New type of engine using arbitrary waveform drive for producing forward
motion.....experimental or is it just mental ?

On 17/02/2021 08:12, jon wrote:
New type of engine using arbitrary waveform drive for producing forward
motion.....experimental or is it just mental ?



How is this different from the Infinite Improbability Drive?

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 17/02/2021 08:12, jon wrote:
New type of engine using arbitrary waveform drive for producing forward
motion.....experimental or is it just mental ?


Have you tried reversing the polarity of the neutron flux?

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On 17/02/2021 08:56, Martin Brown wrote:
On 17/02/2021 08:12, jon wrote:

New type of engine using arbitrary waveform drive for producing forward
motion.....experimental or is it just mental ?

Have you tried reversing the polarity of the neutron flux?

Nah, the capacitor might explode.

--
Spike

On 17/02/2021 08:12, jon wrote:
New type of engine using arbitrary waveform drive for producing forward
motion.....experimental or is it just mental ?


A link or it's just a figment of your imagination ...

On 17/02/2021 11:16, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Wed, 17 Feb 2021 11:11:22 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

On 17 Feb 2021 at 10:48:40 GMT, Jethro_uk
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Feb 2021 08:12:16 +0000, jon wrote:

New type of engine using arbitrary waveform drive for producing
forward motion.....experimental or is it just mental ?

Very first thought was "Em-Drive"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EmDrive

Looking at that, not sure why both ends have a hole. Send all the
microwave radiation out of one end and you should get a thrust. See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_anomaly

Read the third para about what is generally accepted as the explanantion
for the anomaly - namely that the spacecraft is emitting thermal
radiation more in one direction than another.

Of course, the thrust is miniscule.

When you emit radiation like that you should get a thrust as you are
sending out photons, which equtes to mass according to Albert.

There was a brief suggestion - presumably debunked - that the energy was
subtly changing the space-time in the cavity and shifting the centre of
gravity ever so slightly to create thrust.

I am nowhere near well versed enough in the physics to know if that's
even worthy of consideration, but energy has to go somewhere. If not into
moving the thing then at least warming it up.

I wonder what the possibilities are of getting to build some sort of base
on one side of an asteroid, and fire fusion bombs on the other to create
thrust. (Anyone remember Space 1999 ?)

Many years ago one of the well known science fiction writers (I can't
recall which) wrote a story involving large "rockets" with massively
thick bases, powered by repeatedly dropping and detonating atom bombs
under the bases.

On 17/02/2021 12:51, Steve Walker wrote:
On 17/02/2021 11:16, Jethro_uk wrote:

I wonder what the possibilities are of getting to build some sort of base
on one side of an asteroid, and fire fusion bombs on the other to create
thrust. (Anyone remember Space 1999 ?)

Many years ago one of the well known science fiction writers (I can't
recall which) wrote a story involving large "rockets" with massively
thick bases, powered by repeatedly dropping and detonating atom bombs
under the bases.

Heinlein but it was seriously proposed and examined as Project Orion at
one point when it was nuclear ppowered everything in fashion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projec...ear_propulsion)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_pulse_propulsion

Apart from the radioactive fallout it was a plausible scheme.

ISTR there is a video somewhere of a scalemodel mockup powered by
dropping conventional high explosives out of the back. Here :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8Sv5y6iHUM

The ones about half way through are as good as it gets!

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On 17/02/2021 13:05, Martin Brown wrote:
On 17/02/2021 12:51, Steve Walker wrote:
On 17/02/2021 11:16, Jethro_uk wrote:

I wonder what the possibilities are of getting to build some sort of
base
on one side of an asteroid, and fire fusion bombs on the other to create
thrust. (Anyone remember Space 1999 ?)

Many years ago one of the well known science fiction writers (I can't
recall which) wrote a story involving large "rockets" with massively
thick bases, powered by repeatedly dropping and detonating atom bombs
under the bases.

Heinlein but it was seriously proposed and examined as Project Orion at
one point when it was nuclear ppowered everything in fashion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projec...ear_propulsion)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_pulse_propulsion

Apart from the radioactive fallout it was a plausible scheme.

ISTR there is a video somewhere of a scalemodel mockup powered by
dropping conventional high explosives out of the back. Here :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8Sv5y6iHUM

The ones about half way through are as good as it gets!

I did actually think that it was Heinlein, but wasn't sure.

There has always been a huge crossover between science-fiction and real
science, so it's not surprising that it was a real proposal.

In message , Martin Brown
writes
On 17/02/2021 12:51, Steve Walker wrote:
On 17/02/2021 11:16, Jethro_uk wrote:

I wonder what the possibilities are of getting to build some sort of base
on one side of an asteroid, and fire fusion bombs on the other to create
thrust. (Anyone remember Space 1999 ?)
Many years ago one of the well known science fiction writers (I
can't recall which) wrote a story involving large "rockets" with
massively thick bases, powered by repeatedly dropping and detonating
atom bombs under the bases.

