The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. On the Lighter Side
  3. New Theories
  4. Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 17   Go Down

Reactionless Drives Possible ?

  • 334 Replies
  • 67660 Views
  • 3 Tags

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8082
  • Activity:
    1.5%
  • Thanked: 514 times
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #220 on: 05/12/2018 22:29:10 »
Quote from: Professor Mega-Mind on 05/12/2018 17:46:07
This will release 1 GJ of kinetic energy into the target each second .

Here is the part of my post that you are ignoring:

Quote from: Kryptid on 05/12/2018 06:31:52
You want all of the electrons to be accelerated at once, but the problem is that there simply aren't enough photons coming in fast enough to get the job done. You could get more photons either by lowering the energy available for each photon while keeping the laser power constant (which will make each electron move slower) or you can increase the total power of the laser instead.

If you want all 0.17 kilograms (1.866 x 1029) of electrons to be accelerated to 99.876% the speed of light in one second, then the laser will need to provide 10 MeV photons at a rate of 1.866 x 1029 per second. That requires a total laser power of 298,966,149 gigawatts.

There is a hard upper limit on how many electrons you can accelerate to 99.876% of light speed in one second when you only have a gigajoule per second of power to work with.

That mass happens to be 0.583 micrograms of electrons.

So you want to accelerate a mass of electrons up to 99.876% of light speed in one second when you apply a gigajoule of energy in that one second? Sure, you can do that. However, you are limited to that tiny 0.583 micrograms. Any more mass than that and you'll have to wait more than one second to get the amount of energy you need. Even a human egg cell is more than six times more massive than such a cluster of electrons.
Logged
 



Offline Professor Mega-Mind (OP)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 681
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #221 on: 06/12/2018 00:17:19 »
................Simple Logic .
It doesn't matter if it's called one King Kong Ball , it's "one electron for one H.E.X-ray photon" ! The the photons bounce back as visible light , the electrons bounce forward as relativistic electrons .  Impact at the target is .99 GJ ( 278kw.hr. ) , per second .
Note-In practice , a longer "tube" will allow for more complete energy transfer .
P.M.
Logged
 

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8082
  • Activity:
    1.5%
  • Thanked: 514 times
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #222 on: 06/12/2018 01:15:43 »
Quote from: Professor Mega-Mind on 06/12/2018 00:17:19
"one electron for one H.E.X-ray photon"

Which is why you're limited to moving 0.583 micrograms per second.
Logged
 

Offline Professor Mega-Mind (OP)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 681
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #223 on: 06/12/2018 03:06:30 »
.....................OOOOOR !
 25 micrograms accelerated to.9c.
There are many ways to skin this cat .  Bottom line , 1GJ thermal energy  ( HEX-ray ) in , 1GJ kinetic energy ( relativistic electrons ) out.
This actually crushes the "Epstein Drive" , and gives us "Interstellar" .
Ain't group-minds grand ?
P.M.   
Logged
 

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8082
  • Activity:
    1.5%
  • Thanked: 514 times
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #224 on: 06/12/2018 04:54:09 »
Quote from: Professor Mega-Mind on 06/12/2018 03:06:30
25 micrograms accelerated to.9c.

If that impacted the receiver over a period of one second, the resulting force would be about 7 pounds. Hardly the stick of dynamite you keep going on about. You'd also have to have a laser with a power a bit over 5 gigawatts to get it up to that speed in a single second. I'm not going to bother showing you the calculations, since you'd ignore them anyway.
« Last Edit: 06/12/2018 04:57:45 by Kryptid »
Logged
 



Offline Professor Mega-Mind (OP)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 681
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #225 on: 06/12/2018 05:37:49 »
...............Your own crud !
.583 micrograms at .9c gives a kinetic energy of 21,250,350 joules
That's 21 sticks of dynamite , but ; it SHOULD be 999 .  Read Replies number 221&223 again , and reconfigure your calculations . 
Get 'em Scotty's nephew !
P.M.
Logged
 

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8082
  • Activity:
    1.5%
  • Thanked: 514 times
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #226 on: 06/12/2018 06:03:17 »
Quote from: Professor Mega-Mind on 06/12/2018 05:37:49
.583 micrograms at .9c gives a kinetic energy of 21,250,350 joules

You used a Newtonian equation when you should have used a relativistic one instead.

Quote
That's 21 sticks of dynamite

Energy is not force.
« Last Edit: 06/12/2018 06:22:35 by Kryptid »
Logged
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 31101
  • Activity:
    11.5%
  • Thanked: 1291 times
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #227 on: 06/12/2018 07:26:11 »
Quote from: Bored chemist on 05/12/2018 18:42:52
What happens to the track of the centre of the ball?

BTW, I'm going to keep asking that question until you actually answer it.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline Professor Mega-Mind (OP)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 681
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #228 on: 06/12/2018 12:13:28 »
Let’s drop the photon energy down to 1MeV , go ahead and raise the # of photons to #×10th 30th .  What-ever # you use , Reply # 223 must apply .  The electrons soak up 1GJ per second , and impact with 1GJ per sec.  Triiiick !
P.M.
Logged
 



Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8082
  • Activity:
    1.5%
  • Thanked: 514 times
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #229 on: 06/12/2018 15:24:07 »
Quote from: Professor Mega-Mind on 06/12/2018 12:13:28
Let’s drop the photon energy down to 1MeV , go ahead and raise the # of photons to #×10th 30th .  What-ever # you use , Reply # 223 must apply .  The electrons soak up 1GJ per second , and impact with 1GJ per sec.  Triiiick !
P.M.

Actually, it would only be 0.7965 gigajoules per second because electrons can only absorb 79.65% of the photon's energy when the photon is at 1 MeV.
Logged
 

Offline Professor Mega-Mind (OP)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 681
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #230 on: 06/12/2018 17:55:23 »
Fine , dump the reflected ~20% EMR energy out the back .  1 MeV is a much easier energy for labs to work with .
P.M.
Logged
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 31101
  • Activity:
    11.5%
  • Thanked: 1291 times
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #231 on: 06/12/2018 19:05:40 »
Quote from: Bored chemist on 05/12/2018 18:42:52
What happens to the track of the centre of the ball?

BTW, I'm going to keep asking that question until you actually answer it.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline Professor Mega-Mind (OP)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 681
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #232 on: 06/12/2018 20:36:54 »
...........Mosquito Bite Itch .
The answer was veiled in # 216 !
It launches the ball , instead of the baby !
By the way , the electrons won't be exploding !
P.M.
Logged
 



Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 31101
  • Activity:
    11.5%
  • Thanked: 1291 times
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #233 on: 06/12/2018 20:44:13 »
What happens to the track of the centre of the ball?
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8082
  • Activity:
    1.5%
  • Thanked: 514 times
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #234 on: 06/12/2018 22:38:03 »
Quote from: Professor Mega-Mind on 06/12/2018 12:13:28
Let’s drop the photon energy down to 1MeV , go ahead and raise the # of photons to #×10th 30th .

By the way, dividing the energy of each photon by ten will only increase the number of photons per second ten-fold as well. So the actual number is on the order of 1021 photons per second, not 1030.

Quote from: Professor Mega-Mind on 06/12/2018 17:55:23
Fine , dump the reflected ~20% EMR energy out the back .  1 MeV is a much easier energy for labs to work with .
P.M.

Okay, you now have ten times as many electrons per second flowing through the engine since you have 1 MeV photons instead of 10 MeV. However, each electron now has less energy (and a lower relativistic mass) than when there were 10 MeV photons. The laser light reflected back will also hit harder than before when it returns to the laser. All of these factors come together to make the thrust exactly the same as in my first calculation: 3.3356 newtons.

You have neither gained nor lost anything by modifying the photon energy.
Logged
 

Offline Professor Mega-Mind (OP)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 681
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #235 on: 07/12/2018 01:14:04 »
PRACTICALITY for research .  By the way , you can now change the quantity to 1 Godzilla Ball of electrons .
Note-You don't let the reflected EMR "hit" , you let it escape out of the exhaust .
P.M.
Logged
 

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 8082
  • Activity:
    1.5%
  • Thanked: 514 times
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #236 on: 07/12/2018 05:41:13 »
Quote from: Professor Mega-Mind on 07/12/2018 01:14:04
PRACTICALITY for research .  By the way , you can now change the quantity to 1 Godzilla Ball of electrons .

Godzilla Ball meaning what, exactly?

Quote
Note-You don't let the reflected EMR "hit" , you let it escape out of the exhaust .
P.M.

Then what you now have is a reaction engine, since you are letting propellant (in the form of the reflected light) out of the ship.
Logged
 



Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 31101
  • Activity:
    11.5%
  • Thanked: 1291 times
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #237 on: 07/12/2018 09:47:59 »
What happens to the track of the centre of the ball?
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline Professor Mega-Mind (OP)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 681
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #238 on: 07/12/2018 11:59:53 »
L-A-B W-O-R-K !
The point is to make it easy to create the dang thing in the first place !
P.M.
Logged
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 31101
  • Activity:
    11.5%
  • Thanked: 1291 times
Re: Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« Reply #239 on: 07/12/2018 13:25:36 »
Quote from: Professor Mega-Mind on 07/12/2018 11:59:53
L-A-B W-O-R-K !
The point is to make it easy to create the dang thing in the first place !
P.M.
No
Before you do the lab work, you check to see if it is already known to be impossible.
"A couple of months in the laboratory can frequently save a couple of hours in the library."
From
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Frank_Westheimer

What happens to the track of the centre of the ball?
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 



  • Print
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 17   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags: new space engine ?  / ff to reply#91  / pg.5 . 
 
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.589 seconds with 67 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.