h a l f b a k e r yWhy on earth would you want that many gazelles anyway?
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,
|
|
|
The maximum solar furnace temperature is the same as the temperature of the surface of the Sun, and it doesn't matter how much it is concentrated.
I think it is only about 5000C.
The energy in light depends on the frequency, and a higher frequency means a higher temperature can be reached.
So
why not increase the effective potential of a solar furnace by "blue shifting" the light i.e. moving the part to be heated at very high speeds towards the source of the light?
[link]
|
| |
Yes, that should work for a few minutes. Until you impact the sun. |
|
| |
Just out of curiosity, why would you need a tempurature hotter than 5,000 C? Are you planning on boiling tungsten? (5,900 C). |
|
| |
seriously, that would work, but i just
don't know why you would want to. |
|
| |
This is the funniest thing I've heard all week. Fantastic. |
|
| |
First example: Nuclear fusion requires temperatures higher than 5000C. Although I am not sure that this kind of temperature could be reached.
Second example: To see what happens. Some research is being done, right now, for temperatures at around 10,000C. But this uses a different method to generate the high temperatures.
[ldischler] of course the moving part doesn't need to continuously travel towards the Sun. |
|
| |
Here's hoping the breaking thrusters fired, otherwise you might find yourself stuck in San Francisco in the 80's. |
|
| |
Lol :)
The light from sun to object would be blue shifted, but so would the light from object back to sun. Seems to me that standard black box radiation rules will still apply, thus the object will continue to be limited to sun temp.
In any case, that object is going to have to move quite quickly for nuclear fusion.. very close to the speed of light from its point of view. |
|
| |