Heinlein but it was seriously proposed and examined as Project Orion at
one point when it was nuclear ppowered everything in fashion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projec...ear_propulsion)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_pulse_propulsion

Apart from the radioactive fallout it was a plausible scheme.

ISTR there is a video somewhere of a scalemodel mockup powered by
dropping conventional high explosives out of the back. Here :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8Sv5y6iHUM

The ones about half way through are as good as it gets!

Sailing the solar wind has legs but getting back could be a problem.


--
Tim Lamb

Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , Martin Brown
writes
On 17/02/2021 12:51, Steve Walker wrote:
On 17/02/2021 11:16, Jethro_uk wrote:

I wonder what the possibilities are of getting to build some sort of base
on one side of an asteroid, and fire fusion bombs on the other to create
thrust. (Anyone remember Space 1999 ?)
Many years ago one of the well known science fiction writers (I
can't recall which) wrote a story involving large "rockets" with
massively thick bases, powered by repeatedly dropping and detonating
atom bombs under the bases.

Heinlein but it was seriously proposed and examined as Project Orion at
one point when it was nuclear ppowered everything in fashion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projec...ear_propulsion)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_pulse_propulsion

Apart from the radioactive fallout it was a plausible scheme.

ISTR there is a video somewhere of a scalemodel mockup powered by
dropping conventional high explosives out of the back. Here :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8Sv5y6iHUM

The ones about half way through are as good as it gets!

Sailing the solar wind has legs but getting back could be a problem.



Tacking. After all, its what sailing ships do to go upwind... ;-)

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 17/02/2021 13:18, Steve Walker wrote:

There has always been a huge crossover between science-fiction and real
science, so it's not surprising that it was a real proposal.

Many of the toys we have today like communicators and tablets first made
their appearance in Star Trek and 2001. Bit short on moon bases as yet.

And there is still no Hilton in Earth orbit.

Though I did manage to visit the original set used for 2001 when it was
the Kubrick exhibition at the Design Centre last year. They had many of
the models used as well as some of his very exotic lens collection.
(and also material from all the other famous films he did)

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

In message
,
Tim+ writes
Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , Martin Brown
writes
On 17/02/2021 12:51, Steve Walker wrote:
On 17/02/2021 11:16, Jethro_uk wrote:

I wonder what the possibilities are of getting to build some sort of base
on one side of an asteroid, and fire fusion bombs on the other to create
thrust. (Anyone remember Space 1999 ?)
Many years ago one of the well known science fiction writers (I
can't recall which) wrote a story involving large "rockets" with
massively thick bases, powered by repeatedly dropping and detonating
atom bombs under the bases.

Heinlein but it was seriously proposed and examined as Project Orion at
one point when it was nuclear ppowered everything in fashion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projec...ear_propulsion)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_pulse_propulsion

Apart from the radioactive fallout it was a plausible scheme.

ISTR there is a video somewhere of a scalemodel mockup powered by
dropping conventional high explosives out of the back. Here :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8Sv5y6iHUM

The ones about half way through are as good as it gets!

Sailing the solar wind has legs but getting back could be a problem.



Tacking. After all, its what sailing ships do to go upwind... ;-)

I don't think it works without a medium to stop the vessel being pushed
sideways. A big keel won't do much in a vacuum.

--
Tim Lamb

Tim Lamb wrote:
In message
,
Tim+ writes
Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , Martin Brown
writes
On 17/02/2021 12:51, Steve Walker wrote:
On 17/02/2021 11:16, Jethro_uk wrote:

I wonder what the possibilities are of getting to build some sort of base
on one side of an asteroid, and fire fusion bombs on the other to create
thrust. (Anyone remember Space 1999 ?)
Many years ago one of the well known science fiction writers (I
can't recall which) wrote a story involving large "rockets" with
massively thick bases, powered by repeatedly dropping and detonating
atom bombs under the bases.

Heinlein but it was seriously proposed and examined as Project Orion at
one point when it was nuclear ppowered everything in fashion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projec...ear_propulsion)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_pulse_propulsion

Apart from the radioactive fallout it was a plausible scheme.

ISTR there is a video somewhere of a scalemodel mockup powered by
dropping conventional high explosives out of the back. Here :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8Sv5y6iHUM

The ones about half way through are as good as it gets!

Sailing the solar wind has legs but getting back could be a problem.



Tacking. After all, its what sailing ships do to go upwind... ;-)

I don't think it works without a medium to stop the vessel being pushed
sideways. A big keel won't do much in a vacuum.


Good point. ;-)

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 17/02/2021 22:21, Tim+ wrote:
Tim Lamb wrote:
In message
,
Tim+ writes
Tim Lamb wrote:

Sailing the solar wind has legs but getting back could be a problem.



Tacking. After all, its what sailing ships do to go upwind... ;-)

I don't think it works without a medium to stop the vessel being pushed
sideways. A big keel won't do much in a vacuum.


Good point. ;-)

Sad point.

OTOH we want to go away from this star, then stop when we arrive at the
next one...

Andy