New Mars Forums

dicktice,

Ahh i see what your saying.

How can light be a measure of time if light comes in different wavelengths?
Close?

Lets pretend that only the speed of light is a measure or time.
time=c or c=time

Many forms of light can be created with different wavelengths, but the speed of the light is always the same.

Lets pretend that to create a photon you can use any 2 atoms.
Lets also pretend we know how to make them
If you collide 2 hydrogen atoms at a set  collision speed and produce 1 photon, you get a set wavelength, but time sets the speed of the escaping photon.

I think its possible to have no time for the light, but different oscillations for the light.

Hope i was on the right track on that?

Euler,

I guess at some point the weight of the nuclear reactor as it is sized up will limit it's reason to be there.
At 50mw with a thrust of .36c no real need to go any faster exists.

The real question seems to be, will it be a Ferrari or a slow golf cart.

And i just knew i should have broken out my calculator for the math

Anyone have any thoughts on producing say 3mw of conventional power in space .?
The waste product from the production of the electricity needing to be used as particle accelerant.

Nick

Euler,

Just thinking out loud here.
And hoping for a few replies about my noisy thoughts.

If a 50mw nuclear generator can produce .33c.
If the initial mass of the spaceship is 1/3 and the particle accelerant is 2/3 the total mass.
It should be able to obtain a maximum speed of .22c  ?

Obviously for interstellar distances nuclear is the way to go.
And if no humans are on board then why not 100mw or 500mw?

But if you reduce the thrust to say .02c, then the mw requirements also reduce proportionally.
I calculate that to produce thrust of .02c will require about  1mw or less?
In the above formula of 1/3 ship  2/3 fuel.
We should be able obtain  a maximum speed of .015c ?

1mw could be produced with conventional non nuclear means.
And if we are very sneaky we could use the waste product from the production or electricity as the particle accelerant.?

.015c gets us around the solar system in short times.
With a nice protective magnetic field for the people inside.
Well actually .0075c because you will need to turn the ship at whatever the 1/2 way point is.

I haven't done any calculations in change of velocity/time.
That is beyond my math skills.

That might be the un doing of this idea, and may drastically alter power requirements.
If the times are to long to obtain any useful speed.

As for deep space 1 as i understand, it has a pretty slow  velocity/time.

Nick

Gennaro,

I'm not even sure a correct question even exists.

All questions are valid when no one is sure of the answer.
And since your question was so similar to mine, i deduce that you must have a very brilliant mind *grin*
Therefore the question must be valid

Hi Gennaro,

You must have been reading my mind.

Hi Dicktice,

I can't speak for anyone elses math, but mine decreases proportionally to the coffee supply    c=m/s   

This is a  thought that has puzzled me for ages.

You get on a spaceship that allows you to travel at the speed of light (new Ferrari space ship with all the options) and head to a very distant part of the universe.

The aliens at you destination watch your trip through a very powerful telescope (like vlt but way bigger).

They see you taking an awful long time to get there.
But since you are traveling at the speed of light it takes you no time to arrive.

The aliens great great grandchildren are sure you live forever because millions of generations have seen you heading towards them, and you just don't age, nor does your spacecraft.

If you overshoot the aliens home world just a bit, and they decide to measure and see why.
Do they see you as a wave or a particle? or both?

It seems to answer why light always goes at light speed, and why light seems to last forever.
Well in my mind anyway but then i need another cup of coffee
And i sure wish i had invested in the aspirin companies stock

Shaun,

I hear you on the headaches from thinking about photons

What were they thinking when they invented the darn things?
And you would think who ever invented them would be pretty darn proud about the invention and leave some schematics lying around somewhere

No such luck on that.
But always great fun to think about, and it keeps the aspirin company in business

It seems that conservation of momentum no matter how hard you try to cheat is not going to allow a way to gain forward thrust.

In my initial idea for space travel i thought that a force gained in throwing and loosing momentum  no matter how small could gain a velocity.

My initial idea was to make a tube inside a spacecraft that accelerated particles down one end of the spaceship, and decelerated them on the return trip.

But since conservation of momentum won't allow this, then couldn't you simply use a particle accelerator inside the spacecraft in a semi circular magnetic tube.?

Accelerate the particles as close to light speed as the magnets will drive them.
Then release them out the back of the spaceship?
Now you should have a net thrust at very high velocities.

fermilab does this with current technology to about 99% the speed of light.

I bet the electricity bill will be nasty for this though

[color=#000000:post_uid0]A good point Byron.

But since the ball returns to us with most of its energy we get a backwards force each time we throw it and catch it.
And of course a slight sideways motion as the ball goes around the curve of the tube.

Both actions  throwing and catching the ball push you backwards along with the spaceship?

Bear with me for keeping this rubber ball example, but i do have a very good idea in mind.

Not looking for perpetual motion, just motion