The power to propel us to the stars

chuckpeterson · Jun 16, 2019

The power to propel us to the stars

Can we reach the stars and beyond?

The answer is YES!!

Getting humans into outer space is not the problem. Humans have already walked on the moon. The problem with space travel is the vast distance between our solar system and the nearest one to us. The problem is in the speed needed to reach these far-off places in a reasonable time frame. The solution to the has been right in front of us.

Take for example someone at the front of a train traveling 100 MPH. If the person fires a bullet out ahead of the trail that travels at 300 MPH if you clocked the speed of this bullet it would clock at 400 MPH, not 300.

The same principle could be applied to space travel. The craft would have multiple propulsion engines. When the first one is fired it propels to craft to a speed of 1,000 MPH. When the second propulsion engine is fired (with the same propulsion force as the first), the craft is now traveling at a speed of 1,000+1,000 equaling a speed of 2,000 MPH.

If you continue firing these engines your speed increases with each engine burn. The ultimate speed you reach depends on how many bursts your engines can provide With one burst at a time you could reach the speed of light and beyond.

Or so it seemed~~~~~~~~

Now, some time later I discarded the above idea, a spacecraft could not contain enough fuel to propel us to distant stars.

Then an actual solution came to mind.

We use the force of gravity to pull us to wherever we want to go. Magnify the force of gravity using the gravity pull of galaxies channeling that pull in a narrow band multiply the pulling force of gravity exponentially to a limitless speed.

It could be done~~~

JackRT · Jun 16, 2019

chuckpeterson said:
We use the force of gravity to pull us to wherever we want to go. Magnify the force of gravity using the gravity pull of galaxies channeling that pull in a narrow band multiply the pulling force of gravity exponentially to a limitless speed.

Wonderful idea. The problem is that we don't yet know how to do this or even if it is a physical possibility. I should also point out that there is no such thing as "limitless speed" --- that is the realm of science fiction.

timewerx · Jun 16, 2019

chuckpeterson said:
We use the force of gravity to pull us to wherever we want to go. Magnify the force of gravity using the gravity pull of galaxies channeling that pull in a narrow band multiply the pulling force of gravity exponentially to a limitless speed.

It could be done~~~

It's actually kinda similar to actual experiments I did in the past to achieve "non-propellant" propulsion for space travel (even travel here in the atmosphere or underwater).

But instead of manipulating gravity, my test device manipulated electric fields.

The device created non-symmetric distribution of electric fields in terms of "momentum".

It created propulsive force even if the device is fully sealed, airtight and electric fields isolated.

The operation seem to perfectly fit the concept of "Negative Energy" in Quantum Mechanics. And the recorded thrust far greatly exceeded that of "radiation pressure" possible by the amount of energy being used.

Certain frequencies also greatly increased magnitude of thrust. The frequency plus the strong electric fields used produced an audible noise which can strongly interfere / jam radio signals.

Finally, some really cool application of Quantum Mechanics, instead of just using Quantum Mechanics to transmit sensitive data, lol! What are these guys thinking! :doh:

FrumiousBandersnatch · Jun 16, 2019

chuckpeterson said:
The power to propel us to the stars

Can we reach the stars and beyond?

The answer is YES!!

Getting humans into outer space is not the problem. Humans have already walked on the moon. The problem with space travel is the vast distance between our solar system and the nearest one to us. The problem is in the speed needed to reach these far-off places in a reasonable time frame. The solution to the has been right in front of us.

Take for example someone at the front of a train traveling 100 MPH. If the person fires a bullet out ahead of the trail that travels at 300 MPH if you clocked the speed of this bullet it would clock at 400 MPH, not 300.

The same principle could be applied to space travel. The craft would have multiple propulsion engines. When the first one is fired it propels to craft to a speed of 1,000 MPH. When the second propulsion engine is fired (with the same propulsion force as the first), the craft is now traveling at a speed of 1,000+1,000 equaling a speed of 2,000 MPH.

If you continue firing these engines your speed increases with each engine burn. The ultimate speed you reach depends on how many bursts your engines can provide With one burst at a time you could reach the speed of light and beyond.

Or so it seemed~~~~~~~~

Now, some time later I discarded the above idea, a spacecraft could not contain enough fuel to propel us to distant stars.

Then an actual solution came to mind.

We use the force of gravity to pull us to wherever we want to go. Magnify the force of gravity using the gravity pull of galaxies channeling that pull in a narrow band multiply the pulling force of gravity exponentially to a limitless speed.

It could be done~~~

Not a limitless speed - you're always limited by the speed of light. Your additive velocity idea is an approximation.

jayem · Jun 16, 2019

The closest star is Proxima Centauri, which is about 4.2 ly away. It's orbited an Earth-sized planet that's in the habitable zone. It would be an attractive target for exploration. But there would have be some radically advanced propulsion system that could achieve partial luminal velocities. I remember reading somewhere that to accelerate a 1 ton vehicle to 10% of light speed would require 120+ petajoules of energy. 120 x 10^15 joules. As I recall, that's close to the energy used by the entire world in 1 year. And at 10% of light speed, it would still take over 40 years to reach the planet. Not to mention, that there are many micrometeorites and other small particles in space. The International Space Station was hit by debris that punctured a small hole. At the speeds needed for interstellar travel, such a collision would be catastrophic. Adequate shielding would add more mass, which would only increase the energy needed for the trip.

durangodawood · Jun 16, 2019

chuckpeterson said:
....Take for example someone at the front of a train traveling 100 MPH. If the person fires a bullet out ahead of the trail that travels at 300 MPH if you clocked the speed of this bullet it would clock at 400 MPH, not 300.....

But for space travel, we dont want to fire a bullet from the moving train, we want to launch a whole other train - another spacecraft with all the necessary features.

Just to get train (spacecraft) 2 up the the velocity of train 1, train 1 would be set back to velocity zero..... unless train 1 is more massive - way more massive if we really want to ramp up the velocity significantly.

Basically your initial vehicle would have to be ultra massive, requiring gobs of energy just to achieve modest "first stage" velocity. Might as well have just one vehicle with tons of fuel, and just use it for continuous acceleration.

ananda · Jun 16, 2019

chuckpeterson said:
The power to propel us to the stars

Can we reach the stars and beyond?

The answer is YES!!

Getting humans into outer space is not the problem. Humans have already walked on the moon. The problem with space travel is the vast distance between our solar system and the nearest one to us. The problem is in the speed needed to reach these far-off places in a reasonable time frame. The solution to the has been right in front of us.

Take for example someone at the front of a train traveling 100 MPH. If the person fires a bullet out ahead of the trail that travels at 300 MPH if you clocked the speed of this bullet it would clock at 400 MPH, not 300.

The same principle could be applied to space travel. The craft would have multiple propulsion engines. When the first one is fired it propels to craft to a speed of 1,000 MPH. When the second propulsion engine is fired (with the same propulsion force as the first), the craft is now traveling at a speed of 1,000+1,000 equaling a speed of 2,000 MPH.

If you continue firing these engines your speed increases with each engine burn. The ultimate speed you reach depends on how many bursts your engines can provide With one burst at a time you could reach the speed of light and beyond.

Or so it seemed~~~~~~~~

Now, some time later I discarded the above idea, a spacecraft could not contain enough fuel to propel us to distant stars.

Then an actual solution came to mind.

We use the force of gravity to pull us to wherever we want to go. Magnify the force of gravity using the gravity pull of galaxies channeling that pull in a narrow band multiply the pulling force of gravity exponentially to a limitless speed.

It could be done~~~

To what end?

durangodawood · Jun 16, 2019

ananda said:
To what end?

To spread human life....(for better or worse)

lasthero · Jun 16, 2019

This reminds me, what happened to all the flat earthers around here? It seemed like they were all over the place for a few months, then they all just migrated.

Ophiolite · Jun 16, 2019

lasthero said:
This reminds me, what happened to all the flat earthers around here? It seemed like they were all over the place for a few months, then they all just migrated.

They fell off the edge.

ananda · Jun 16, 2019

durangodawood said:
To spread human life....(for better or worse)

To what end?

