star trek warp inside solar system

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

• LISTEN & FOLLOW
• Apple Podcasts
• Amazon Music
• Amazon Alexa

Your support helps make our show possible and unlocks access to our sponsor-free feed.

In honor of 'Star Trek: Strange New Worlds' Season 2, a tour of the physics

Regina G. Barber

Berly McCoy

Rebecca Ramirez

Season 2 of the critically acclaimed Star Trek: Strange New Worlds premiered June 15 ( streaming on Paramount+ ). So today, Short Wave boldly goes where many, many nerds have gone before and explores the science — specifically the physics — and the science- fiction of Star Trek . Scientist in Residence Regina G. Barber chats with two Trekkie physicists about why they love the franchise. Astrophysicist Erin Macdonald is the science consultant for Star Trek , and Chanda Prescod-Weinstein is a theoretical physicist and author of the book The Disordered Cosmos .

This episode, the trio discusses the feasibility of warp drive, global cooperation and representation and how the transporters that beam crew members from the surface of a planet to the ship might be breaking fundamental laws of physics. They end at the galaxy's edge — and discuss why its portrayal in Star Trek might be problematic, scientifically.

Space is vast – it takes years for real spacecrafts to travel within our solar system! In Star Trek, characters zip around the galaxy in their starship vessels thanks to warp drive, which let spaceships travel faster than the speed of light. But physics puts a speed limit on anything with mass. These objects have to move slightly slower than the speed of light, which itself has a speed limit. So what's the loophole here?

According to Erin, good ol' suspension of disbelief isn't necessary because, "the math checks out." For that reason, it's one of Erin's favorite pieces of sci-fi in the series. Spacetime is the three dimensions we humans are used to living in, plus time. The universe is situated in the four dimensional fabric of spacetime, with heavier objects "pulling" that fabric down more than lighter — or, weightless, in the case of light — objects. So, spacetime itself could be a loophole to this speed limit. Erin says that to bypass the cosmological speed limit of light, you could simply, "build a bubble of space time around your ship, and then that pushes you faster than the speed of light. " This is the various warp speeds . One bubble for warp 1, another bubble around that first bubble for warp 2 and so on.

Of course, Erin and Chanda both point out that using spacetime in this way requires an extraordinary amount of energy — well beyond what humans are capable of at this moment in time.

'Star Trek: Strange New Worlds' season 2 is a classic sci-fi adventure

Transporters.

It would be great to teleport to work, as Star Trek characters do thanks to their transporters. Upside? No traffic. Downside? The fear that once you've been broken down into particles and beamed across the city, you might not be rearranged in the right order.

In order for a transporter to work, users would have to know both where a given particle is and its velocity. Unfortunately, this is not possible due to a well known physics conundrum, the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle . Star Trek plugs this plot hole with something they call a Heisenberg Compensator that is connected to their transporter mechanics. How it works is never explained. All we need to know is that, in the Star Trek universe ... it does!

So, transporters require a little more suspension of disbelief than warp drive — or good-humored humility if you're Chanda. "I don't think transporters will ever be a thing that we can do. But I always say that it's important for me as a scientist to be humble, and so it may be that there is some science beyond the uncertainty principle that we are just not aware of at this point," she quips.

Galactic Barrier

Warp drive can get ships to light speed and faster in the Star Trek world but space is still HUGE. The Milky Way galaxy is 100,000 light years across so, even at Warp 9, it would take the Star Trek crew years to travel the galaxy. It's pretty rare that any starship gets near the edge of our galaxy, but in the 1960s, Star Trek writers had the crew arrive at the " galactic barrier ." According to the show, this barrier doesn't let communication signals through, is dangerous and gives characters " strange energies ."

Chanda says that the impenetrability of signals is what winds her up most about this fake barrier. "But we see other galaxies all the time, and those are signals," she says. "We see radio observations. We see across the electromagnetic spectrum."

These three sci-fi concepts barely scratch the surface of what "science" — and science — Star Trek uses throughout the series . There's so much physics we didn't cover — and so there will be much more science to dissect in the future.

Listen to Short Wave on Spotify , Apple Podcasts and Google Podcasts .

Questions about the "scientific" underpinnings of other pop culture? Email us at [email protected] . We'd love to hear from you!

This episode was produced by Berly McCoy, edited by Rebecca Ramirez and fact checked by Katie Daugert. Josh Newell engineered the audio. Johannes Doerge is our main legal duderino.

• Star Trek: Strange New Worlds

The U.S.S. Enterprise , depicted here in the 2013 movie Star Trek: Into Darkness , relies on its warp drive to zip across the galaxy.

Inside the Quest for a Real ‘Star Trek’ Warp Drive

It may be a while before starship captains can race across the galaxy, but engineers and physicists have a few ideas for making it so.

Within the Star Trek universe, traveling across the galaxy is a breeze thanks to the famed warp drive . This fictional technology allows humans and other civilizations to zoom between star systems in days rather than centuries.

Such rapid travel times are impossible in the real world, because our best theory for the way the universe works, Einstein’s special relativity , says that nothing moves faster than the speed of light.

While current rocket propulsion systems are bound by this law, plenty of hopeful engineers and physicists are working on concepts that might bring us a step closer to Star Trek ’s vision of racing across the cosmos.

“Currently, even the most advanced ideas behind interstellar travel entail trip times of decades and centuries to even the closest stars, due to the restrictions of special relativity, and our abilities—or lack of—to travel at an appreciable fraction of the speed of light,” says Richard Obousy , director and founder of Icarus Interstellar, a nonprofit dedicated to making progress toward interstellar flight.

“Being able to build starships with the capability to travel faster than the speed of light would open the galaxy for exploration and possible colonization by humans.”

Nuclear Engines

Distances in space are so vast that astronomers usually measure them in light-years, the distance light can travel in a year’s time. A single light-year equals about six trillion miles.

Nat Geo Kids Back-To-School Exclusive Offer

Get up to 4 bonus issues!

The closest star to our solar system, Proxima Centauri, is 4.23 light-years away, so even traveling at the speed of light, a one-way voyage there would take 4.23 years. That may seem pokey, but it would be a huge improvement over current technology.

Right now, the fastest spacecraft headed away from Earth is Voyager 1, which is puttering along at about 38,600 miles an hour. At that rate, it would take more than 70,000 years to reach Proxima Centauri.

Still, various teams have proposed ways to at least reach a fraction of light speed and hasten our exploration of interstellar space.

Back in 1958, researchers at San Diego-based defense contractor General Atomics came up with Project Orion , which involved a spacecraft driven essentially by nuclear bombs. A controlled series of nuclear explosions would propel the ship at high speeds, rapidly carrying a hundred tons of cargo and eight astronauts to places like Mars and even the outer solar system.

Faster propulsion technology would allow us to visit our galactic neighbors, like this satellite of the Milky Way known as the Large Magellanic Cloud.

Blueprints were also created showing how to adapt the technology for interstellar travel. However, all experimentation with this so-called nuclear-pulse propulsion came to a halt with the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty of 1963.

Announced earlier this year, the ambitious Breakthrough StarShot initiative represents a less explosive effort to undertake an interstellar mission. Run by a conglomerate of billionaires and big thinkers, including famed physicist Stephen Hawking, the project’s goal is to send a flotilla of postage stamp-size spacecraft to Alpha Centauri, a triple star system that’s 4.3 light-years away. (See “Is the New $100 Million ‘Starshot’ for Real?” )

You May Also Like

How do shells get their shapes? These are the forces behind their twists and coils

U.S. returns to the moon as NASA's Odysseus successfully touches down

See Sally Ride’s boundary-breaking life in photos

The tiny spacecraft would be attached to a thin light sail, a piece of technology that would allow mission managers to propel the probes with lasers shining from Earth’s orbit. The lasers would accelerate the craft to 20 percent the speed of light, and the probes would arrive at their destination in roughly 20 years.

