A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Mach Thruster Update.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 6th 20, 07:14 AM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 687
Default Mach Thruster Update.

Gravity, Gizmos, and a Grand Theory of Interstellar Travel:

"Woodward’s MEGA drive is different. Instead of propellant, it relies on
electricity, which in space would come from solar panels or a nuclear reactor. His
insight was to use a stack of piezoelectric crystals and some controversial—but he
believes plausible—physics to generate thrust. The stack of crystals, which store
tiny amounts of energy, vibrates tens of thousands of times per second when zapped
with electric current. Some of the vibrational frequencies harmonize as they roll
through the device, and when the oscillations sync up in just the right way, the
small drive lurches forward."

See:

https://www.wired.com/story/mach-eff...tellar-travel/


What are the odds of this actually working?
Ads
  #4  
Old September 6th 20, 02:50 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Alain Fournier[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 548
Default Mach Thruster Update.

On Sep/6/2020 at 02:14, wrote :
Gravity, Gizmos, and a Grand Theory of Interstellar Travel:

"Woodward’s MEGA drive is different. Instead of propellant, it relies on
electricity, which in space would come from solar panels or a nuclear reactor. His
insight was to use a stack of piezoelectric crystals and some controversial—but he
believes plausible—physics to generate thrust. The stack of crystals, which store
tiny amounts of energy, vibrates tens of thousands of times per second when zapped
with electric current. Some of the vibrational frequencies harmonize as they roll
through the device, and when the oscillations sync up in just the right way, the
small drive lurches forward."

See:

https://www.wired.com/story/mach-eff...tellar-travel/


What are the odds of this actually working?


From the link you provided:
“I'd say there's between a 1-in-10 and 1-in-10,000,000 chance that it’s
real, and probably toward the higher end of that spectrum,” says McDonald.

Yeah, 1 in 10,000,000 seems about right to me.

Woodward is following a path a little similar to that of calmagorod with
his NNP. He doesn't give equations of how much thrust his device should
produce. He does experiments and gets results that are most of the time
close to measurement errors, when some other folks try to redo the same
experiments they usually get less thrust. That all looks much like
artifacts. But then, again from the linked you provided:
“But imagine that one chance; that would be amazing."


Alain Fournier
  #5  
Old September 6th 20, 03:14 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Doctor Who[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 103
Default Mach Thruster Update.

On 9/6/20 3:50 PM, Alain Fournier wrote:
On Sep/6/2020 at 02:14, wrote :
Gravity, Gizmos, and a Grand Theory of Interstellar Travel:

"Woodward’s MEGA drive is different. Instead of propellant, it relies on
electricity, which in space would come from solar panels or a nuclear
reactor. His
insight was to use a stack of piezoelectric crystals and some
controversial—but he
believes plausible—physics to generate thrust. The stack of crystals,
which store
tiny amounts of energy, vibrates tens of thousands of times per second
when zapped
with electric current. Some of the vibrational frequencies harmonize
as they roll
through the device, and when the oscillations sync up in just the
right way, the
small drive lurches forward."

See:

https://www.wired.com/story/mach-eff...tellar-travel/


What are the odds of this actually working?


From the link you provided:
“I'd say there's between a 1-in-10 and 1-in-10,000,000 chance that it’s
real, and probably toward the higher end of that spectrum,” says McDonald.

Yeah, 1 in 10,000,000 seems about right to me.

Woodward is following a path a little similar to that of calmagorod with
his NNP. He doesn't give equations of how much thrust his device should
produce. He does experiments and gets results that are most of the time
close to measurement errors, when some other folks try to redo the same
experiments they usually get less thrust. That all looks much like
artifacts. But then, again from the linked you provided:
“But imagine that one chance; that would be amazing."


Alain Fournier




the important thing in life is to be convinced, but you will regret
everything as soon as the patent is filed and the equations revealed.


  #6  
Old September 6th 20, 06:22 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Alain Fournier[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 548
Default Mach Thruster Update.

