Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="freyar" data-source="post: 6315062" data-attributes="member: 40227">On the Higgs boson, absolutely.&nbsp; And, going in, we had a very good idea that learning the details about the Higgs boson (which we still haven't nailed down yet) would tell us even more about physics we don't quite understand.&nbsp; As for negative energy density: nothing said in the research here is &quot;new&quot; in terms of understanding negative energy densities, so this research won't help us understand the importance of it.&nbsp; This research is about trying to use negative energy densities to manipulate space-time; however, as best as I can tell from the little technical information that's available, the experiment proposed won't do that properly either.&nbsp; The LHC cost something like 300,000 times as much as this experiment, if we're putting things in perspective.&nbsp; Many experiments cost a lot more than that.&nbsp; But for some more perspective, many physicists (myself included) have to put in many hours of work writing grant proposals to get less than $50k per year.&nbsp; And we only get that if we are judged to have been productive enough and have sound plans for spending the money both by independent referees and evaluation panels at the appropriate funding agency.&nbsp; As I've said several times before, putting some funding toward warp drive research is fine, but this particular line of research looks unproductive, more and more so the more I look at it.&nbsp; That's all.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="freyar, post: 6315062, member: 40227"] On the Higgs boson, absolutely. And, going in, we had a very good idea that learning the details about the Higgs boson (which we still haven't nailed down yet) would tell us even more about physics we don't quite understand. As for negative energy density: nothing said in the research here is "new" in terms of understanding negative energy densities, so this research won't help us understand the importance of it. This research is about trying to use negative energy densities to manipulate space-time; however, as best as I can tell from the little technical information that's available, the experiment proposed won't do that properly either. The LHC cost something like 300,000 times as much as this experiment, if we're putting things in perspective. Many experiments cost a lot more than that. But for some more perspective, many physicists (myself included) have to put in many hours of work writing grant proposals to get less than $50k per year. And we only get that if we are judged to have been productive enough and have sound plans for spending the money both by independent referees and evaluation panels at the appropriate funding agency. As I've said several times before, putting some funding toward warp drive research is fine, but this particular line of research looks unproductive, more and more so the more I look at it. That's all. [/QUOTE]

Verification