While many of the tiny travelers may never make it to Alpha Centauri, a few of them should survive and may even fly past any planets orbiting the far-off stars , beaming back data about these alien worlds.

“I’m incredibly excited to see private money being used to explore breakthrough ideas that may advance the field of interstellar flight,” Obousy says.

“I hope to see more like this in the future. While there are engineering challenges associated with the Starshot Initiative, none appear insurmountable.”

Warping Reality

Of course, the real breakthrough would be a true warp drive, which requires technology to catch up with our theoretical designs.

In 1994, Trek fans got a glimmer of hope from Mexican theoretical physicist Miguel Alcubierre, who came up with a radical theory of hyper-fast space propulsion that doesn't break Einstein’s special relativity.

Instead of accelerating the spacecraft itself to light speed, why not bend, or warp, the fabric of space and time around the ship itself? Alcubierre presented calculations that produce a bubble in space-time in which one end is expanding and the other is contracting. A spaceship could, in theory, be carried along with the warp bubble and accelerated to velocities up to 10 times the speed of light.

While that sounds simple on paper, to make it work, we may need to harness exotic forms of matter, like antimatter, that for now are poorly understood. In addition, numerous unsolved issues plague the creation and control of a warp bubble, Obousy says.

“One such problem, for example, is the idea of causal disconnection, which implies that any spacecraft sitting within the bubble would not be able to ‘communicate’ with the exterior of the bubble, suggesting that a ship would not be able to ‘turn off’ the bubble once inside of it,” he notes.

As is often the case in space travel, developing true interstellar travel like what we see in Star Trek will require significant changes in the cost and energy requirements.

“Currently, the amount of energy and money required to entertain the notion of manned interstellar travel is measured in large fractions of global output—specifically, tens of trillions of dollars, and energy measured on the scale of what many large countries use annually,” he says.

Still, he adds, “the finest minds of the 15th century could not have predicted the technological wonders of the 21st century. Similarly, who are we to say what technology the humans of the 27th century will have mastered.”

Andrew Fazekas, the Night Sky Guy, is the author of Star Trek: The Official Guide to Our Universe and host of NG Live! " Mankind to Mars " presentations. Follow him on Twitter , Facebook , and his website .

Related Topics

• TELEVISION AND VIDEO

What is a sonic boom—and is it dangerous?

NASA has a plan to clean up space junk—but is going green enough?

Why go back to the moon? NASA’s Artemis program has even bigger ambitions

Why this company sent ancient human fossils into space

NASA smashed an asteroid with a rocket. The debris could hit Mars.

• Interactive Graphic
• Environment
• Paid Content

History & Culture

• History & Culture
• History Magazine
• The Big Idea
• Mind, Body, Wonder
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Your US State Privacy Rights
• Children's Online Privacy Policy
• Interest-Based Ads
• About Nielsen Measurement
• Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
• Nat Geo Home
• Attend a Live Event
• Book a Trip
• Inspire Your Kids
• Shop Nat Geo
• Visit the D.C. Museum
• Learn About Our Impact
• Support Our Mission
• Advertise With Us
• Customer Service
• Renew Subscription
• Manage Your Subscription
• Work at Nat Geo
• Sign Up for Our Newsletters
• Contribute to Protect the Planet

Copyright © 1996-2015 National Geographic Society Copyright © 2015-2024 National Geographic Partners, LLC. All rights reserved

Is Star Trek’s Warp Drive Possible?

The concept of the warp drive is currently at odds with everything we know to be true about physics.

Central to science fiction, and Star Trek in particular, is the ability to travel the galaxy at speeds far faster than light via a fictional technology called a “ warp drive .” What is that, and will we ever have one ?

No Warp Drive for You

A provisional answer is “no.” According to the accepted laws of science, nothing can travel faster than light . Even though light is fast enough to circle the Earth over seven times in a single second, space is very large. It takes eight minutes for light to travel from the Sun to the Earth, and it would take four years for light from our Sun to reach the nearest star ( Proxima Centauri ). Most stars—and hence, most planets—are much more distant, so travel time would be correspondingly longer. The distances are so vast that interstellar travel would take lifetimes.

That makes for a boring sci-fi plot, so the creators of Star Trek invented a convenient, but imaginary, technology. According to Star Trek canon, the warp drive works by creating a “warp bubble” around the spaceship, inside of which space is literally warped. In front of the spaceship, space is compressed, while behind the vessel, it is expanded. In this way, a spaceship never travels faster than light; it merely passes through a shorter distance. For example, if a warp drive could shrink the distance to Proxima Centauri by 1/1,461 times the normal length, it could travel there in a single day.

A Massive Problem

Is this realistic? Maybe. To begin with, our best modern understanding of space comes from Einstein’s theory of general relativity . In this theory, gravity is understood not as a force as we typically imagine it, but rather as a bending of space. So, if space can be bent or distorted in some way, then a warp drive could be within the realm of accepted science.

However, this is where things get tricky. Within the theory of relativity, the quantity that bends space is mass (or, equivalently, energy). In familiar and simple terms, the enormous mass of the Earth bends space in its vicinity. This distortion results in the phenomenon we know of as gravity.

While the bending of space by matter is a fact, it doesn’t help our warp drive very much. The bending of space near the surface of the Earth is relatively modest. After all, the distortion doesn’t appreciably shorten the distance between the Earth and the Sun, let alone the nearest star. Thus, for a warp drive to be a useful propulsion technology, a spaceship might have to carry with it a mass much larger than a planet — or even larger than a star. This extra mass would make the craft too difficult to move, meaning that the idea just isn’t tenable.

Negativity about Negative Energy

Does this completely invalidate the idea of a warp drive? Not quite. The equations governing special relativity are rich and complex and there are many solutions. In 1994, theoretical physicist Miguel Alcubierre found a solution that distorted space in a way very similar to that originally envisioned by the creators of Star Trek . Under exactly the right conditions, it is possible to expand space behind an object and compress it in front.

There is a problem, though. To accomplish this distortion, researchers would have to use negative energy—that is, reduce the energy of empty space to below zero. According to Einstein, a warp drive requires an impossible premise. As an analogy, it’s possible that some mathematical calculation involving a person’s height might have a solution that is negative. But what would it mean for a person to have a negative height? It doesn’t make physical sense.

Therefore, while scientists try to find loopholes in the conditions required for Alcubierre’s solution, most think that a warp drive will not be created this way; negative energy is a mathematical artifact and not a physical phenomenon.

Is a Warp Drive Possible or Not?

Altogether, our current understanding of the laws of nature neither allows for faster-than-light travel nor an Alcubierre-like solution to warping space. However, those who dream of traveling the stars should not give up. Scientists do not have a full understanding of the laws of nature. Indeed, my colleagues and I spend our days looking for new phenomena—things that have never been seen before.

Weekly Newsletter

Get your fix of JSTOR Daily’s best stories in your inbox each Thursday.

Privacy Policy   Contact Us You may unsubscribe at any time by clicking on the provided link on any marketing message.

In speculative science, it is always foolhardy to say that something is impossible. In 1850, if you asked the best scientists of the day if it would be possible to speak in Europe and have someone in America hear you, or if it would be possible to look inside a person’s body, they would have told you “no.” Yet a scant half century later, the invention of radio and discovery of X-rays would have proved them wrong.

That is what it will take for a warp drive to be a reality. Some bright soul is going to have a new idea, something quite different from our current understanding of physics. Then, maybe—just maybe—we will be able to boldly go where no one has gone before.

Support JSTOR Daily! Join our new membership program on Patreon today.

JSTOR is a digital library for scholars, researchers, and students. JSTOR Daily readers can access the original research behind our articles for free on JSTOR.

