Talk:Warp drive

FA nomination (Jun 2004, Failed)
My congratulations go out to Chuckhoffmann, who clearly did his homework on this one. Some canon issues are still being worked out, but I'm confident that'll work out just fine. -- Redge 17:08, 12 Jun 2004 (CEST)
 * Opposed. There are severe issues (mainly content, some style issues as well) still being discussed on that article's talk page. -- Cid Highwind 17:39, 12 Jun 2004 (CEST)

FA nomination (13 Aug - 20 Aug 2004, Failed)
I've almost completely rewritten the article, to make it canon-referenced, and pretty much comprehensive. -- Michael Warren | Talk 01:10, Aug 13, 2004 (CEST)
 * Oppose. Already a very good article, but there is still lots of info that needs to be added to this article. Think of the numerous episodes in Star Trek revolving around a strange phenomenon affecting the Warp drive. Those need to be listed. -- Redge | Talk 17:33, 13 Aug 2004 (CEST)
 * Although I am in support of Redge, I still think the article is comprehensive enough to be featured. Support nomination. Ottens 13:19, 14 Aug 2004 (CEST)
 * Archived. -- Redge | Talk 19:58, 20 Aug 2004 (CEST)

Eugene's Limit
Is it alright to add a mention of Eugene's Limit (St:TNG Tech Manual, p.56) to the article? --WTRiker 21:51, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Only as a background note. --OuroborosCobra talk 23:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Removed

 * ''Warp drive works by distorting the fabric of space to propel the vessel. Simply put, the drive warps space, both in front of and behind a starship, allowing it to travel faster than the speed of light. Specifically, spacetime is contracted in front of the ship and expanded behind it. The starship itself rests in a warp bubble between the two spacetime distortions. This warped space, together with the region inside it, accelerates off at 'warp speed' and the vessel then 'surfs' the wave in spacetime created by this distortion.


 * ''Travel at velocities exceeding the speed of light is possible in this fashion because the starship is, strictly speaking, stationary (relative to the space inside the warp bubble) while space itself is moving. Since space itself is moving and the starship is not actually accelerating, it experiences no time dilation, allowing the passage of time inside the vessel to be the same as that outside the warp bubble.

Uncited a bit more detailed than any episode or film would have ever gotten into. – Alan 21:35, 2 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Also removed, too much real world info:

Theories abound regarding the possibilities of developing a real 'warp drive'; antimatter is certainly an idea, but there exist only a few particles of antimatter anywhere on the Earth's surface at a given moment. Another idea, that of an 'Alcubierre Bubble', which would 'push' a ship faster than light (but the ship would not exceed lightspeed). The drawbacks, however, are that a ship in the Bubble would not be able to change its course, and would likely not even be able to exit the Bubble at the destination. Therefore, while warp-drive is a wonderful concept in science-fiction, it remains -- for the moment, at least -- entirely outside of our capabilities.--31dot 11:35, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

André Bormanis's explanation
''..which provides a bridge between electromagnetic and gravitational forces. By design, it has the property that when the warp plasma circulates through the coils, a [warp field]] is generated. Electromagnetic interactions between waves of the warp plasma and the verterium cortenide coils change the geometry of space surrounding the engine nacelles. In the process, a multilayered wave of warped space is born, and the starship cruises off to its next destination at hundreds of times the speed of light relative to normal space. Within the warp field, however, the starship does not exceed the local speed of light, and therefore does not violate the principal tenet of special relativity.''

''Travel at velocities exceeding the speed of light is possible in this fashion because the starship is, strictly speaking, stationary (relative to the space inside the warp field) while it is the space-time immediately around the starship that is actually moving. Since spacetime itself is moving and the starship is not actually accelerating, it experiences no time dilation, allowing the passage of time inside the vessel to be the same as that outside the warp field.''

I removed this update as it doesn't show up in canon. It looks like a similar section that was already removed earlier. --Morder 11:54, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Canonicity isn't the issue so much as citation is. If it really did come from Bormanis, then it falls under one of the permitted resources ("Background information from the production staff") as defined in the Canon policy (although also according to policy, it should be in background, not in the main article). The question, then, is whether Bormanis really said all this and if so, where, so it can be cited properly. - Bridge 12:07, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

You can find the statement in a transcript on. I leave it up to you to decide whether or not to include it. --Morder 12:09, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Probably best to leave that decision to an admin, just in case I've misinterpreted the canon policy. I'll leave a note at Alan's page asking him to look at this discussion, since he was the one who removed the similar uncited notes as shown in the section above this one. - Bridge 12:34, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Integration of the Alcubierre Drive into the article?