On Sep/6/2020 at 10:14, Doctor Who wrote :
On 9/6/20 3:50 PM, Alain Fournier wrote:
On Sep/6/2020 at 02:14, wrote :
Gravity, Gizmos, and a Grand Theory of Interstellar Travel:

"Woodward’s MEGA drive is different. Instead of propellant, it relies on
electricity, which in space would come from solar panels or a nuclear
reactor. His
insight was to use a stack of piezoelectric crystals and some
controversial—but he
believes plausible—physics to generate thrust. The stack of crystals,
which store
tiny amounts of energy, vibrates tens of thousands of times per
second when zapped
with electric current. Some of the vibrational frequencies harmonize
as they roll
through the device, and when the oscillations sync up in just the
right way, the
small drive lurches forward."

See:

https://www.wired.com/story/mach-eff...tellar-travel/


What are the odds of this actually working?


*From the link you provided:
“I'd say there's between a 1-in-10 and 1-in-10,000,000 chance that
it’s real, and probably toward the higher end of that spectrum,” says
McDonald.

Yeah, 1 in 10,000,000 seems about right to me.

Woodward is following a path a little similar to that of calmagorod
with his NNP. He doesn't give equations of how much thrust his device
should produce. He does experiments and gets results that are most of
the time close to measurement errors, when some other folks try to
redo the same experiments they usually get less thrust. That all looks
much like artifacts. But then, again from the linked you provided:
“But imagine that one chance; that would be amazing."


Alain Fournier




the important thing in life is to be convinced, but you will regret
everything as soon as the patent is filed and the equations revealed.


If and when the equations are revealed, I will not regret anything and I
will rejoice. As for the patent, I don't really care about it if it
isn't backed up by a rocket that actually can move large objects around
and/or equations showing why it should work. I am not against a
fantastic improvement in space travel, it is just that I will not
believe in it until someone gives me a reason to believe in it.


Alain Fournier
  #7  
Old September 6th 20, 09:57 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Doctor Who[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 103
Default Mach Thruster Update.

On 9/6/20 7:22 PM, Alain Fournier wrote:
On Sep/6/2020 at 10:14, Doctor Who wrote :
On 9/6/20 3:50 PM, Alain Fournier wrote:
On Sep/6/2020 at 02:14, wrote :
Gravity, Gizmos, and a Grand Theory of Interstellar Travel:

"Woodward’s MEGA drive is different. Instead of propellant, it
relies on
electricity, which in space would come from solar panels or a
nuclear reactor. His
insight was to use a stack of piezoelectric crystals and some
controversial—but he
believes plausible—physics to generate thrust. The stack of
crystals, which store
tiny amounts of energy, vibrates tens of thousands of times per
second when zapped
with electric current. Some of the vibrational frequencies harmonize
as they roll
through the device, and when the oscillations sync up in just the
right way, the
small drive lurches forward."

See:

https://www.wired.com/story/mach-eff...tellar-travel/


What are the odds of this actually working?


*From the link you provided:
“I'd say there's between a 1-in-10 and 1-in-10,000,000 chance that
it’s real, and probably toward the higher end of that spectrum,” says
McDonald.

Yeah, 1 in 10,000,000 seems about right to me.

Woodward is following a path a little similar to that of calmagorod
with his NNP. He doesn't give equations of how much thrust his device
should produce. He does experiments and gets results that are most of
the time close to measurement errors, when some other folks try to
redo the same experiments they usually get less thrust. That all
looks much like artifacts. But then, again from the linked you provided:
“But imagine that one chance; that would be amazing."


Alain Fournier




the important thing in life is to be convinced, but you will regret
everything as soon as the patent is filed and the equations revealed.


If and when the equations are revealed, I will not regret anything and I
will rejoice. As for the patent, I don't really care about it if it
isn't backed up by a rocket that actually can move large objects around
and/or equations showing why it should work. I am not against a
fantastic improvement in space travel, it is just that I will not
believe in it until someone gives me a reason to believe in it.


Alain Fournier




I find your lack of faith unbearable :-)



  #8  
Old September 6th 20, 10:42 PM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected][_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default Mach Thruster Update.

On Sunday, September 6, 2020 at 10:22:25 AM UTC-7, Alain Fournier wrote:


the important thing in life is to be convinced, but you will regret
everything as soon as the patent is filed and the equations revealed.