Get Our Newsletter

More stories.

• Eisenhower and the Real-Life Nautilus

The Scientists, the Engineers, and the Water Wheel

Biofuels: Feeding the Earth or Feeding the Engine?

The Case of the Volcano on the Moon

Recent posts.

• Becoming the British Virgin Islands
• Demystifying Sovereign Wealth Funds
• Painting Race
• The Governess, in Her Own Written Words

Support JSTOR Daily

Sign up for our weekly newsletter.

July 13, 2021

11 min read

Star Trek ’s Warp Drive Leads to New Physics

Researchers are taking a closer look at this science-fiction staple—and bringing the idea a little closer to reality

By Robert Gast & Spektrum

Warp one, engage!

Getty Images

For Erik Lentz, it all started with Star Trek . Every few episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation, Captain Jean-Luc Picard would raise his hand and order, “Warp one, engage!” Then stars became dashes, and light-years flashed by at impossible speed. And Lentz, still in elementary school, wondered whether warp drive might also work in real life.

“At some point, I realized that the technology didn’t exist,” Lentz says. He studied physics at the University of Washington, wrote his Ph.D. dissertation on dark matter and generally became far too busy to be concerned with science fiction. But then, at the start of the coronavirus pandemic, Lentz found himself alone in Göttingen, Germany, where he was doing postdoctoral work. He suddenly had plenty of free time on his hands—and childhood fancies in his head.

Lentz read everything he could find on warp drives in the scientific literature, which was not very much. Then he began to think about it for himself. After a few weeks, something occurred to him that everyone else seemed to have overlooked. Lentz put his idea on paper and discussed it with more experienced colleagues. A year later it was published in a physics journal .

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

It quickly became clear that Lentz was not the only person dreaming about warp drives. Media outlets all over the world picked up the story , and a dozen journalists asked for interviews. A discussion on the online forum Reddit attracted 2,700 comments and 33,000 likes. One Internet user wrote, “Anyone else feel like they were born 300 years too soon?”

A Bubble in Space and Time

There is no doubt that the universe is still far too vast for humans to traverse. It takes more than four years for a beam of light to reach Earth’s nearest star Proxima Centauri. Even with the best available propulsion systems, it would take tens of thousands of years for a human to get there. One can always dream about establishing colonies in other star systems, but it is not a journey anyone is likely to undertake.

But perhaps one day it might be possible to reduce the travel time. There are many ideas about how to do that, from laser-accelerated solar sails to nuclear propulsion. But even with the aid of these technologies, you would not get too far in a human lifetime. The galaxy really is open only to those who travel as fast as light—or faster.

NASA artist’s 1998 rendition of warp drive travel. The ring around the spacecraft generates a negative-energy field. From today’s perspective, the negative-energy field would no longer be necessary. Credit:  NASA; Digital art by Les Bossinas (Cortez III Service Corp)

For that very reason, imaginative physicists have long been pondering the ultimate propulsion system: a bubble in space and time in which a spaceship could dash from sun to sun, just like the USS Enterprise did. This is research at the fringe of science: not necessarily wrong but spiced with a large pinch of optimism.

The fact that scientists are dealing with the idea at all today is thanks to a 1994 paper by Mexican theoretical physicist Miguel Alcubierre. At the time, Alcubierre was not just a passionate Star Trek devotee. In his doctoral thesis at the University of Wales College Cardiff (now Cardiff University), Alcubierre also worked on the theory of relativity. Strictly speaking, the theory states that nothing can travel faster than light. But by applying a little creativity, Alcubierre identified an apparent loophole.

For physicists, Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity consists of two parts: The “special” theory of relativity, which dates from 1905, deals with the uniform motion of fast-as-light objects. Ten years later Einstein generalized these ideas for accelerating bodies. According to “general” relativity, the three spatial dimensions we are familiar with (up-down, left-right, front-back) are inseparable from time. Every mass deforms this spacetime.

According to Albert Einstein’s epic discovery, we live in four-dimensional “spacetime.” Spacetime is not static. Like a tablecloth, it is deformed by massive objects. Everything that moves across the tablecloth (or through spacetime) can accelerate only up to the speed limit set by light. The tablecloth itself, on the other hand, can be deformed at any speed, as the universe itself shows in some situations.

At the instant of the big bang, for example, the original spacetime structure presumably expanded for a split second and did so much faster than any ray of light could travel. Even today, the expansion continues to drive extremely distant galaxies away at speeds faster than light, which means their light can no longer reach us.

Based on his discovery, Alcubierre surmised that it would only be a small step to a warp drive. If spacetime were contracted in front of a spaceship and expanded behind it to compensate, it would be possible to travel to one’s destination at a speed faster than light. The ship would remain encapsulated in a bubble, and the crew would not sense the magnitude of the interstellar journey. In a 2017 lecture, Alcubierre compared it to being on a passenger conveyor belt at the airport: “You can imagine that the floor behind you is being created out of nothing and in front of you it is being destroyed, so you move along.”

But formulating this idea in the language of general relativity immediately gives rise to major practical problems. First, to deform spacetime so radically, you would need to cram a huge mass into a bubble bounded by a wall thinner than an atomic nucleus. Then you would need two forms of matter to maintain the bubble. The gravity of ordinary mass would cause the space at the front of the bubble to contract, moving the whole structure forward. But at the same time, the space at the back of the bubble would need to expand like rising bread dough. To make that expansion happen, according to Alcubierre, you would need some form of negative energy radiating a kind of antigravity.

The Curse of Negative Energy

For most physicists, that was the end of the thought experiment. Energy—which according to Einstein’s formula E = mc2 is equivalent to unconstrained mass—seems like it must, by definition, be positive. But according to quantum theory, it can indeed have a negative value. This seems to occur only in rare special cases, however—on a tiny scale. In the so-called Casimir effect , for example, the quantities involved are so minuscule that any technological application seems absurd.

Alcubierre, now a professor of physics at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, concedes this point. In terms of a potential technology, warp drives “are greatly lacking,” he and one of his colleagues wrote in a recent preprint paper . He has now turned his attention to known phenomena, such as black holes. The warp drive concept, however, retains its fascination, especially for Trekkies—and for a few gravitational physicists, who occasionally publish variations on the idea.

Some of these papers have shown how to reduce the bubble’s mass requirements so that the total mass needed to deform spacetime would be less than that of our sun. But no one was able to get around the problem of negative energy—until Lentz took it up during the lockdown in Göttingen. In his enforced isolation, Lentz found a way to construct a warp bubble using only positive energy. In so doing, he may have overcome the greatest objection to warp drives.

What made it possible was a special feature of the geometry of spacetime that Lentz discovered buried in the general theory of relativity—more precisely, in Einstein’s field equations. These equations can calculate how a particular distribution of matter and energy deforms spacetime. Researchers can also use them, as Alcubierre did, to determine the mass and energy needed to produce a specific curvature of space.

Dealing with a dynamic, four-dimensional structure like spacetime is extremely complicated, however. Writing out Einstein’s formulas in full produces a jumble of nested differential equations with thousands of terms. Depending on the assumptions you make about a particular physical situation, you only take some of those terms into account. For theorists, it is an almost limitless playground.

Principle of the Alcubierre drive: Spacetime contracts at the front of the bubble (right), corresponding to a warp in spacetime. Behind the bubble (left), new space is created out of nothing, which is equivalent to stretching spacetime. Credit: AllenMcC Wikimedia  (CC BY-SA 3.0)

Lentz specifically examined the assumptions leading to the negative energy requirements in Alcubierre’s work. Like his colleague, Lentz began by analyzing spacetime, modeling the multidimensional substance as a stack of very thin layers. He found that Alcubierre had only considered comparatively simple “linear” relationships between the equations for shifting one layer onto the next. At this point, choosing more complex “hyperbolic” relations, which typically express rapidly changing quantities, results in a different warp bubble than the one obtained by Alcubierre. It still requires enormous amounts of mass and energy but, according to Lentz’s calculations, only positive amounts. “I was very surprised that no one had tried this before me,” Lentz says.

Lentz’s bubble looks different from the one Alcubierre worked out in 1994. It consists of diamond-shaped regions of altered spacetime that resemble a flock of birds. Creating such a spacetime geometry in reality would involve a complicated layering of rings and disks, not made of solid material but of an extremely dense fluid of charged particles, similar to the substance found in the interior of neutron stars, Lentz says.

That means near-light-speed travel is still very, very far away from applied technology. But now that no exotic negative energy densities are needed—at least according to Lentz’s latest work—the theoretical games are within the realm of established physics. Alcubierre describes Lentz’s paper as a “very important development.” Francisco Lobo, a researcher at the University of Lisbon and a colleague of Alcubierre’s, who has published a textbook on warp drives, cannot find any obvious errors either. “If correct, this has the potential of opening up new interest and novel avenues of research in warp drive physics,” he says.

Lentz’s idea has even aroused interest among researchers outside the small community of warp drive enthusiasts, including Lavinia Heisenberg, a professor of cosmology at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich. Heisenberg and her student Shaun Fell found Lentz’s paper so exciting that they built on it by designing their own positive-energy warp bubbles that would require as little as a thousandth of the mass of our sun.

“The whole thing is much less mysterious than most people assume,” says Alexey Bobrick , an astrophysicist at Lund University in Sweden. Collaborating with New York City–based entrepreneur Gianni Martire, Bobrick came up with some promising solutions to Einstein’s field equations in 2020. According to Bobrick, all that is needed for a warp bubble is an appropriately shaped shell made of dense material that bends spacetime in its immediate vicinity while the universe through which the bubble moves and the space within the shell remain comparatively undisturbed.

Time Goes by So Slowly

“Comparatively” is the key. Alcubierre and later warp architects assumed an abrupt transition between the contorted spacetime in the wall of the bubble and the smooth interior and exterior. But Bobrick and Martire found this “truncation” of the gravitational field to be the reason why large amounts of negative energy are required to stabilize the contortion of space and time.

Abandoning the cartoonish image of a soap bubble, however, makes it possible to build warp drives based on ordinary matter, they claim. The gravitational field would not simply disappear when one moved away from the wall of the shell. Instead it would gradually decay. Spacetime would therefore also be curved inside the bubble. To travelers in a spaceship right in the middle of the bubble, this phenomenon would be most obvious in the passage of time: their watches would go slower than in the rest of space because, according to the theory of relativity, time is affected by gravity.

The slower passage of time on a spaceship might be something interstellar travelers appreciate. Still, Bobrick and Martire describe other obstacles. So far, they argue, there is no known way to actually accelerate a warp bubble. All previous ideas about the subject simply assume that the curvature of spacetime is already moving at high speed.

A beam of light travels 299,000 kilometers per second. According to Einstein’s special theory of relativity, this is a physical constant. The speed of light is the maximum speed any particle may reach, and a particle can only do so if it has no mass. Consequently, today’s physics offers no possibility of accelerating objects beyond the speed of light. On closer inspection, however, this limit only applies within the four-dimensional spacetime comprising the universe. Outside of that, even greater speeds appear to be possible.

“None of the physically conceivable warp drives can accelerate to speeds faster than light,” Bobrick says. That is because you would require matter capable of being ejected at speeds faster than light—but no known particles can travel that fast. Furthermore, the bubble could not be controlled by occupants of the spaceship itself because they would lose contact with the outside world, owing to the extremely strong curvature of space around them.

Lentz sees these objections as a problem, too, but he believes a solution can be found. Bobrick, meanwhile, points out that it is also possible to travel to distant stars at a third or half the speed of light, especially if time passes more slowly for the people in the warp bubble. Just do not think about the fact that all your relatives left behind on Earth will probably have died of old age before you get back. “But at least the idea is no longer completely crazy,” Bobrick says.

From Theory to Practice

There is still some debate about whether warp bubbles really can do without negative energy. Recently, three theoreticians suggested that this claim was only true for observers moving next to the bubble. Plus, not everything that seems possible according to the theory of relativity actually exists—or is technologically feasible. For example, Einstein’s field equations can also be used to justify “white” holes (the antithesis of their black hole counterparts), Einstein-Rosen bridges (frequently called wormholes) and other exotic alterations in spacetime that no one has ever observed. That could be because laws of nature, as yet unknown, preclude such phenomena.

Some researchers therefore caution against going overboard with the fantasies. Space propulsion expert Martin Tajmar of the Technical University of Dresden, for example, sees no practical relevance for the current work on warp drives. The huge masses involved simply exceed anything that can be tested on Earth, he says.

Most veteran warp drive researchers would undoubtedly agree. They see their work less as preparation for real-world experiments and more as a way of exploring the limits of relativity. In this endeavor, even speculative “thought experiments” are useful, Lobo says.

Lentz, on the other hand, is actively working toward a practical application of his idea. After his research in Göttingen, he took a job at an IT company. But in his spare time, he still thinks about how to accelerate a bend in spacetime to speeds faster than light and how to reduce the energy required to do so.

Lentz also advocates looking closely at the surroundings of neutron stars. It could be that these ultracompact stellar remnants eject bubbles like those that he describes in his paper. “As long as one doesn’t let personal biases get in the way and accepts what evidence tells you, it’s a field of research that is as worthy of being pursued as any other,” he says.

Jean-Luc Picard would probably see it similarly. “Things are only impossible until they are not,” the character noted in an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation . But that’s also easier to say when you live 300 years in the future.

This article originally appeared in Spektrum der Wissenschaft and was reproduced with permission

What it would take to make a 'Star Trek' warp drive real

A physicist breaks down the barriers to our journey to the final frontier.

The closest star to Earth is Proxima Centauri . It is about 4.25 light-years away, or about 25 trillion miles (40 trillion km). The fastest ever spacecraft, the now-in-space Parker Solar Probe will reach a top speed of 450,000 mph. It would take just 20 seconds to go from Los Angeles to New York City at that speed, but it would take the solar probe about 6,633 years to reach Earth’s nearest neighboring solar system.

If humanity ever wants to travel easily between stars, people will need to go faster than light. But so far, faster-than-light travel is possible only in science fiction.

In Issac Asimov’s Foundation series , humanity can travel from planet to planet, star to star or across the universe using jump drives. As a kid, I read as many of those stories as I could get my hands on. I am now a theoretical physicist and study nanotechnology, but I am still fascinated by the ways humanity could one day travel in space.

Some characters – like the astronauts in the movies Interstellar and Thor – use wormholes to travel between solar systems in seconds. Another approach – familiar to Star Trek fans – is warp drive technology. Warp drives are theoretically possible if still far-fetched technology. Two recent papers made headlines in March when researchers claimed to have overcome one of the many challenges that stand between the theory of warp drives and reality.

But how do these theoretical warp drives really work? And will humans be making the jump to warp speed anytime soon?

Compression and expansion

Physicists’ current understanding of spacetime comes from Albert Einstein’s theory of General Relativity . General Relativity states that space and time are fused and that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. General relativity also describes how mass and energy warp spacetime – hefty objects like stars and black holes curve spacetime around them. This curvature is what you feel as gravity and why many spacefaring heroes worry about “getting stuck in” or “falling into” a gravity well. Early science fiction writers John Campbell and Asimov saw this warping as a way to skirt the speed limit.

What if a starship could compress space in front of it while expanding spacetime behind it? Star Trek took this idea and named it the warp drive.