Strathos · Jun 16, 2019

jayem said:
The closest star is Proxima Centauri, which is about 4.2 ly away. It's orbited an Earth-sized planet that's in the habitable zone. It would be an attractive target for exploration. But there would have be some radically advanced propulsion system that could achieve partial luminal velocities. I remember reading somewhere that to accelerate a 1 ton vehicle to 10% of light speed would require 120+ petajoules of energy. 120 x 10^15 joules. As I recall, that's close to the energy used by the entire world in 1 year. And at 10% of light speed, it would still take over 40 years to reach the planet. Not to mention, that there are many micrometeorites and other small particles in space. The International Space Station was hit by debris that punctured a small hole. At the speeds needed for interstellar travel, such a collision would be catastrophic. Adequate shielding would add more mass, which would only increase the energy needed for the trip.

Two words: Solar sail

No need to impart all of that energy at once when you can slowly accelerate using nothing but light from the sun.

durangodawood · Jun 16, 2019

ananda said:
To what end?

To what end do we do anything?

We like the idea. That seems to be enough.

timewerx · Jun 16, 2019

jayem said:
But there would have be some radically advanced propulsion system that could achieve partial luminal velocities. I remember reading somewhere that to accelerate a 1 ton vehicle to 10% of light speed would require 120+ petajoules of energy. 120 x 10^15 joules..

I used to work on some "radically advanced" method of achieving that.

"Negative Energy" is your only option. Forget about nuclear energy, fusion, etc. They only look good on movies but won't get you to the stars on any practical level, seriously! This isn't sailing the seas in the 14th century. We're talking about deep space where the hazards are orders of magnitude greater!

Negative energy propulsion requires a lot less energy because most of the energy demand is being sourced from quantum fluctuations (Zero Point Energy). It gets you there a lot faster too by exploiting the "Lense Thirring Effect" to permit faster-than-light speed.

ananda · Jun 16, 2019

durangodawood said:
To what end do we do anything?

We like the idea. That seems to be enough.

It seems to me that human effort should go first towards solving our own problems on Earth before reaching outwards.

timewerx · Jun 16, 2019

ananda said:
It seems to me that human effort should go first towards solving our own problems on Earth before reaching outwards.

Right! Our insatiable lust / greed to acquire must first end, otherwise, we'll exploit the entire Universe to death!

We'd be like cancer spreading!! :doh:

SelfSim · Jun 16, 2019

timewerx said:
Right! Our insatiable lust / greed to acquire must first end, otherwise, we'll exploit the entire Universe to death!

We'd be like cancer spreading!!

Such a negative view of humanity!
Humans are an integral part of the universe y'know ... and not independent from it!
That's if I get your meaning here(?)

steve78 · Jun 16, 2019

ananda said:
It seems to me that human effort should go first towards solving our own problems on Earth before reaching outwards.

Humanity needs to grow up and the only way that's going to happen is for humans to get out among the stars.

Plus we are trashing our planet and settling on other worlds like Mars maybe the only way to ensure survival of our species. If we don't do something about climate change then our species only has a few hundred years left before we face exctintion.

jayem · Jun 16, 2019

timewerx said:
Negative energy propulsion requires a lot less energy because most of the energy demand is being sourced from quantum fluctuations (Zero Point Energy). It gets you there a lot faster too by exploiting the "Lense Thirring Effect" to permit faster-than-light speed.

From what I was taught in undergrad physics, faster than light speed is impossible. Is that not correct?

steve78 · Jun 16, 2019

timewerx said:
Right! Our insatiable lust / greed to acquire must first end, otherwise, we'll exploit the entire Universe to death!

We'd be like cancer spreading!!

Lol.

There are civilisations far more advanced than us out there, they may exploit or even decide to kill us if we ever meet them.

The power to propel us to the stars

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

the village i--o--t--

Well-Known Member

Naturalist

Dis Member

Early Buddhist

Dis Member

Newbie

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape

Early Buddhist

No one important

Dis Member

the village i--o--t--

Early Buddhist

the village i--o--t--

A non "-ist"

Newbie

Naturalist

Newbie

Similar threads