If and when the equations are revealed, I will not regret anything and I
will rejoice. As for the patent, I don't really care about it if it
isn't backed up by a rocket that actually can move large objects around
and/or equations showing why it should work. I am not against a
fantastic improvement in space travel, it is just that I will not
believe in it until someone gives me a reason to believe in it.


Alain Fournier



As for patents, the Navy has filed some strange ones:


Navy's Advanced Aerospace Tech Boss Claims Key 'UFO' Patent Is Operable:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...nt-is-operable



The Secretive Inventor Of The Navy's Bizarre 'UFO Patents' Finally Talks

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...-finally-talks



Either we're on the verge of something really revolutionary, or it's another case of
someone pulling a flim-flam for more money for their pet project(s).
  #9  
Old September 7th 20, 03:15 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Sylvia Else[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 87
Default Mach Thruster Update.

On 06-Sep-20 11:50 pm, Alain Fournier wrote:
On Sep/6/2020 at 02:14, wrote :
Gravity, Gizmos, and a Grand Theory of Interstellar Travel:

"Woodward’s MEGA drive is different. Instead of propellant, it relies on
electricity, which in space would come from solar panels or a nuclear
reactor. His
insight was to use a stack of piezoelectric crystals and some
controversial—but he
believes plausible—physics to generate thrust. The stack of crystals,
which store
tiny amounts of energy, vibrates tens of thousands of times per second
when zapped
with electric current. Some of the vibrational frequencies harmonize
as they roll
through the device, and when the oscillations sync up in just the
right way, the
small drive lurches forward."

See:

https://www.wired.com/story/mach-eff...tellar-travel/


What are the odds of this actually working?


From the link you provided:
“I'd say there's between a 1-in-10 and 1-in-10,000,000 chance that it’s
real, and probably toward the higher end of that spectrum,” says McDonald.

Yeah, 1 in 10,000,000 seems about right to me.

Woodward is following a path a little similar to that of calmagorod with
his NNP. He doesn't give equations of how much thrust his device should
produce. He does experiments and gets results that are most of the time
close to measurement errors, when some other folks try to redo the same
experiments they usually get less thrust. That all looks much like
artifacts. But then, again from the linked you provided:
“But imagine that one chance; that would be amazing."


Alain Fournier


It all seems to involve highly speculative theory. At this stage, it
would make more sense to try to design experiments sensitive enough to
detect the effect, than to try to design working thrusters using it.

Sylvia.
  #10  
Old September 7th 20, 04:05 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Greg \(Strider\) Moore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 752
Default Mach Thruster Update.

wrote in message
...

Gravity, Gizmos, and a Grand Theory of Interstellar Travel:

"Woodward’s MEGA drive is different. Instead of propellant, it relies on
electricity, which in space would come from solar panels or a nuclear
reactor. His
insight was to use a stack of piezoelectric crystals and some
controversial—but he
believes plausible—physics to generate thrust. The stack of crystals, which
store
tiny amounts of energy, vibrates tens of thousands of times per second when
zapped
with electric current. Some of the vibrational frequencies harmonize as
they roll
through the device, and when the oscillations sync up in just the right
way, the
small drive lurches forward."

See:

https://www.wired.com/story/mach-eff...tellar-travel/


What are the odds of this actually working?


https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...ic-propulsion/
is where I first read about this. (paywalled sorry).

This is one of those, "I HIGHLY doubt it'll work, but it's just close enough
to the edge of physics as we know it, it's probably worth some cautious
funding."

I think it's sort of like the proposed Alcubierre warp drive, unlikely to
actually work or be practical, but worth some investigation "just in case".




--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net
IT Disaster Response -
https://www.amazon.com/Disaster-Resp...dp/1484221834/

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Gemini 8 stuck thruster JOE HECHT History 21 February 22nd 07 07:25 PM
mach diamonds Lynndel K. Humphreys Space Shuttle 2 October 20th 05 02:20 PM
Titan : Mach 1 you said ? Thierry Amateur Astronomy 10 January 20th 05 06:34 AM
CSM Thruster Arrangement Charleston History 9 June 29th 04 02:03 AM
Double-Layer Ion Thruster sanman Technology 15 August 1st 03 07:13 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.