In 1994, Miguel Alcubierre, a Mexican theoretical physicist, showed that compressing spacetime in front of the spaceship while expanding it behind was mathematically possible within the laws of General Relativity . So, what does that mean? Imagine the distance between two points is 10 meters (33 feet). If you are standing at point A and can travel one meter per second, it would take 10 seconds to get to point B. However, let’s say you could somehow compress the space between you and point B so that the interval is now just one meter. Then, moving through spacetime at your maximum speed of one meter per second, you would be able to reach point B in about one second. In theory, this approach does not contradict the laws of relativity since you are not moving faster than light in the space around you. Alcubierre showed that the warp drive from “Star Trek” was in fact theoretically possible.

Proxima Centauri here we come, right? Unfortunately, Alcubierre’s method of compressing spacetime had one problem: it requires negative energy or negative mass.

A negative energy problem

Alcubierre’s warp drive would work by creating a bubble of flat spacetime around the spaceship and curving spacetime around that bubble to reduce distances. The warp drive would require either negative mass – a theorized type of matter – or a ring of negative energy density to work. Physicists have never observed negative mass, so that leaves negative energy as the only option.

To create negative energy, a warp drive would use a huge amount of mass to create an imbalance between particles and antiparticles. For example, if an electron and an antielectron appear near the warp drive, one of the particles would get trapped by the mass and this results in an imbalance. This imbalance results in negative energy density. Alcubierre’s warp drive would use this negative energy to create the spacetime bubble.

This ESA visualization depicts the amount various stars curve space-time. This kind of curvature is essential in creating a warp drive.

But for a warp drive to generate enough negative energy, you would need a lot of matter. Alcubierre estimated that a warp drive with a 100-meter bubble would require the mass of the entire visible universe .

In 1999, physicist Chris Van Den Broeck showed that expanding the volume inside the bubble but keeping the surface area constant would reduced the energy requirements significantly , to just about the mass of the sun. A significant improvement, but still far beyond all practical possibilities.

A sci-fi future?

Two recent papers – one by Alexey Bobrick and Gianni Martire and another by Erik Lentz – provide solutions that seem to bring warp drives closer to reality.

Bobrick and Martire realized that by modifying spacetime within the bubble in a certain way, they could remove the need to use negative energy. This solution, though, does not produce a warp drive that can go faster than light.

[ Over 100,000 readers rely on The Conversation’s newsletter to understand the world. Sign up today .]

Independently, Lentz also proposed a solution that does not require negative energy. He used a different geometric approach to solve the equations of General Relativity, and by doing so, he found that a warp drive wouldn’t need to use negative energy. Lentz’s solution would allow the bubble to travel faster than the speed of light.

It is essential to point out that these exciting developments are mathematical models. As a physicist, I won’t fully trust models until we have experimental proof. Yet, the science of warp drives is coming into view. As a science fiction fan, I welcome all this innovative thinking. In the words of Captain Picard , things are only impossible until they are not.

This article was originally published on The Conversation by Mario Borunda at Oklahoma State University. Read the original article here .

• Science Fiction
• Space Science

To revisit this article, visit My Profile, then View saved stories .

• The Big Story
• Newsletters
• Steven Levy's Plaintext Column
• WIRED Classics from the Archive
• WIRED Insider
• WIRED Consulting

A Warp Drive Breakthrough Inches a Tiny Bit Closer to Star Trek

A team of physicists has discovered that it’s possible to build a real, actual, physical warp drive and not break any known rules of physics . One caveat: The vessel doing the warping can’t exceed the speed of light, so you’re not going to get anywhere interesting anytime soon. But this research still represents an important advance in our understanding of gravity .

Moving Without Motion

Einstein’s general theory of relativity is a tool kit for solving problems involving gravity that connects mass and energy with deformations in spacetime. In turn, those spacetime deformations instruct the mass and energy how to move. In almost all cases, physicists use the equations of relativity to figure out how a particular combination of objects will move. They have some physical scenario, like a planet orbiting a star or two black holes colliding, and they ask how those objects deform spacetime and what the subsequent evolution of the system should be.

But it’s also possible to run Einstein’s math in reverse by imagining some desired motion and asking what kind of spacetime deformation can make it possible. This is how the Mexican physicist Miguel Alcubierre discovered the physical basis for a warp drive—long a staple of the Star Trek franchise.

The goal of a warp drive is to get from A to B in the time between commercial breaks, which typically involves faster-than-light motion. But special relativity expressly forbids speeds faster than light. While this never bothered the writers of Star Trek , it did irritate Alcubierre. He discovered that it was possible to build a warp drive through a clever manipulation of spacetime, arranging it so that space in front of a vessel gets scrunched up and the space behind the vessel stretched out. This generates motion without, strictly speaking, movement.

It sounds like a contradiction, but that’s just one of the many wonderful aspects of general relativity. Alcubierre’s warp drive avoids violations of the speed-of-light limit because it never moves through space; instead space itself is manipulated to, in essence, bring the spacecraft’s destination closer to it.

While tantalizing, Alcubierre’s design has a fatal flaw. To provide the necessary distortions of spacetime, the spacecraft must contain some form of exotic matter, typically regarded as matter with negative mass. Negative mass has some conceptual problems that seem to defy our understanding of physics, like the possibility that if you kick a ball that weighs negative 5 kilograms, it will go flying backwards, violating conservation of momentum. Plus, nobody has ever seen any object with negative mass existing in the real universe, ever.

These problems with negative mass have led physicists to propose various versions of “energy conditions” as supplements to general relativity. These aren’t baked into relativity itself, but add-ons needed because general relativity allows things like negative mass that don’t appear to exist in our universe—these energy conditions keep them out of relativity’s equations. They’re scientists’ response to the unsettling fact that vanilla GR allows for things like superluminal motion, but the rest of the universe doesn’t seem to agree.

Warp Factor Zero

The energy conditions aren’t experimentally or observationally proven, but they are statements that concord with all observations of the universe, so most physicists take them rather seriously. And until recently, physicists have viewed those energy conditions as making it absolutely 100 percent clear that you can’t build a warp drive, even if you really wanted to.

But there is a way around it, discovered by an international team of physicists led by Jared Fuchs at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. (The team is also affiliated with the Applied Propulsion Laboratory of Applied Physics, a virtual think tank dedicated to the research of, among many other things, warp drives.) In a paper accepted for publication in the journal Classical and Quantum Gravity , the researchers dug deep into relativity to explore if any version of a warp drive could work.

The equations of general relativity are notoriously difficult to solve, especially in complex cases such as a warp drive. So the team turned to software algorithms; instead of trying to solve the equations by hand, they explored their solutions numerically and verified that they conformed to the energy conditions.

The team did not actually attempt to construct a propulsion device. Instead, they explored various solutions to general relativity that would allow travel from point to point without a vessel undergoing any acceleration or experiencing any overwhelming gravitational tidal forces within the vessel, much to the comfort of any imagined passengers. They then checked whether these solutions adhered to the energy conditions that prevent the use of exotic matter.

The researchers did indeed discover a warp drive solution: a method of manipulating space so that travelers can move without accelerating. There is no such thing as a free lunch, however, and the physicality of this warp drive does come with a major caveat: The vessel and passengers can never travel faster than light. Also disappointing: the fact that the researchers behind the new work don’t seem to bother with figuring out what configurations of matter would allow the warping to happen.

The Future of Gravity

On one hand, that’s a gigantic letdown. We already have plenty of methods for traveling slower than light (rockets, walking, etc.), so adding one more to the list isn’t all that exciting. Plus, even if we wanted to build this warp drive, the gulf between this hyper-theoretical work and an actual, physical propulsion mechanism is the same as the difference between writing down Newton’s laws and building a Falcon 9.

But that doesn’t mean this new development isn’t interesting. We don’t fully understand gravity, and we know that Einstein’s theory is incomplete. One of the signposts that we have to a future understanding of gravity is the fact that general relativity allows for interesting, exotic solutions—like warp drives—that appear to violate other domains of physical understanding.

