h a l f b a k e r yWe don't have enough art & classy shit around here.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
| |
This is definitely cool, but I'm just wondering
about the shape of the chamber. I know a sphere
would work for the compression, but not the
exhaustion. A cylinder is the natural for the
exhaust but not the compression. Maybe a sphere
with a cone exhaust? Or a portion 1/8th to a 1/2
of a sphere and the pore at the center? |
|
| |
PS Did you ever read about the guys who were
doing this to create fusion? |
|
| |
No i didn't, that sounds interesting but insufficient.
Shape, hmm. Would a short enough pulse of current
act as induction in these circumstances? |
|
| |
// "twanged" piezoelectrically, producing a shock
wave. This shock wave compresses and rarefies the
liquid, forming a cavity which then collapses, leading
to ionisation and the conversion of the liquid to a
plasma.// But does it? |
|
| |
your craft will run out of fuel very, very quickly. |
|
| |
Well, [MB], mantis shrimp can generate plasma by cavitation, so if this doesn't work i strongly suspect there's another way of getting it to work on this scale with similar equipment. |
|
| |
[Voice], yes indeed but there are several answers to that. One is that this is one droplet of liquid and more could be provided, another is that it could still accelerate it up to the velocity required - i envisage this happening in interplanetary space, far from any large masses, and a third is that there is such a thing as the pressure of sunlight. |
|
| |
Taews glands more like. These are not going to cool things down. |
|
| |
Don't. I was put off bread for ages by that talking
loaf with the eyes. |
|
| |
//your craft will run out of fuel very, very quickly.// Any particular reason why? |
|
| |
My guess is that [nineteenthly] intends to harness the energy out there (wheresoever "there" is) for a fuel-less drive. The energy harnessed would provide the mechanism to generate the cavitation. No fluid actually being used as fuel. The geometry of the object would induce a direction of force. Look Ma, no hands! |
|
| |
I guess the hard part is the geometry of the object. But considering that the pioneer anamoly is thought to be created by the geometry of the craft inducing resultant forces in a particular vector, it can't be far from the truth. |
|
| |
// My guess is that [nineteenthly] intends to harness
the energy out there (wheresoever "there" is) for a
fuel-less drive // |
|
| |
That's another idea i'm working on now, to do with
harvesting antimatter, but that's not for here and in
fact there is fuel. No, my thought was to have a
reservoir of powder which was then melted in the
chamber one particle at a time. |
|
| |
Here me out [nine...]. There was a proposition a few years ago, for an M-drive (IIRC). Basically, a cavity magnetron with a certain geometry, similar to a cone, or more acurately, the area described by some conic section. The developer claimed to have achieved a fuel-less drive. Obviously this was greeted with the contempt it did'nt deserve. Quite recently, researchers investigating the pioneer anomaly found that the geometry presented (all things considered) a similar geometry. Low and behold when you plug the numbers in you can describe the acceleration observed. |
|
| |
It must be said that the above anamoly accounts for solar winds, etc, yet still exists. However the accounting for more accurate measurement can never be, uhh, taken into account. Nor can the non-accounting of unknown unknowns. However it does suggest that certain geometries can produce resultant forces that at first seem to violate Newton's Second. At least for the mean time. |
|
| |
Fuel-less drives are a reality. Quite how we can master them, or if we can, is still a matter of some debate. |
|
| |
Clearly there can in a sense be fuelless drives, for
instance there are, i think, monorails which use
magnetohydrodynamic propulsion, but they still have
an energy input. Hmm, i don't know, but i very much
want to find out. I presume you don't mean
something over-unity? |
|
| |
Yes, of course they have an energy input, but they carry no fuel. No-one wants a free ride, (ie not over unity) but you don't need to use fuel in the vehicle in space, you want to use available energy. You would also like to use minimal surface material. Surface material being the materials garnered from your planet of origin. Therefore the use of cavitation may be more appropriate than a 1km^2 solar sail, for example. |
|
| |
Now, I am presuming a few things. Firstly, the examination of the pioneer anomaly, as mentioned earlier, is correct. Secondly, the anomaly produced is more efficient than using solar wind, or other. Both of these are untested but the possibility exists that they are true, or at least one of them is true. |
|
| |
I am not looking for over-unity. But fuel-less drives are very interesting. More specifically, fuel-less drives not using energy from our sun are very interesting. By creating a mini-sun (plasma spheriod) inside a working medium you can maybe create a resultant force, (obviously the jury is still out on this) without the use of onboard fuel. How do we create the energy to create this cavitation. Why, by harnessing the power of the sun, or suns, etc. |
|
| |
I find this interesting because it uses a minimal amount of earth based materials to replicate an effect that uses a lot of earth sourced materials. Not because it is magick. |
|
| |
//There was a proposition a few years ago, for an M-drive// |
|
| |
//Fuel-less drives are a reality.// |
|
| |
Well, in a sense fuel-less motors are a reality, if by motor you mean "physical device for achieving movement of a vehicle" and by fuel you mean "substance contained within said device", because then a sail would be an example, solar or otherwise. |
|
| |
[Bunsen..] in your own words explain, including usage of onboard fuel: |
|
| |
1. The pioneer anomaly.
2. Orbits. (We have to presume they are burning fuel, in your world)
3. Solar sails.
4. Acceleration of galaxies away from any chosen point in the universe.
5. Newton's spinning bucket.
Bear in mind I said nothing of "reactionless" drives.
Granted: the M-drive may be contrived bollocks, as first advertised. I maintain that the principles of cavitation may be included as a power source as a solar sail would be employed, given the correct construction of the device. |
|
| |