|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Mag-beam to Mars?
In this article on MSNBC.com:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3217961/ "At the start of the trip, the [near-] Earth station would focus its particle beam on the magnetic sail of a Mars-bound space taxi, pushing it to speeds of tens of thousands of miles an hour. During the approach to Mars, the Red Planet station would fire its own beam to decelerate the spacecraft." Nowhere is mention made that this particle beam causes any "equal and opposite" action at the particle-beam source. If this near-Earth station is blasting a particle beam into space that causes a spaceship to accelerate (momentum transfer) to "tens of thousands" of mph ... what is the source doing to maintain position or orbital velocity? Am I missing something? Jon |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:54:36 -0500, Jon Berndt wrote:
In this article on MSNBC.com: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3217961/ "At the start of the trip, the [near-] Earth station would focus its particle beam on the magnetic sail of a Mars-bound space taxi, pushing it to That JPL/Lockmart JIMO design is sure getting a lot of abuse...last I looked that graphic had been shanghaied as the carrier craft of a student tripartite Kuiper Belt probe. Now it's a space station.... JimO is gaining weight... Nowhere is mention made that this particle beam causes any "equal and opposite" action at the particle-beam source. If this near-Earth station is blasting a particle beam into space that causes a spaceship to accelerate (momentum transfer) to "tens of thousands" of mph ... what is the source doing to maintain position or orbital velocity? Am I missing something? Just handwave in electrodynamic tethers and you can devise a truly Rube Goldbergian propulsion scheme. Jon -- Chuck Stewart "Anime-style catgirls: Threat? Menace? Or just studying algebra?" |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1 In article , "Jon Berndt" wrote: In this article on MSNBC.com: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3217961/ "At the start of the trip, the [near-] Earth station would focus its particle beam on the magnetic sail of a Mars-bound space taxi, pushing it to speeds of tens of thousands of miles an hour. During the approach to Mars, the Red Planet station would fire its own beam to decelerate the spacecraft." Nowhere is mention made that this particle beam causes any "equal and opposite" action at the particle-beam source. If this near-Earth station is blasting a particle beam into space that causes a spaceship to accelerate (momentum transfer) to "tens of thousands" of mph ... what is the source doing to maintain position or orbital velocity? Am I missing something? Jon One of the summaries I saw made mention of an interaction between the particle beams, a type of solar sail and the solar wind. Perhaps that is the key. Alternately, the developers - as theoreticians rather than engineers, forgot that inconvenient little F=ma thing . . . :-) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin) iD8DBQFBcD6ShyAAKqvGGXwRAqATAKCYQq2/Y61aoIKxTW4ph3TDx30GEgCgnTsk iISFCPNkoYXeb3FLeV/0Rkk= =Qidw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D. "Never underestimate the power of human stupidity." ~ Robert A. Heinlein http://www.angryherb.net |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Jon Berndt wrote:
In this article on MSNBC.com: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3217961/ "At the start of the trip, the [near-] Earth station would focus its particle beam on the magnetic sail of a Mars-bound space taxi, pushing it to speeds of tens of thousands of miles an hour. During the approach to Mars, the Red Planet station would fire its own beam to decelerate the spacecraft." Nowhere is mention made that this particle beam causes any "equal and opposite" action at the particle-beam source. If this near-Earth station is blasting a particle beam into space that causes a spaceship to accelerate (momentum transfer) to "tens of thousands" of mph ... what is the source doing to maintain position or orbital velocity? Am I missing something? Jon You hold your foot on the brake while the beam is on. Natch. TBerk |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Jon Berndt wrote:
In this article on MSNBC.com: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3217961/ "At the start of the trip, the [near-] Earth station would focus its particle beam on the magnetic sail of a Mars-bound space taxi, pushing it to speeds of tens of thousands of miles an hour. During the approach to Mars, the Red Planet station would fire its own beam to decelerate the spacecraft." Nowhere is mention made that this particle beam causes any "equal and opposite" action at the particle-beam source. If this near-Earth station is blasting a particle beam into space that causes a spaceship to accelerate (momentum transfer) to "tens of thousands" of mph ... what is the source doing to maintain position or orbital velocity? Am I missing something? If the station is in orbit, then half the time the push is increasing orbital velocity and half the time it is decreasing orbital velocity. The net effect is to push the planet it is orbiting. Alain Fournier |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Jon Berndt wrote:
Nowhere is mention made that this particle beam causes any "equal and opposite" action at the particle-beam source. If this near-Earth station is blasting a particle beam into space that causes a spaceship to accelerate (momentum transfer) to "tens of thousands" of mph ... what is the source doing to maintain position or orbital velocity? Am I missing something? If the transmitter is in orbit around Earth, the net effect would be to displace the orbit slightly, so that the momentum is transfered to the planet. Paul |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Paul F. Dietz" wrote:
Jon Berndt wrote: Nowhere is mention made that this particle beam causes any "equal and opposite" action at the particle-beam source. If this near-Earth station is blasting a particle beam into space that causes a spaceship to accelerate (momentum transfer) to "tens of thousands" of mph ... what is the source doing to maintain position or orbital velocity? Am I missing something? If the transmitter is in orbit around Earth, the net effect would be to displace the orbit slightly, so that the momentum is transfered to the planet. Paul I wonder if the idea is to have complete visibility of the interplanetary probe at all times? This would dictate a polar orbit. Maybe that would work better. Also, for redundancy, perhaps there would be several of the particle-beam generators in orbit about source and destination planets ... Jon |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
- Magnetized Beamed Plasma Propulsion (PI: Dr. Robert M.