Us physicists like it when all of our theories line up and agree on the nature of the Universe. So if the energy conditions set real limits on physics—limits where things like negative mass don’t just not exist , but can’t exist —then we’d like a physical theory that says that from the beginning, instead of relying on add-ons like the energy conditions.

Exploring how a warp drive might (not) work, and under what conditions and restrictions, is a step in that direction. For years physicists thought that the energy conditions outlawed all kinds of warp drives, yet the new research shows a possible way around that. What comes next will be a win no matter what; whether we get a fancy superluminal warp drive or not. That’s because whatever comes out of future lines of inquiry along these directions, we’re going to learn more about the force of gravity, and just possibly revolutionize our understanding of it.

And who knows what we’ll get once we understand gravity better.

This story originally appeared on Ars Technica .

You Might Also Like …

In your inbox: Our biggest stories , handpicked for you each day

How one bad CrowdStrike update crashed the world’s computers

The Big Story: How soon might the Atlantic Ocean break ?

Welcome to the internet's hyper-consumption era

• New threadmarks

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

• The Versus Debates Rules have been streamlined and updated. Check out the details here .
• This year's penultimate batch of new Awards has arrived. Introducing the Informative Award and the Jaw Drop Award!
• Fiction Discussion
• Vs. Debates
• Technical Analysis

Using Warp drive in System! What is the danger really?

• Thread starter RJLCyberPunk
• Start date Mar 27, 2009

RJLCyberPunk

• Mar 27, 2009

OK here's a cooker! We have heard many times that apparently is dangerous to go to warp inside a Solar system but no one has ever answered why. And in a lot of instances we have seen ships going to Warp drive within a Solar system and not wait until they reach the edge of such a system to go to warp, we know that Warp is quite maneuverable so collisions are basically out of the question, we have seen ships go to warp near stars and so on so is not an issue of gravity, radiation or anything like that! Whoever wrote this peril never made claar what the peril really was is basically a phantom peril for all intended purposes! But anyhow given that we can exclude all of the above does anyone have a suggestion as to what this peril might be?  

Are we talking Trek warp? AFAIK, there is no such restriction in Trek.  

Major Diarrhia

• Mar 28, 2009

Actually, there is an entire episode where one of the solutions is to give control completely over to the computer because only it can make adjustments fast enough. But it comes off as precalculated adjustments, rather than determinations on the fly by the computer. Voyager had a similar situation. The solution in the end for the former situation was turn off all power and use manual control with reaction jets instead of impulse engines.  

Naneu said: Alternatively, being close to a star could also vastly complicate the computations needed for establishing a proper warp field. Starfleet isn't going to care that much in an emergency, since they have the best of the best in terms of gear and training, but your average civilian isn't likely to have either. Being a bit off there could mean the difference between life and death for them. Click to expand... Click to shrink...

Lord Squishy

Shadow cabal member.

As AFAIK, there is exactly one episode in which it was specified going to warp inside the solar system is dangerous and that was because it was required by the plot. Starships routinely enter and exit warp inside planetary gravity wells and deep inside solar systems.  

RJLCyberPunk said: Somehow something tells me Warsies would love that especially since it has been claimed that gravity cannot affect warp in any way. Click to expand... Click to shrink...

Lord Squishy said: As AFAIK, there is exactly one episode in which it was specified going to warp inside the solar system is dangerous and that was because it was required by the plot. Starships routinely enter and exit warp inside planetary gravity wells and deep inside solar systems. Click to expand... Click to shrink...

Would you like to make a contract?

Presumably a populated system would have lots of stuff in it, from ships and stations, to space junk just floating here and there, expecially for the smaller ships (starships presumably have better sensors and navigational deflectors to deal with hazards like that, unlike runabouts).  

Weyoun the Dancing Borg

Now 11% zombified.

Wielder of the Furies

Activating a warp engine within the Cochrane radius of a star will cause it to go nova, (or supernova, if sufficiently large).  

shubzilla said: Activating a warp engine within the Cochrane radius of a star will cause it to go nova, (or supernova, if sufficiently large). Click to expand... Click to shrink...

RJLCyberPunk said: Link? And as I recalll didn't the Enterprise went to warp orbiting the sun at close range in order to do a time jump to try to get some humpback whales in the past? Once again we have an example of something that allegedly cannot be done, done, go figure... Click to expand... Click to shrink...

Weyoun the Dancing Borg said: No it wont If you're thinking of the time Martok took out a dominion ship yard, they were firing some subspace thingy at the star but had to get really close to it to do it. Although if you go to warp sufficiently close to a star's "surface", you can cause solar flares to happen - Kurn destroyed 2 klingon ships that way in Redemption in TNG. The slingshot effect doesn't require a star to do it - or even a solar system - they've done it with black holes before in TOS - they referenced that in Star Trek 4. "Sure, we've done it before but.." They used the sling shot to gain enough speed to break the time barrier which on the old TOS scale appeared to be warp 10. Click to expand... Click to shrink...

RJLCyberPunk said: Sounds like a Time machine Puddle Jumper would come in handy in such situations... Click to expand... Click to shrink...

in Dragon's Teeth it was explicitly stated they needed to reach 280-320km in altitude before they could go to warp (somewhere inside the upper thermosphere)  

evilauthor said: Only if you're not intending to transport a pair of whales. Puddle Jumpers are a bit... cramped for them. Click to expand... Click to shrink...

Lord Squishy said: in Dragon's Teeth it was explicitly stated they needed to reach 280-320km in altitude before they could go to warp (somewhere inside the upper thermosphere) Click to expand... Click to shrink...

Major Diarrhia said: That's interesting, it fits well with my theory on warp collision, that a warp field will in some way fizzle if it comes in contact with too much mass or has to wrestle with too large a volume of material. That leads to warp collisions do very little damage, rather than superluminal kinetic damage. Actually, there is a far simpler explanation. Going faster than light in an atmosphere means you have a shitton of molecules hitting your at relativistic velocity. Once, when Voyager was at warp, her navigational deflector failed, and that's what happened. But in an atmospher it would be a billion times worse. You would think they would impact at superluminal velocity, but my theory kind of explains why not. Click to expand... Click to shrink...

• Mar 30, 2009

Lord Squishy said: Well, warp collisions have never been seen to do extreme damage; it's not like ships warp into each other for UBER DAMAGE. Click to expand... Click to shrink...

Weyoun the Dancing Borg said: Didn't Riker order Crusher to prepare to jump to maximum warp, in an attempt to ram the borg cube in TBOBW? Click to expand... Click to shrink...

Neuromancer

Malignant a.i..

It's probably just airmanship. You don't go to warp inside a solar system for the same reason you don't buzz an airfield at 50 feet and 150 knots in a bell 214. Or you don't do it every day at least. The same idea applies on water, you don't hit full throttle on your jetboat when you're pulling out of a marina, and you don't go warp 11 in system with civvie ships around.  

• Search forums

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

• Misc. Star Trek

Warp in Atmosphere?

• Thread starter Dnoth
• Start date Oct 11, 2007

Fleet Captain

• Oct 11, 2007

According to Memory Beta: "Starships can engage their warp drives while in the upper atmosphere of a planet, but the maneuver is very dangerous. To engage a warp drive in the lower atmosphere would be suicidal." Does anybody have any guesses as to why it would be suicidal? And what do ya think would be the cut off altitude in a typical M-class atmosphere? Thanks for your insights.  

GodThingFormerly

A different kind of asshole.

Dnoth said: Does anybody have any guesses as to why it would be suicidal? Click to expand...

Cary L. Brown

Rear admiral.