 * The Alcubierre Drive was postulated by Miguel Alcubierre after watching Star Trek. Basically, the Alcubierre Drive works by contracting spacetime in front of a vessel, and expanding spacetime behind the vessel.  This creates a sort of "warp bubble".  While the ship is moving at locally sublight speeds (usually actually zero), the bubble that carries the ship is free to travel at any velocity without its contents noticing anything.
 * The Alcubierre Drive has never explicitly been confirmed in any Star Trek episode or movie, and warp drive has never been fully explained onscreen. Star Trek, however, does somewhat confirm the Alcubierre Drive as Star Trek's warp drive when Scotty mentions that he'd never have thought of having space be what's moving is his transporter equations for targets moving at warp speed.
 * The Alcubierre Drive does have some problems though. To bend space enough to reach superluminal velocities, an immense amount of energy would be required.  Supposedly, Zefram Cochrane and Starfleet's engineers solved this with dilithium crystals and warp coils.  There are a lot more problems with the Alcubierre Drive discussed on Wikipedia. 74.211.15.99 04:00, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * MA is not for original research, speculation or anything of the like. This site is intended to be an encyclopedia build purely around canon and related licensed material. --Alan 04:08, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Warp drive mechanics
I have been a big star trek fan but i never got far into the backstory of the star trek universe until i found this wiki. i looked up warp drive, read the mechanics of it and notices that i know this is some of the hardest science fiction around but the warp drive does not use any kind of real world mechanic at all to propel itself. it does not generate a wormhole between two points, become partially in another universe where the laws of physics permit superluminal speeds, or reduce its mass to zero. it merely seems to heat up gas in a matter-antimatter reaction then shoot it out the neacells (did i spell that right?). how would this allow FTl and even if it did there is nothing to provide the thrust, even is something can move faster then light it does not mean that it is. if anybody can make sense of a warp drive then try to explain it to me. i dont really expect any good explainations as this is sci-fi but i was wondering if the creators addressed this question in an episode or something like that.
 * That isn't how warp drive is described as working at all. --OuroborosCobra talk 20:14, September 6, 2009 (UTC)

well gee sorry you have to admit it is a bit complicted. anyway thats why i started this thread, so that people could give me a better understanding. feel fre to post your interpretation.
 * Read the article. It was written for the very purpose of education. The very first paragraph would be a great start to dispelling your reaction mass theory. --OuroborosCobra talk 20:29, September 6, 2009 (UTC)

okay so it says they get the plasma with the antimatter reaction by heating up gasses i take it? thats how i would get some plasma. and then they shoot it into the neacells with the plasma injectors. i think it says that the whole thing is made of dilithium so the anti matter doesnt go off and ahhnialate itself and ruin the procces (why not just use force fields?) so anway then the plasma is injected into some warp coils. some how this projects a warp field. whats so special about the warp coils that gets them to make this field?. and things in the field can exede lightspeed, right? like i said before just because its in a field that lefts it go faster that light there is no propultion. do they use the impulse drives? a eingine that generates that kind of speed would be almost as monumental a achivement then the warp drive itself.
 * What is so special about Light Emitting Diodes that putting electricity through them causes them to emit light? Different compounds have different and unique properties. The field itself is and can be the propulsion. It is interacting with the very fabric of space/time. --OuroborosCobra talk 20:50, September 6, 2009 (UTC)

ok that wasnt much help but i think im done here. thanks anyways nice to see someone who doesnt yell at me on a forum. most wiki forums ive been to every idea ive presened or question ive asked eveybody puts it down and discourags me.

Excelsior Project
I don't remember ever specifically seeing that the Excelsior Project was a failure, I was under the impression that the failure was due to sabotage, which I would think would be obvious once somebody actually looked at the system. Wouldn't it be logical to say that the Excelsior Project was a success since Okudagrams in ST5 and ST6 suggested that the Enterprise and Excelsior travelled at warp speeds similar to that of TNG? It's just MHO I don't expect anyone to change anything just thought I'd bring it up.Mtblillie 21:27, January 28, 2010 (UTC) OK after looking at that again I realised that the comment seems more speculation than anything. I don't mean to say that the reference that the Excelsior Project was a failure should necessarily be changed to successful, I only mean that I am not sure about it's validity as being true that it was indeed a failure.Mtblillie 21:27, January 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * The "Excelsior Project" was the Federation transwarp drive. It was explained in that dilithium (used in all Federation warp cores) becomes unstable at the high warp frequency essential in the Federation transwarp design, so achieving warp 10 was never possible on the Excelsior. That is what the failure refers to, not Mr. Scott's sabotage of the transwarp computer in ST3. --Pseudohuman 22:30, January 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * I stand corrected, thank you for clearing that up!Mtblillie 00:34, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

How Warp Looks
Did they ever give any sort of explaination as to why warp looks they way it does, both from the inside and outside? To clarify what I mean, while in typical warp, it appears as though they are going past stars, or even through stars, and especially inside the ship, stars appear to stretch into lines. I'm asking for more of an in universe explaination, rather than why the creators decided to make it look like that, though I'll take both if possible.– 66.41.44.102 04:13, January 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * No explanation in-universe canon or otherwise exists. Some fans have speculated though, based on the TNG Tech Manual stating that when ever shields are hit, the bluish flash we see is a momentary discharge of Cerenkov radiation, that the "star streaks" are similar flashes of radiation spikes that occur in the warp field around the ship, but that is just fan speculation. --Pseudohuman 11:52, January 20, 2011 (UTC)

Present/past tense
Shouldn't the article be rewritten in the past tense (Warp drive WAS instead of IS)? 193.110.186.126 23:37, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yup. Rather than writing this, you could've started you know. -- sulfur 23:40, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

How fast
how fast is the fastest warp drive engens in ether km. or mi.? --71.253.69.237 18:30, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
 * Warp factor -page details all the known canonical and reference material facts on how fast warp factors are, Maximum warp -page lists how fast different classes of ships are. Hope that helps. --Pseudohuman 09:50, May 27, 2012 (UTC)