Introducing Physical Warp Drives · HackerPapers discussions

Introducing Physical Warp Drives — HN submission

Tue, 09 Dec 2025 16:08:55 GMT

Introducing Physical Warp Drives (2021)

2 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Introducing Physical Warp Drives — HN submission

Sat, 11 Oct 2025 16:55:26 GMT

Physical Warp Drives (2021)

2 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Introducing Physical Warp Drives — mentioned by JumpCrisscross

Thu, 04 Jul 2024 04:16:07 GMT

> Would a sub light warp drive be much different performance wise from, say, a fusion torch engine with insane iSP Yes. The “warp shell allows one to modify the state of spacetime inside it…the time in the inner region may go faster or slower than it would go without the shell” [1]. It is not a system of propulsion. That said, the paper does hint at forming “a region within a subliminal warp drive which is similar to ergospheres of spinning black holes” for use “as an efficient energy storage” and “wherein black hole-like regions of the spacetime may be used to produce accretion power” for…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Introducing Physical Warp Drives — mentioned by JumpCrisscross

Thu, 04 Jul 2024 04:08:26 GMT

> Are they talking about a reactionless drive? No. The “warp shell allows one to modify the state of spacetime inside it…the time in the inner region may go faster or slower than it would go without the shell” [1]. Being “internally moving shells of normal or exotic matter,” these warp shells “do not have any natural way of changing their velocities. They are just like any other types of inertially moving objects. Similarly, just like for any other massive object, achieving a certain velocity for a warp drive requires an externally applied force or, more practically, some form of propulsion.”…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Introducing Physical Warp Drives — mentioned by anigbrowl

Thu, 04 Jul 2024 01:04:28 GMT

https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.06824 for an unpaywalled version of the paper. I (kind of) understand their argument, but am unclear on how the physical shell is supposed to be filled with energy, eg is one supposed to just get inside and hook it up to the terminals of a battery or other power generator? Also slightly unsure about their insistence on propellant as a means of locomotion, as opposed to hanging out a sail and riding solar winds toward the nearest gravitational slingshot.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Introducing Physical Warp Drives — mentioned by raattgift

Sun, 06 Nov 2022 04:29:11 GMT

> the math works, and it looks like it should be possible The math can only work (if it even does) in exceptionally constrained circumstances. The main purely-theoretical issue is that the paper's <https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.06824v2> solution is wholly spherically symmetric, and with vacuum everywhere but in the warping region. "Fig. 1: Asymptotically-flat vacuum background ... general stationary curved region with a spherical topology ... (the warping region) ... flat inner region ... ('passenger' space). ... As we discuss in Section 5, warp drive spacetimes require some form of propulsion…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Introducing Physical Warp Drives — mentioned by Steuard

Sun, 06 Nov 2022 01:20:00 GMT

It's an article about theoretical physics published in the 21st century, so it would be very surprising if it had not been posted on the arXiv before being published in a journal. And sure enough: https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.06824

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Introducing Physical Warp Drives — mentioned by JPLeRouzic

Sat, 05 Nov 2022 17:02:47 GMT

"Conceptually, we demonstrate that any warp drive, including the Alcubierre drive, is a shell of regular or exotic material moving inertially with a certain velocity. Therefore, any warp drive requires propulsion. We show that a class of subluminal, spherically symmetric warp drive spacetimes, at least in principle, can be constructed based on the physical principles known to humanity today" https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.06824

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Introducing Physical Warp Drives — mentioned by suilied

Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:20:47 GMT

It looks like we're getting closer and closer to making this a reality. Recently (this year) some other people published a sort of reworking of the Alcubierre drive[1], I wonder how much (if at all) better this paper will fit with that. For those who'd like a more accessible way to what it's about see: [2] [1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2102.06824.pdf [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VWLjhJBCp0

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Introducing Physical Warp Drives — mentioned by jbdistaken

Fri, 28 May 2021 14:49:48 GMT

https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.06824 looks like CQG spell-checker added a subliminal typo in the abstract :)

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Introducing Physical Warp Drives — mentioned by _Microft

Fri, 28 May 2021 14:47:42 GMT

Am I correct that the interesting thing about subluminal warp drives is that they do not require working mass for propulsion? So if we had such a warp drive, we could put energy in and get motion out of it, without being subject to the tyranny of the rocket equation? It seems like this idea is not correct. The authors write in section 5.2: "Warp drives, being inertially moving shells of normal or exotic material, do not have any natural way of changing their velocities. They are just like any other types of inertially moving objects. Similarly, just like for any other massive objects…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Introducing Physical Warp Drives — mentioned by _Microft

Fri, 28 May 2021 14:25:19 GMT

Arxiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.06824

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Introducing Physical Warp Drives — mentioned by forgotpwd16

Wed, 05 May 2021 10:05:01 GMT

E.g. arXiv:gr-qc/9504004, arXiv:1512.01236, arXiv:2102.06824

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Introducing Physical Warp Drives — mentioned by jonathanraiman

Sun, 28 Mar 2021 16:42:20 GMT

Link to one of the referred papers « Introducing Physical Warp Drives» https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.06824

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Introducing Physical Warp Drives — mentioned by tobmlt

Wed, 10 Mar 2021 09:29:22 GMT

I presently have no time to get into GR, but surely wish I did. Here instead of comment I offer two papers: Erik Lentz (underlying the work in the press release here): https://arxiv.org/pdf/2006.07125.pdf And similar seeming work by another group at something called the “advanced propulsion lab” (who are they?) https://arxiv.org/pdf/2102.06824.pdf It’s interesting that they both claim positive energy solutions that, eh hem, do the trick.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Introducing Physical Warp Drives — mentioned by 100ideas

Wed, 10 Mar 2021 02:03:10 GMT

There appears to be a newer and more extensive paper that encompasses and expands on Lentz' work, while also claiming Lentz's paper was mathematically incomplete or un-reproducible in some way: Bobrick A, Martire G. Introducing physical warp drives. Classical and Quantum Gravity. 2021 Jan 25. https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.06824 from the abstract: ...We present the first general model for subluminal positive-energy, spherically symmetric warp drives; construct superluminal warp- drive solutions which satisfy quantum inequalities; provide optimizations for the Alcubierre metric that decrease the…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Introducing Physical Warp Drives — mentioned by Iolaum

Fri, 05 Mar 2021 15:08:23 GMT

Arxiv link for people interested in the source rather than a journalists take. https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.06824

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.