• Oct 12, 2007

Basically, the effect I'd expect would be to basically "drag" the planet's atmosphere with you... which (as TGT says) would likely overstress your ship in every practical way. Sort of like trying to tow a dual tractor-trailer with a Yugo. Except worse, because the more powerful the field you create, the more drag you'll see... so ANY ship would likely tear itself apart. STILL... assume that your ship could do it. Think about the effect on the PLANET, as you suddenly cause a near-total-decompression of a large area of the planetary surface (as you rip the atmosphere away). You'd destroy EVERYTHING at the "epicenter" and the devastation (think the worst hurricane or tornado you've ever heard of... times 1000). Generally speaking, not a good move. At any rate, that's how >I< see it. Of course, since warp drive doesn't "really" exist (as far as we know), it's all moot anyway. So the REAL reason is "the writers said it, so it must be true."  

Fleet Admiral

So the REAL reason is "the writers said it, so it must be true." Click to expand...

Ronald Held

Vice admiral.

Beyond dragging the atmosphere along and overstressing the vessel, how much harm is going to be done to the planet due to the warp field so close to the planet's surface?  

SonicRanger

Going to warp in the atmosphere: http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=69&pos=84 If this rust-bucket can do it, so can other ships.  

Starting in armosphere I would guess is not the same as flying through atmosphere, since you're starting out in a gaseous environment. Warping so close to that much matter could generate enough force to start an atmomic explosion, which assuming you carried with you (instead of outrunning it), would blow you up real good.  

Additional Pylon

Is the atmosphere issue the reason why going to warp in a solar system is supposedly bad? Course, that's rarely been used with any consistency.  

Chris_Johnston

Yeah, I thought you couldn't go to warp anywhere near a singularity. Found these cool discussions, though... Physics Forums | The problem of warp drive How does warp drive work? | Ask MetaFilter  

• Oct 13, 2007

^^^ No, there's just less margin for error in a solar system -- a lot more stuff to run into than when flying in interstellar space.  

• Oct 14, 2007

Maybe, but that's certainly not been shown (as there doesn't seem to be any one thing that would make warping with a system bad; we see ships doing it frequently) or what's been implied to the contrary (that warp is somehow bad if you're not in open space). The idea of accidentally capturing a nearby atmosphere makes sense to me, in terms of a plausible reason for not warping in-system.  

In TMP going to warp inside the solar system is risky per Kirk voice over. In TVH the BOP goes to warp in the atmosphere on Kirk's order. Don't try to sort this mess out.  

Bernard Guignard

Might it have something to do with Vessel Size ?  

Probable vessel size, shape, and intensity of the warp field.  

In many stories, for various reasons, a starship cannot enter or leave hyperspace too close to a large concentration of mass, such as a planet or star; this means that hyperspace can only be used after a starship gets to the outside edge of a solar system, so the starship must use other means of propulsion to get to and from planets. The reasons given for such restrictions are usually technobabble, but their existence is just a plot device allowing for interstellar policies to actually form and exist. Science fiction author Larry Niven published his opinions to that effect in N-Space . According to him such an unrestricted technology would give no limits to what heroes and villains could do. In fact, every criminal would have the ability to destroy colonies, settlements and indeed whole worlds without any chance of stopping him. Click to expand...

• Oct 16, 2007

Whoops, TGT 's message disappeared when I was typing a response. Never mind... It would be interesting for the Trek universe to have a milder version of the classic hyperspace/gravity well limitation. Perhaps it only manifests in a few badly behaving star systems? Bajor could be one, what with this Denorios belt thing and the wormhole and the recurring plasma storms of "Invasive Procedures" fame; Sol might also have an uppity star, surrounded by some sort of a stormy subspace anomaly that forces even the Borg to drop out of warp during foul-weather conditions. Timo Saloniemi  

Timo said: Whoops, TGT 's message disappeared when I was typing a response. Never mind... Click to expand...

Oh, it was just the usual thing about air ceasing to be a fluid when it is pierced by something moving at lightspeed (or beyond, provided we extend Newtonian thinking to that). That is, no drag forces or friction or shockwaves or anything so conventional to endanger our brave little BoP. No problem! (The fictional ways of the nav deflector might indeed lead to a fruitless argument, though - the system appears incredibly capable, yet fails to be utilized to its supposed maximum extent on screen, so what are we to believe?) Timo Saloniemi  

dru said: In TMP going to warp inside the solar system is risky per Kirk voice over. In TVH the BOP goes to warp in the atmosphere on Kirk's order. Don't try to sort this mess out. Click to expand...

Similar threads

• Lord Hierarch
• Jan 4, 2024

• Admiral Archer
• Jan 10, 2024
• Star Trek - The Original & Animated Series

• Arvis Taljik
• Jun 22, 2024

• Jul 6, 2024
• Fan Fiction

• Michael Two Wolves
• Sep 18, 2023

Sign up / Register

• General Trek Discussion
• Star Trek: Enterprise
• Star Trek: The Next Generation
• Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
• Star Trek: Voyager
• Star Trek: Discovery
• Star Trek: Picard
• Star Trek: Strange New Worlds
• Star Trek: Lower Decks
• Star Trek: Prodigy
• Star Trek Movies I-X
• Star Trek Movies: Kelvin Universe
• Future of Trek
• Trek Gaming
• Trek Literature
• Fan Productions
• CSI (at Talk CSI)
• Science and Technology
• Sports and Fitness
• Web Sites/Design
• Miscellaneous
• Site Forums

Warp in a Solar System

Advertisement

Could we take the entire solar system on a voyage through space?

To transport our planet across the universe, we would need to bring the whole solar system to sustain life on Earth – on this episode of Dead Planets Society, our hosts contemplate how to shepherd all that baggage on this scenic journey

By Leah Crane and Chelsea Whyte

6 August 2024

Dead Planets Society is a podcast that takes outlandish ideas about how to tinker with the cosmos – from snapping the moon in half to causing a gravitational wave apocalypse – and subjects them to the laws of physics to see how they fare. Listen on Apple , Spotify or on our podcast page .

It is time for an epic journey. On the season finale of Dead Planets Society, our hosts Chelsea Whyte and Leah Crane are sending Earth on a voyage through the cosmos – and taking the entire solar system along for the ride.

After all, sending Earth across the universe without its home star would result in a dark, cold trip and the demise of all life on the planet. That would render the journey moot, as there would be nobody around to see the wonders of the cosmos, so we will have to take the sun with us. The rest of the planets are simply a bonus.

Obviously, moving the sun is not an easy task, especially if you want to keep the planets orbiting around it. That’s why astrophysicist Jay Farihi at University College London joined this episode to help figure out the problem.

One possibility is to build a colossal warp drive – a self-contained bubble of space-time that moves by warping the space in front of it. But these hypothetical devices are renowned for potentially allowing faster-than-light travel, and the key to keeping all the planets bound to the sun is to move slowly. Plus, we don’t know how to build one.

Another option is to place a black hole just in front of the sun to accelerate it slightly. The black hole would have to be moved along with the sun, or perhaps a string of black holes could pass the solar system along in a cosmic relay race.

Sign up to our Launchpad newsletter

Voyage across the galaxy and beyond with our space newsletter every month.

These options are particularly unrealistic, but there are more plausible ideas – not doable, but at least more feasible than a solar-system-sized warp drive. These include a set of enormous solar sails, or potentially placing an indestructible straw inside the sun to funnel out its high-pressure insides in a jet of plasma.

There are many places in the universe that our hosts would love to visit with the newly mobile solar system, from stellar clusters to nebulae to a supermassive black hole. All we need is a few technological impossibilities to make it happen.

• astrophysics /
• solar system /
• Dead Planets Society

Sign up to our weekly newsletter

Receive a weekly dose of discovery in your inbox! We'll also keep you up to date with New Scientist events and special offers.

More from New Scientist

Explore the latest news, articles and features

The JUICE spacecraft may be visible on a near-Earth flyby next week

Galaxy cluster smash-up lets us observe dark matter on its own

Subscriber-only

The sun could capture rogue planets from 3.8 light years away

Dark matter may solve the mystery of how colossal black holes merge

Popular articles.

Trending New Scientist articles

Marvel and 'Star Wars' take note. 'Star Trek' is now Hollywood's ultimate shared universe

From 'Discovery' to "Strange New Worlds' via 'Lower Decks' and 'Prodigy', 'Star Trek' is leading the way.

Shared universes go back way further than Tony Stark, Steve Rogers and co sitting down for some post-Chitauri shawarma. Superheroes have been moonlighting in each other's comic books for decades, while Cheers regulars frequently paid Frasier a visit in Seattle. It wasn't until Marvel Studios launched the MCU ( Marvel Cinematic Universe ), however, that the concept started to gain serious mainstream traction. 

By incorporating the contrasting adventures of Iron Man, Captain America, Thor and Black Widow into one gigantic, overarching narrative, Marvel successfully blended cinematic spectacle with the "must-watch-every-episode" ethos of serialised TV. The MCU's famous end-credits stings also had the unexpected side-effect of convincing us all to stick around until the end of the closing titles of every movie, y'know, just in case. 

From a business point of view it's one of the shrewdest creative decisions ever made in Hollywood, a move that helped turn the MCU into the most lucrative franchise in history, while spawning an army of imitators. Some fell quickly by the wayside — Universal's planned Dark Universe didn't survive beyond its first release, "The Mummy" — while others (most notably DC's original answer to the MCU) simply felt tired in comparison. But with apologies to box-office behemoths Marvel, Star Wars and the Monsterverse home of Godzilla and King Kong, the most exciting shared universe of them all is currently located somewhere on the final frontier.

It's not quite "Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations" (sorry, Mr Spock), but " Star Trek "'s guiding principle since "Discovery" brought the franchise back to TV in 2017 has been variety. "Discovery" started out as an "Original Series" prequel, before warping off to the even-more-distant future of the 32nd century. That left a gap in the timeline for the less serialized voyages of a pre-Kirk Enterprise in " Strange New Worlds ". "Picard" picked up the story of the ageing Jean-Luc Picard two decades after "The Next Generation" crew's final voyage, while a pair of animated series — kids' show " Prodigy " and all-out comedy "Lower Decks" — were given freedom to take the most daring swings in "Trek" history. 

Throw upcoming spy adventure " Section 31 " and cadet-themed "Disco" spin-off " Starfleet Academy " into the mix, and it's clear that — beyond the obligatory warp drives, phasers and frequent violations of the Prime Directive — the main element unifying these very different series is their shared universe. Even their settings are far enough apart — geographically and chronologically — that there's little danger of storylines colliding in Spacedock. 

The contrast between the Alpha Quadrant and a certain galaxy far, far away is stark. Until " The Acolyte ", every canonical "Star Wars" movie and TV show had been set within a few generations of the Skywalker family tree. But even ignoring the limitations of that brief timeline, there's a creeping homogeneity to much of the saga's storytelling and dialogue. 

Scenes from "The Acolyte" (set around a century before "The Phantom Menace") feel interchangeable with moments in " Ahsoka " (several years after "Return of the Jedi"), while the powers-that-be at Skywalker Ranch seem more preoccupied with plugging holes in existing lore than telling stories for their own sake. What was the final episode of "The Acolyte" season one if not a prequel to the prequel trilogy?

"Star Wars" should be an exhilarating interstellar playground capable of supporting any story you can imagine, but it's increasingly constrained by strict rules that must, it seems, never be broken. "Star Wars" is calling out for its own "Lower Decks"-style comedy" , while the upcoming "'Goonies' in space" " Skeleton Crew " could be the kid-oriented launchpad that Prodigy has been for "Trek". "Star Wars" arguably needs both because right now, all that canon could easily feel daunting to anyone eager to take those precious first steps into a larger world.

Not that the current iterations of "Star Trek" deny the franchise's rich past. The glorious final season of "Picard" was a nostalgia-fest from start to finish, bringing back familiar friends and foes to give the "TNG" crew the send-off they deserved — if it's possible to replicate your cake and eat it, that season showed the way. "Prodigy" also goes big on the deep cuts, but crucially, it doesn't matter if you have no idea that the name of the USS Voyager-A's resident whale (Gillian) is a reference to "Star Trek IV". Or that a mention of the "dysfunctional" crew of the Cerritos is a callback to "Lower Decks". All of the in-jokes are simply window dressing holding the universe together, without excluding newcomers. 

That's the genius of the modern "Star Trek" universe, whose guiding lights clearly understand that expecting every viewer to be up-to-speed with the more than 900 episodes and 13 “Star Trek” movies in the back catalogue would be a surefire route to failure. The MCU and "Star Wars" lived charmed lives when they were built around a relatively small number of movies, but both franchises are now too vast and unwieldy to demand that even casual viewers become completists. 

Nobody should have to watch everything , so surely it's better for everyone if we accept that some people will set their targeting computers on "The Mandalorian" but avoid " Andor ", just as some "Discovery" fans can skip "Picard" without feeling they're missing out. 

Besides, we probably shouldn't be surprised that it's "Trek" leading the way, because this isn't Starfleet's first away mission to a shared universe. Back in the ’90s "The Next Generation", "Deep Space Nine", "Voyager", four movies and even prequel series "Enterprise" shared characters and plotlines, to the extent that after hundreds of hours of TV, planet Earth was losing interest in shows that were becoming increasingly formulaic. Sound familiar? The franchise's latest overseers have boldly taken note — now "Star Wars", the MCU and the rest should follow in their warp trails.

"Discovery", "Picard", "Strange New Worlds" and "Lower Decks" are all available to stream on Paramount Plus, along with "The Original Series", "The Next Generation", "Deep Space Nine", "Voyager" and "Enterprise". "Prodigy" is available on Netflix.

Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: [email protected].

Get the Space.com Newsletter

Breaking space news, the latest updates on rocket launches, skywatching events and more!

Richard's love affair with outer space started when he saw the original "Star Wars" on TV aged four, and he spent much of the ’90s watching "Star Trek”, "Babylon 5” and “The X-Files" with his mum. After studying physics at university, he became a journalist, swapped science fact for science fiction, and hit the jackpot when he joined the team at SFX, the UK's biggest sci-fi and fantasy magazine. He liked it so much he stayed there for 12 years, four of them as editor. 

He's since gone freelance and passes his time writing about "Star Wars", "Star Trek" and superheroes for the likes of SFX, Total Film, TechRadar and GamesRadar+. He has met five Doctors, two Starfleet captains and one Luke Skywalker, and once sat in the cockpit of "Red Dwarf"'s Starbug.  

'Borderlands' review: A return to the dark ages of video game adaptations

This Week In Space podcast: Episode 123 — The Mighty Perseids

Watch live as SpaceX Transporter 11 sends new payloads to space today

• Mars Tafts I have been a Star Trek fan since 1966 and even I don't believe this article. Reply
• Amin Abakery Is this some kind of Joke? Paramount did worse to Star Trek than they did to Halo, than Disney ever did to Star Wars, its an insult not just to science but to morality and human decency. I used to grow up watching star trek, proud that it was written by scientists and good people like her. Now it seems to be written by your average twitter user. With an adulterer Spock and mushroom drive spinning ships. Reply
• View All 2 Comments

Most Popular

• 2 How a quantum sensor on the ISS could revolutionize space exploration
• 3 What Boeing Starliner astronauts are doing on ISS as NASA works on their ride home
• 4 HP Spectre x360 14 (2024) laptop review
• 5 James Webb Space Telescope adds to the confusing drama of Hubble tension