[AR] Re: Way OT question: degerate matter thrusters?
- From: "Monroe L. King Jr." <monroe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 14:01:48 -0700
According to Newtons 3rd law yes. You can expel anything at any velocity
and achieve orbit without gravity weight or drag. Air alone would work
in space well enough.
Short answer in reality NO you can't do it.
Monroe
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [AR] Re: Way OT question: degerate matter thrusters?
> From: "Galejs, Robert - 1007 - MITLL" <galejs@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wed, February 18, 2015 1:54 pm
> To: "arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> Maybe I can ask my question once again, very precisely…
>
>
>
> Is it theoretically possible, assuming I give you a magical tank with zero
> weight and arbitrarily high tensile strength, to put an object into orbit
> using highly compressed air (think giga-atmospheres of pressure or more)? Or
> is there some physics limitation (like the tank freezing from the air
> expanding or some other thermodynamic gotcha) that would make this
> theoretical rocket not work?
>
>
>
> - Robert
>
>
>
> From: arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of rsteinke@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 3:40 PM
> To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [AR] Re: Way OT question: degerate matter thrusters?
>
>
>
> The engineering issue of tank weight is what would keep it from getting to
> orbit. Compressed air rockets work fine except that you just can't get very
> good mass ratio from a tank of air. Going to higher pressures doesn't help
> because the tank has to get heavier to hold the higher pressure. The reason
> that liquid fuels are better is that they are higher density than air at the
> pressures that generally make sense inside rocket propellant tanks.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From:
>
> "Galejs, Robert - 1007 - MITLL" <galejs@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
>
> To:
>
> "arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Cc:
>
>
>
> Sent:
>
> Wed, 18 Feb 2015 20:30:15 +0000
>
> Subject:
>
> [AR] Re: Way OT question: degerate matter thrusters?
>
>
> I believe that that's a bad example. If I understand things properly, I
> believe that the ISP of the air alone is higher, but the mass flow with water
> is much better.
>
> But you missed my point entirely... I wasn't trying to optimize anything, I
> was just trying to see if using hyper-compressed air at some arbitrarily high
> pressure could be used to get something into orbit theoretically, ignoring
> obvious engineering issues like tank weight.
>
> - Robert
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Monroe L. King Jr.
> Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 3:20 PM
> To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [AR] Re: Way OT question: degerate matter thrusters?
>
> Here's a simple experiment to show you. Go down to the toy store and buy
> yourself one of the old pump up water rockets. Pump it up with air and let
> her
> rip. Then fill it with water and try again at the same pressure.
>
> Monroe
>
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: [AR] Re: Way OT question: degerate matter thrusters?
> > From: "Galejs, Robert - 1007 - MITLL" <galejs@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Wed, February 18, 2015 1:10 pm
> > To: "arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> >
> > So why is supercritical steam "better" than air?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Monroe L. King Jr.
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 3:01 PM
> > To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [AR] Re: Way OT question: degerate matter thrusters?
> >
> > Well so does HP air. Unless your using just a plain ol jet engine like
> > a ramjet. That would be HP air also.
> >
> > > -------- Original Message --------
> > > Subject: [AR] Re: Way OT question: degerate matter thrusters?
> > > From: "Galejs, Robert - 1007 - MITLL" <galejs@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Date: Wed, February 18, 2015 12:55 pm
> > > To: "arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > >
> > > Supercritical steam does not require heavy tankage?
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > [mailto:arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Monroe L. King Jr.
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 2:47 PM
> > > To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: [AR] Re: Way OT question: degerate matter thrusters?
> > >
> > > I think Supercritical steam would be better than air. High
> > > pressures require heavy tankage.
> > >
> > > Monroe
> > >
> > > > -------- Original Message --------
> > > > Subject: [AR] Way OT question: degerate matter thrusters?
> > > > From: "Galejs, Robert - 1007 - MITLL" <galejs@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Date: Wed, February 18, 2015 12:35 pm
> > > > To: "arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I know this is way off-topic, but it has always had me wondering
> > > > and it seems like Arocket has the appropriate knowledge base to
> > > > address this (or, at least wildly speculate).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > In some of Larry Niven's sci-fi stories, he imagines rocket
> > > > thrusters (between the ground and orbit) based on super-compressed
> > > > air (supposedly "nearly degenerate matter"). Would such thrusters
> > > > theoretically work, or are there some thermodynamic (or other
> > > > physics) limitations that come into play?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Robert
Other related posts: