[AR] Re: NASA test of quantum vacuum plasma thruster (was "Anyone heard of this?")
- From: "Monroe L. King Jr." <monroe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2014 17:47:11 -0700
There is the theory Hawking Radiation (which was mostly proven wrong)
But there is the radiation emitted from black holes. It takes a hell of
a gravity well to produce it. But as the particles reach the horizon
it's like there it produces a particle and an anti particle and one
falls over the horizon and the other escapes if they do no annihilate
each other first. For me that explains why we have more matter than anti
mater in our universe. Black holes sweeping up the floor all the time
for eons.
I am sure you guy's could care less what I think. But it's going to
take a hell of a lot of energy to make the next breakthrough (like a
tiny black hole) or being able to actually see the event horizon and
measure something from a far off black hole (Like the massive one at the
center of our galaxy) But Hawking was trying to explain why or where the
matter goes?
Why not a "Big Bang" on the other side? Why not if the gravity is so
great the singularity smashes down so far to the Higgs or beyond and
that energy is expelled into another universe?
One thing is for sure they don't expel anything but some minor
radiation in our universe. Where does all that matter go?
Black holes do die! They eventually evaporate.
Anyway bla bla bla. With no proof.
Mathematics is like building skyscrapers with geometric shapes that
seem to resemble something we call building blocks. Lots of ways to
build something but eventually you reach the top. We have whole cities
of blocks that over time we have made fit together.
We are at the pinnacle of what we can do with our building blocks made
of stone. So what we have to do now is discover steel and concrete.
The new cities we build will look nothing like the ones we have now.
Maybe a bit here some architecture there you can recognize. But beyond
that it just wont be the same anymore.
That's how far we have come. Pretty damn far! But we are so so so very
far from understanding it all it's not even funny.
Monroe
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [AR] Re: NASA test of quantum vacuum plasma thruster (was
> "Anyone heard of this?")
> From: Ian Woollard <ian.woollard@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sun, August 03, 2014 3:09 pm
> To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> If you have photons leaving in significant numbers you will have at least
> some thrust; but that's a conventional photon rocket. Photon rockets give
> very small thrust and are highly inefficient; it turns out that almost all
> the energy leaves with the photons and hardly any ends up accelerating the
> vehicle. (It's due to the extreme mismatch between the exhaust speed and
> vehicle speed, you always want the two to be about the same-ish relative to
> the launch frame of reference aka inertial reference frame.)
>
> Note that these thrusters have no photons leaving other than thermal ones
> due to waste heat; they consist of sealed cavities filled with microwaves.
> They claim that by quantum/relativistic/magic/somehow they will start
> moving all by themselves.
>
> I'll only really believe it if it floats up into the sky and yanks the
> power cord out of the wall.
>
>
> On 3 August 2014 09:23, Steen Eiler Jørgensen <steen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Den 03-08-2014 02:09, Ian Woollard skrev:
> >
> > > There's essentially no chance that a thruster can work where you turn
> > > it on, feeding only electricity through it, and with nothing leaving
> > > it; where you switch it off, and you're now moving faster. This is
> > > what the emdrive is claimed to do.
> >
> > Please define "nothing". Photons (e.g.) have no mass, but nonzero momentum.
> >
> > /steen
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> -Ian Woollard
Other related posts: