|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Magnetohydrodynamic Space Drive
On of my concepts is to use the solar corona gas as fuel for
a true space drive. I looked at the topic and found that records, wiki, call it impractical. I will point out that plasma production energy costs appear the cause of impracticality. My space drive is designed to use free coronal plasma as the fuel. It also warns of heating of the interior "chute" causes loss of physical integrity. I would use a suffiecient ablative ceramic, nonconductive, to line the central plasma chute. Given free plasma allows a huge gain in efficiency. It is to be a cometary ejection form of orbit to free interstellar space. The energy source to make a magnetic field is quite obvious high temperature solar cells. Why do I bother? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Magnetohydrodynamic Space Drive
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Magnetohydrodynamic Space Drive
On Saturday, October 7, 2017 at 11:57:38 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On of my concepts is to use the solar corona gas as fuel for a true space drive. I looked at the topic and found that records, wiki, call it impractical. I will point out that plasma production energy costs appear the cause of impracticality. My space drive is designed to use free coronal plasma as the fuel. It also warns of heating of the interior "chute" causes loss of physical integrity. I would use a suffiecient ablative ceramic, nonconductive, to line the central plasma chute. Given free plasma allows a huge gain in efficiency. It is to be a cometary ejection form of orbit to free interstellar space. The energy source to make a magnetic field is quite obvious high temperature solar cells. Why do I bother? Seems like if your talking about "magnetohydrodynamic", you could also include geoengineering an asteroid or small moon for artificial Van Allen, then rejuvenate the small body via what Carl Sagan suggested |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Magnetohydrodynamic Space Drive
On Tuesday, October 10, 2017 at 11:56:14 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Saturday, October 7, 2017 at 11:57:38 AM UTC-4, wrote: On of my concepts is to use the solar corona gas as fuel for a true space drive. I looked at the topic and found that records, wiki, call it impractical. I will point out that plasma production energy costs appear the cause of impracticality. My space drive is designed to use free coronal plasma as the fuel. It also warns of heating of the interior "chute" causes loss of physical integrity. I would use a suffiecient ablative ceramic, nonconductive, to line the central plasma chute. Given free plasma allows a huge gain in efficiency. It is to be a cometary ejection form of orbit to free interstellar space. The energy source to make a magnetic field is quite obvious high temperature solar cells. Why do I bother? Seems like if your talking about "magnetohydrodynamic", you could also include geoengineering an asteroid or small moon for artificial Van Allen, then rejuvenate the small body via what Carl Sagan suggested better than that. Pretend the Rocky Mountains are a plate like asteroid and calculate the gravity pull at a disk edge like geometry. Then calculate the earths gravity for a Rocky Mountain free Earth. Pretend you are at Boulder Colorado. Now add the asteroid gravity vector. Now we have an obvious gravity anomaly. The question. What type of glider design can fly using this horizontal Rocky Mountain gravity vector? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Magnetohydrodynamic Space Drive
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Magnetohydrodynamic Space Drive
Gravity doesn't work like that. Are you saying an asteroid has no gravity? My anomaly is stated using an allowed two body system. If the asteroid was just overhead would its gravity pull cause a net change in total pull? In my thinking why would we be restricted to overhead vector two body system? Newton's gravity is a spherical geometry theory. How would you calculate a disk asteroid gravity map? Remember mass does not attenuate another mass's gravity field, you can literally use a set of small spheres filling the sphere of Earth to estimate Earths gravity pull. The same goes for a disk asteroid. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Magnetohydrodynamic Space Drive
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Magnetohydrodynamic Space Drive
On Wednesday, October 11, 2017 at 1:00:17 PM UTC-4, Fred J. McCall wrote:
wrote: Gravity doesn't work like that. Are you saying an asteroid has no gravity? No, I'm saying what I said and you're still a nitwit loon. -- Making the Gravity Anomaly Glider does not have to be an aviation record design. It would be allowed to use helium lift boosting and it could be unmanned. The question becomes the restriction of wind conditions. Mybe 1 to 2 mph wind would be allowed. Takeoff would be with a drop-able gas motor-propeller. Balloonists likely have no notice of this anomaly because it would be felt as a slow wind vector. The basic test requirement is for the Glider to be heaver than air. I have a design for an inflatable aircraft. It allows easy rubber/pvc/plastic welding of the wing in perfect aerodynamic form. My only need is to figure the exact airfoil form for it. Maybe a flying wing also. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Magnetohydrodynamic Space Drive
On Oct/12/2017 at 10:26 AM, wrote :
On Wednesday, October 11, 2017 at 1:00:17 PM UTC-4, Fred J. McCall wrote: wrote: Gravity doesn't work like that. Are you saying an asteroid has no gravity? No, I'm saying what I said and you're still a nitwit loon. -- Making the Gravity Anomaly Glider does not have to be an aviation record design. It would be allowed to use helium lift boosting and it could be unmanned. The question becomes the restriction of wind conditions. Mybe 1 to 2 mph wind would be allowed. Takeoff would be with a drop-able gas motor-propeller. Balloonists likely have no notice of this anomaly because it would be felt as a slow wind vector. That's a cool idea you have there. Unfortunately it won't work. No it wouldn't be felt as a slow wind vector. It merely changes very slightly the direction of vertical. The atmosphere experiences the same small offset of the direction of vertical, meaning that air pressure decreases the most in a direction that is not quite equal to the direction of the centre of the Earth. So instead of falling towards the centre of Earth you fall in a direction a little different that happens to be the direction of air pressure decrease, like always. From the glider's point of view, the exact position of the centre of Earth doesn't matter much. What is important is the direction of gravitational verticality. Note that the direction of gravitation verticality changes because the world is somewhat a ball. So when you move around the direction of the pull from Earth changes. That doesn't help the glider because the direction of the decrease in air pressure is always the same as the direction of gravitational verticality. Alain Fournier |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
China is testing an em drive right now in space | jacob navia | Policy | 1 | December 24th 16 02:27 AM |
Antigravity space drive is here | [email protected] | Misc | 1 | November 5th 09 06:44 PM |
Chinese Say They're Building 'Impossible' Space Drive | [email protected] | Policy | 8 | October 2nd 08 11:36 PM |
Space without space: World Hologram & Warp Drive | Jack Sarfatti | Astronomy Misc | 7 | August 9th 07 10:29 AM |
Safe space habitat Was:the drive to explore | Earl Colby Pottinger | Policy | 78 | July 10th 05 11:30 AM |