I've not double checked these two articles for accuracy.
But, what the hell, maybe it's true! Maybe it's not.
It's exciting, though!

http://gizmodo.com/5942634/nasa-starts- ... warp-drive

http://www.space.com/17628-warp-drive-p ... light.html

EDIT:
Ok. Confirmed.
Slightly more data here:
http://www.icarusinterstellar.org/daydr ... mechanics/

Confirmation here:
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20110023492
And take a look at the PDF at the top of the page! WHOOO!! COOL!

EDIT:
Warp Field Mechanics 101:
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi. ... 016932.pdf
I've not read it yet but WOW!! Really?

Oh! And guess what shape they expect to use for the first warp nacell?
A RING!! *WE* are the Vulcans!

Last EDIT:
I skimmed through the above PDF. This is a serious proposal, though the physics is highly speculative. It seems to require a kind of "hyperspace" --his words-- to reduce the energy needed to make a warp bubble --also a term he used. Basically, he's combining two pieces of work: Alcubierre warp metric and the Chung-Freese "hyper-drive" Metric. The latter I know nothing about. Apparently it thickens the walls of the Alcubierre warp bubble within extra dimensions....Or so I understand.

I'll try to do a more complete reading in the next few days and give y'all my impressions. In the mean time, read up on it yourselves and post your impressions here! (Please?) I'd love to know what y'all think!

Sorry to disappoint you, but I read the "Warp Field Mechanics 101" PDF and it seems like bogus to me

The stuff about the Alcubierre drive are legit, but highly speculative.

BTW, this guy has zero publications in theoretical physics, so this makes it even more probable that he's a crackpot. That fact that he has put the PDF in a NASA server doesn't really mean much.

PS I'm working at a theoretical physics department focusing in cosmology and general relativity.

I will tell Virgin Atlantic to hold off on singing people up for now. Even if it is more cold fusion it sure is fun to think about.

Capt. Picard,
I *am* disappointed.
I've not read it completely yet and your assessment wont stop me from doing so.
But I'm also willing to completely accept your judgement on the matter, until otherwise informed.
DAG NAB IT!!
....Not even a kernel of hope?? Oh, PLEASE?!

Of course there's hope! Just don't expect anything from this guy. Most likely when warp drive or something similar is achieved, it will be part of some secret DARPA project or something.

By the way, if you want to have a look on real warp drive research (=done by physicists not crackpots & published in serious journals not obscure servers), have a look at this:
http://inspirehep.net/search?ln=en&ln=e ... rg=25&sc=0

inspirehep.net is a database that gathers high energy physics (gravity, quantum mechanics, cosmology, astrophysics) papers. Most of my own papers can be found on that database as well.

As Kenneth said elsewhere: "Never give up. Never surrender."

First off, Capt Picard, those links are AWESOME!! Thank you!
...And, of course, curse you for introducing me to such an irresistible time suck.

I just finished reading "Warp Field Mechanics 101" myself. I'm not a GR physicist but I do have a good grasp of GR and cosmology from the limited armchair-scientist POV. And this paper has several flaws even I can detect. Simplistic is the main critique I would use. The deduced connections are simplistic; the conclusions are simplistic; even the analogies are simplistic. Worse, though, there is next to nothing about how the negative-mass torus is to be created for his experiment. And what is said is vague.

Oh well.

Still, if I could be convinced that the last objection --the construction of the torus-- could be tackled with reasonable chance of success, and I had the purse strings, I would fund the experiment. WTH?! Likely nothing would happen and we'd learn something even so. But if anything out of the ordinary was detected: revolutionary.

That was my evil plan all along