Winglee of the University of Washington, Seattle) It's cool to see that Robert Winglee has been awarded a NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts (NIAC) project to develop a plasma beam to push a M2P2 magnetic plasma sail for space propulsion. It sounds like an excellent project which has the potential to revolutionize high delta-V space propulsion. I do want to mention that, in part, the concept develops out of my previous study of a particle-beam pushed magnetic sail, presented at the 2001 STAIF Conference: G. A. Landis, "Interstellar Flight by Particle Beam," presented at the Space Technology and Applications Intenational Forum Albuquerque NM, Feb. 11-15, 2001. American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings Volume 552, pp. 393-396. Coincidentally, the refereed-journal version of this article has just come out: G. Landis, "Interstellar Flight by Particle Beam," Acta Astronautica. Vol 55, No. 11, 931-934 (Dec. 2004). [Copies available by request.] It is published online via ScienceDirect: ( http://authors.elsevier.com/sd/artic...9457650400133X ) -- Geoffrey A. Landis http://www.sff.net/people/geoffrey.landis |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
everybody has knocked this theory of travel alot. But does anyone actual
think it will work... "Chuck Stewart" wrote in message news On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:54:36 -0500, Jon Berndt wrote: In this article on MSNBC.com: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3217961/ "At the start of the trip, the [near-] Earth station would focus its particle beam on the magnetic sail of a Mars-bound space taxi, pushing it to That JPL/Lockmart JIMO design is sure getting a lot of abuse...last I looked that graphic had been shanghaied as the carrier craft of a student tripartite Kuiper Belt probe. Now it's a space station.... JimO is gaining weight... Nowhere is mention made that this particle beam causes any "equal and opposite" action at the particle-beam source. If this near-Earth station is blasting a particle beam into space that causes a spaceship to accelerate (momentum transfer) to "tens of thousands" of mph ... what is the source doing to maintain position or orbital velocity? Am I missing something? Just handwave in electrodynamic tethers and you can devise a truly Rube Goldbergian propulsion scheme. Jon -- Chuck Stewart "Anime-style catgirls: Threat? Menace? Or just studying algebra?" |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Chuck Stewart" wrote in message
news On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:54:36 -0500, Jon Berndt wrote: Nowhere is mention made that this particle beam causes any "equal and opposite" action at the particle-beam source. If this near-Earth station is blasting a particle beam into space that causes a spaceship to accelerate (momentum transfer) to "tens of thousands" of mph ... what is the source doing to maintain position or orbital velocity? Am I missing something? Just handwave in electrodynamic tethers and you can devise a truly Rube Goldbergian propulsion scheme. Bob Forward has the same problem with his laser-propelled sail. His laser array was orbiting Mercury in a plane perpendicular to the path of the receding sail. When the lasers fired, the orbit was displaced slightly from the plane cutting through the center of gravity of Mercury, but the array continued orbiting and didn't leave. See no reason one couldn't do the same from Earth. -- Regards, Mike Combs ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Member of the National Non-sequitur Society. We may not make much sense, but we do like pizza. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Space Calendar - November 26, 2003 | Ron Baalke | Misc | 1 | November 28th 03 09:21 AM |
Space Calendar - September 28, 2003 | Ron Baalke | History | 0 | September 28th 03 08:00 AM |
Space Calendar - August 28, 2003 | Ron Baalke | History | 0 | August 28th 03 05:32 PM |
Space Calendar - August 28, 2003 | Ron Baalke | Misc | 0 | August 28th 03 05:32 PM |
Space Calendar - July 24, 2003 | Ron Baalke | History | 0 | July 24th 03 11:26 PM |