[AR] Re: NASA test of quantum vacuum plasma thruster (was "Anyone
- From: Peter Fairbrother <zenadsl6186@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 16:48:21 +0100
On 07/08/14 17:17, John Schilling wrote:
[...]
Basically, this is postulating an "Aetheric Propellor", which is an
interesting thought experiment at least, and not an entirely ridiculous
notion. Also, I think Edison used one of those to conquer the Martians,
so there's heritage :-)
Roughly speaking, if you try to use a perfectly efficient Aetheric
Propellor to accelerate relative to the local Aether, your thrust to
power ratio is limited to: T/P <= 1/Vr, where Vr is velocity relative
to the Aether, thrust power and velocity in consistent units.
If, on the other hand, you aren't trying to accelerate relative to
the Aether, you theoretically don't need any power at all. You are
just engaged in Aetherobraking, though there may be some overhead
load associated with engaging your Aetheric Anchor.
The experimental results presented by Brady et al, are mostly consistent
with a 100% efficient Aetheric Propellor trying to fly upstream in an
Aether flow at 500-700 km/s. That's kind of interesting at first glance,
what with the CMB having a local velocity of ~370 km/s. Going with thus
hypothesis, they are getting maybe +/-20% variation depending on how
their gadget was aligned with the Aether Flux during the working day, and
their one anomalously high result came when they worked late into the
night and inadvertently deployed a simple Aetheric Anchor.
Damn; now you've got me thinking about trajectory optimization using an
Aetheric Anchor in a unidirectional 370 km/s Aether Flux. Can we maybe
deploy an Aether Sail instead, and get some side force? Need to think
on what we would use for a keel...
Heh :)
Or, can we just dip a well-anchored Aether Turbine into the flux, and
go back to solving the energy crisis? Well, at least until we find
the Earth being dragged off towards Leo at 370 km/s; Greenpeace is
going to be a nuisance on that one.
Rofl. Well not literally, I have two recently-broken ribs, but otherwise ...
The big problem comes when we look at the theoretical predictions, and
the secondhand reporting of the Chinese experiments. The claimed T:P
ratio of 0.4 N/kW is inconsistent with any relative velocity greater
than 2.5 km/s.
Which could be a low velocity at near right angles to a "unidirectional
370 km/s Aether Flux", or even minus a lot in the opposite direction -
the angle of attack is all-important, and we don't know what it was.
OK, some of the old theories had an "Aetheric Drag"
that brought the local Aether to rest relative to any large mass in
the vicinity; that was thoroughly disproven w/re the Luminiferous
Aether,
?? the very existence of "the Luminiferous Aether" was supposedly
disproven (though see my length-of-a-piece-of-string post), I don't know
about disproving aetheric drag though ??
but maybe can be resurrected for our newfangled Quantum Plasma
Aether. That gives us Aether stationary in the geocentric reference
frame, and they can make highly efficient Aetheric Propellors in the
laboratory.
Which will proceed to crap out as they accelerate past 2.5 km/s, making
them pretty much useless for space propulsion. Oops. That might have
been worth mentioning in the paper.
Mind you, for that to be going on here, we'd need to daisy-chain a whole
lot of implausibilities:
A team that is trying to build a reactionless drive, stumbling
onto an Aetheric Propellor instead
A rose, by any other name ..
Their getting better than 50% efficiency on their first try of
a gadget they didn't know they were building
Perceived efficiency depends on the angle of the dangle ..
Their Aetheric Propellor, at 50% efficiency, just happening to
produce a thrust right at the fuzzy edge of the error bar on
their thrust stand
Their one and only try of a novel configuration (TE01 on the
truncated-cone thruster?) just happening to come on the one and
only time they were operating in a reversed Aetheric Flux
And, neither this team, nor the Chinese, nor the theoreticians
who started the whole thing, recognizing or bothering to mention
that the reactionless drive they were trying to build would violate
conservation of energy and any conservative Aetheric Propellor they
might stumble into would have severe velocity limits that would
severely limit its utility for space travel.
I think I'm going to go with systematic experimental error on the edge
of the error bar as being the more likely explanation.
Oh dear - but so am I.
Though it would
be fun to see someone take a serious look at the prospects for Aetheric
Propellors, Anchors, Sails, and Turbines if some variant of this proposed
mechanism could be consciously applied in that direction.
Yeehaw! Or perhaps Huzzah!, or Hooray!!as it all seems a bit steampunk
.. though the Enterprise impulse drive seems similar too.
--Peter Fairbrother
Other related posts: