already covered in a previous post. Assuming the missile doesn't stop instantly when the drive is turned off.....(see above)

This is all aside from the point, which you are still refusing to acknowledge, that the world already has "unstoppable" weapons. Nuclear warheads fired from today's intercontinental missiles are already functionally identical to your theoretical superluminal weapons. It's impossible for anybody on Earth to destroy a nuclear launch site before the missile gets out of the silo; and for every other nation except the United States and possibly Russia, it's impossible to stop the warhead before it hits its target. Then there's all the other weapons I already mentioned, which are not COMPLETELY unstoppable, but come close. It's almost impossible to spot and destroy a submarine before it fires on its target. It's almost impossible to spot and destroy stealth helicopters sneaking across your border to kidnap a terrorist. Your unstoppable weapons already exist; the United States is not the only nation that has them; yet the balance of power has not shifted. New weapons are not going to change the balance of power, because the nation at the top in said balance will likely be the first to get them, and will definitely be able to build more of them.

Okay, let me put it another way. The US is owned

......mostly by Americans and America-based companies. And also what PB666 said.

MAD and a sneak attack are two different things. MAD is to preserve the peace and prevent sneak attacks there is a social consequence to living with MAD.

Remember when the U.S. sent stealth helicopters into Pakistan to nab Osama bin Laden? The U.S. did that without the permission (or even the knowledge) of the Pakistani government. Pakistan has nuclear weapons. Those weapons are not protecting it from getting its sovereignty violated. I therefore theorize that MAD is most assuredly dead..........

Edited August 4, 2015 by WedgeAntilles

[ZetaX]

Disagree entirely. The Earth is constantly getting bombed, every day, by large numbers of asteroids--most of them the size of grains of sand. The large asteroids are the only ones that stand a chance of hitting the ground; all the others are incinerated, and the smaller they are, the faster they burn up. The resulting plasma/molten rock is then quickly dispersed, also by atmospheric friction. A near-light missile accelerated with a Gregrox drive would be subject to thousands of times more heat and would disintegrate proportionately faster.

Show me any asteroid that came in at 0.99999999c, then I might consider this an argument. Until then: check how much energy that bullet actually has. Hint: it is best measured in Mega- or Gigatons of TNT. I can also add 30 more 9s if you want, wouldn't be any problem with that warp drive. But then I would probably vaporize the planet...

On a less pragmatic matter: there is no way for it to disperse because there is no time for it. It comes in, hits everything in a very narrow cone towards the ground and releases its energy into there. All that in less than a millisecond. It probably also causes fusion, Cherenkov radiation, and whatever else, but those are miniscule.

[Nibb31]

This thread would be so much better without the constant jingoistic chest thumping.

[Camacha]

This thread would be so much better without the constant jingoistic chest thumping.

The chest thumping is not even that bad, but as soon as you are bending your reasoning around your views rather than the reverse, things go awry. It currently is a repeat stating of views, rather than a discussion that is winding itself to a logical conclusion. All while it actually has to potential of being a fun and educational thought experiment.

Apparently you missed the part where I pointed out to you that Gregrox recently modified his original post and murdered this argument. Gregrox added the rule that the warp drive doesn't work at more than a few hundred miles per hour within the gravity well of a planet. Superluminal weapons made with this warp drive do not work on or near Earth. If you fire a missile from outside the gravity well and then turn off the warp drive? The weapon disintegrates as soon as it hits atmosphere, due to atmospheric friction. Which I (and at least one other person) already covered in a previous post. Assuming the missile doesn't stop instantly when the drive is turned off.....(see above)

I did not miss it, I asked for calculations, which you so far have not provided. Like I said last time, until you prove what you preach, we can disregard the point.

This is all aside from the point, which you are still refusing to acknowledge, that the world already has "unstoppable" weapons. Nuclear warheads fired from today's intercontinental missiles are already functionally identical to your theoretical superluminal weapons. It's impossible for anybody on Earth to destroy a nuclear launch site before the missile gets out of the silo; and for every other nation except the United States and possibly Russia, it's impossible to stop the warhead before it hits its target. Then there's all the other weapons I already mentioned, which are not COMPLETELY unstoppable, but come close. It's almost impossible to spot and destroy a submarine before it fires on its target. It's almost impossible to spot and destroy stealth helicopters sneaking across your border to kidnap a terrorist. Your unstoppable weapons already exist; the United States is not the only nation that has them; yet the balance of power has not shifted. New weapons are not going to change the balance of power, because the nation at the top in said balance will likely be the first to get them, and will definitely be able to build more of them.

There is a lot of almosts in your post. Almost impossible, almost impossible. This is, for any nation without warp, absolutely impossible. Power balance shifted, point made.

Remember when the U.S. sent stealth helicopters into Pakistan to nab Osama bin Laden? The U.S. did that without the permission (or even the knowledge) of the Pakistani government. Pakistan has nuclear weapons. Those weapons are not protecting it from getting its sovereignty violated. I therefore theorize that MAD is most assuredly dead..........

Are you seriously arguing that having nuclear weapons would stop incidents small enough not to start world war 3 over? You are hugely misunderstanding the concept of MAD and the attached balance of power, up to the point that it seems senseless to even continue this conversation.

Edited August 4, 2015 by Camacha

[GeneralVeers]

Show me any asteroid that came in at 0.99999999c, then I might consider this an argument.

You made the claim. You prove it. You claim an object at near-light speed would go right through the atmosphere? Prove it. Show me a bullet that came in at 0.99999999c. What you're probably not aware of is this: friction varies as the SQUARE of velocity. Don't take my word for it; Wikipedia it.

Are you seriously arguing that having nuclear weapons would stop incidents small enough not to start world war 3 over?

Of course not. I argued the exact opposite. That having nuclear weapons would NOT stop such incidents. Because that's how it's actually happened in the real world.

I did not miss it, I asked for calculations, which you so far have not provided.

I don't have to provide calculations. Gregrox wrote the original post (well, actually, he UPDATED the original post, and it's pretty easy for people to not see the update). Gregrox is God. What Gregrox says is law. And he says the warp drive he described in the OP can't be used as a weapon within Earth's gravity well. Your entire line of argument for warp weapons (or, rather, EVERYBODY'S line of argument for warp weapons) is dead.

Moving on.

In the beginning of the Warp Age, the benefit of warp drive would be economic rather than military--and it would come down to who can build the most ships. Guess who that is? Same deal. The economic balance wouldn't change. The primary economic benefit would go to the nations/entities already at the top. Edward Norton was right--it really WILL be named the Microsoft Galaxy.

Edited August 4, 2015 by WedgeAntilles