[CLBrown]

Making the ship look like a football was the only way to get the attention of most of their readers

What's that supposed to mean?

I sure hope that wasn't a "political barb" (based upon the bullshit assumption that folks on the right side of the political spectrum are "stoopid"). Not only is that untrue, but it's also a violation of the terms of this site to bring in political stuff. And I'd wager that the readers of this site, like most of the country, are split evenly, so if that was a "barb" it would be an attack on 1/2 of this site's reader base.

Now... back on target...

The discussion of "real warp drive" comes up about once, every year. Usually from the same group of "scientists" (and usually at the time when they're trying get funding for their academic field of study at their respective university departments).

The world is full of scientists... both applied scientists (a category which includes everything from mechanical engineers to biochemists to geologists and a million other "real world application of science" jobs) and "pure research" scientists (usually working through public-funding at universities, though some are funded and maintained by private businesses or directly by governments). And an inordinate number of those who go into this field are huge geeks, and got into it because they wanted to do "really cool stuff." Most can quote episodes of Star Trek by memory. Trust me on that!

Very few things get the imagination going more, for the taxpayer who'll be asked to fund these programs, then telling them we'll be flying around on the Enterprise if only we fund their research team for another year!

The reality is, these "warp drive theories" are interesting, but if you read them in detail, you'll see that there are issues (usually involving the existence of purely-hypothetical materials like "dark matter" and "dark energy" and so forth, or requiring INFINITE (or nearly so) energy supplies... ie, the math may seem to work, but the practical application of the theories are pretty much impossible.

Don't get me wrong... I love seeing this sort of theoretical, mathematical work being done, and don't mind paying for it (as long as it's a reasonable cost). But I've seen this, at the same time, every year, for over a decade now. It's sort of like Christmas at this point... you can look forward to it every year!

 

[CLBrown]

If the amount of gravity from a black hole were pointed in just one direction, what would happen?

Well... that's sort of like saying "If a circle was square, what would happen?

Gravity, as best we understand it today, is not "directional" in that sense. It's always omnidirectional... a "deformation in space/time" with the deepest deformation at the center-of-mass of whatever mass is creating it.

The model usually used to describe gravity is to think of 3D space as 2D... and as a big sheet of rubber (infinite in size, but for the purposes of this discussion, just assume that it's a square several feet across with the edges supported, which is "good enough" for now).

Then think of a series of heavy spheres... representing various objects with mass. Put them on the sheet, and they locally deform the sheet, creating depressions in the sheet. Other objects also deform the sheet. These deformations affect other objects, of course. If two objects are very far apart on this sheet, the effect is minimal. But, put a big sphere in the middle, and several smaller spheres reasonably nearby, the big sphere will "attract" the smaller ones, due to the "incline in space time."

That's quite literally about the best model we currently have for how gravity works. As for the mechanism behind it... nobody has developed any reasonably model, with any mathematical support or experimental support, to explain that. We have no evidence of "gravitons" or "gravity waves" or anything of that matter... none whatsoever. A few people have written dissertations talking about such "hypothetical" particles or wavicles, but none have any support at all at this point.

We understand "If this, then this" quite clearly at this point, insofar as the attraction mechanism works. We get this because of the relative ease of collecting data on how it works. We have equations which very well explain "if this happens, then this is the result."

But we really do have no idea how we get from point A to point B.

What we do know is that gravity, as we understand it today, is omnidirectional. If it were to somehow in the future be determined that we can direct gravity in some manner... well, it may be possible but that would be something far beyond our current understanding.

So... the answer to your question, really, is "nobody has a clue." :freak: