Space Shuttle 1 / 3 C (C = speed of light)
- Thread starter Danbage
- Start date
- Status
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
This is a tad
fftopic but ok. What are you going to ue as propulsion for your 10 minet ride to the moon?- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #3
The ship 1 / 3 C had the following parts:
1) Engine Neutrons (nuclear fusion), small size
2) intelligent Shield
3) Neutralizador of force G (aleleração)
4) Field of laser energy to neutralize particles
5) Radar to enable field of energy
6) anti gravity device (part)
7) Neutralizador the force of friction of the atmosphere and water
8) Neutralizador of heat
I have every project in mind.
We will produce it?
I need centre of searches in a developed country.
1) Engine Neutrons (nuclear fusion), small size
2) intelligent Shield
3) Neutralizador of force G (aleleração)
4) Field of laser energy to neutralize particles
5) Radar to enable field of energy
6) anti gravity device (part)
7) Neutralizador the force of friction of the atmosphere and water
8) Neutralizador of heat
I have every project in mind.
We will produce it?
I need centre of searches in a developed country.
Theree is no current availible technology for that kind of speed.
We're still using chemical rockets. Only a few probes have been powered by ion-engines, and nuclear engines were tested back in the 50s and 60s in Los Alamos. None of them ever flew.
The NASA's Project Prometheus(JIMO - Jupiter Icy Moons orbiter) was scheduled to fly somewhere late in the next decade, but now it seems it will probably not happen soon. The ship(JIMO) would use a 100 kW nuclear reactor, not too unsimilar to those found in the SSNs, which would power an ion engine. Even so, it would take JIMO over 9 years to get to Jupiter.
There are several concepts of engines capable of attaining such speeds that it would take only a few weeks to reach Mars, but for now, they're only concepts.
BTW, the Shuttle is finished. It was never designed to leave the Earth's orbit.
We're still using chemical rockets. Only a few probes have been powered by ion-engines, and nuclear engines were tested back in the 50s and 60s in Los Alamos. None of them ever flew.
The NASA's Project Prometheus(JIMO - Jupiter Icy Moons orbiter) was scheduled to fly somewhere late in the next decade, but now it seems it will probably not happen soon. The ship(JIMO) would use a 100 kW nuclear reactor, not too unsimilar to those found in the SSNs, which would power an ion engine. Even so, it would take JIMO over 9 years to get to Jupiter.
There are several concepts of engines capable of attaining such speeds that it would take only a few weeks to reach Mars, but for now, they're only concepts.
BTW, the Shuttle is finished. It was never designed to leave the Earth's orbit.
Last edited:
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #5
Friend, I am intuitive and have many ideas for the future. We must be bold, because those who do not can not throw hit. Engines ion not serve (not working right).
I have in mind the project of a small nuclear fusion reactor, the size of a box of shoes. He neutrons deliver a very high speed.
I believe that we would in a few hours to Mars and the Moon in just 10 minutes.
If they want to develop this project in just 2 years, I seek.
I have in mind the project of a small nuclear fusion reactor, the size of a box of shoes. He neutrons deliver a very high speed.
I believe that we would in a few hours to Mars and the Moon in just 10 minutes.
If they want to develop this project in just 2 years, I seek.
windscorpion
New Member
You know how to develop nuclear fusion, and shrink it down to a shoe box size in 2 years?
He breaks the laws of physics, in particular regarding basic thermodynamics, in at least five different ways in that post.
... and you people wonder about the engine and the reactor?
What's next, "neutralizing" the Lorentz invariance so we don't have to consider relativistic effects and time dilation?
windscorpion: cold fusion, in theory (bubble fusion and such).
ragusian: look up VASIMR. NASA project.
... and you people wonder about the engine and the reactor?
What's next, "neutralizing" the Lorentz invariance so we don't have to consider relativistic effects and time dilation?
windscorpion: cold fusion, in theory (bubble fusion and such).
ragusian: look up VASIMR. NASA project.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #8
I have a theory about that, using high-power laser beam in bubbles of tritium and deuterium.
I am not a nuclear physicist specifically, but I understand the physical geral.Precisaria in a team to help.
Faria also nuclear fusion on a scale larger.
That experience would be only 30 dias.Se sure that we could manufacture the engine of the aircraft shortly, and he would be 100% safe, because the emitter circuit is destroyed case exceed certain limits.
I am not a nuclear physicist specifically, but I understand the physical geral.Precisaria in a team to help.
Faria also nuclear fusion on a scale larger.
That experience would be only 30 dias.Se sure that we could manufacture the engine of the aircraft shortly, and he would be 100% safe, because the emitter circuit is destroyed case exceed certain limits.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #9
Kato, none. You are in Germany? I understand his disbelief, but my physics is a bit different. I have some theories of physics themselves, private. My Big-bang is different, Unified Theory Universal, New Model Atomic, Gravitational Theory, Inercial Theory, Theory of acceleration, Electromagnetic Theory, Theory centrifuge, New Molecular Theory, etc. The time for me is a constant and does not follow cold fusion. Forget Einstein. I have other inventions: Motor rotation, shielding clever, new kind of fuzil, etc.Desse way you will not achieve break the old paradigms.
Imagine a shield of 0.1 mm of steel hold the shooting of a fuzil 7.62 mm. I think we can do that.
I see the world 1000 years ahead. I am stating a physics laboratory to test my theories. It could be any country seriously that invest in technology: USA, Germany, Great Britain, Israel, Russia, China, etc.. Imagine a submarine or ship is moving to 1000 km / h, because I think that would neutralize the force of friction. Imagine, too, a plane or missile without the strength of the force of friction of the atmosphere. And know how to neutralize the strength G and the gravitational force?
A saying: Those who do not throw can not hit.
Imagine a shield of 0.1 mm of steel hold the shooting of a fuzil 7.62 mm. I think we can do that.
I see the world 1000 years ahead. I am stating a physics laboratory to test my theories. It could be any country seriously that invest in technology: USA, Germany, Great Britain, Israel, Russia, China, etc.. Imagine a submarine or ship is moving to 1000 km / h, because I think that would neutralize the force of friction. Imagine, too, a plane or missile without the strength of the force of friction of the atmosphere. And know how to neutralize the strength G and the gravitational force?
A saying: Those who do not throw can not hit.
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
Forget Einstien? :lol3 Sorry bud you just lost me. Relativistic effects can be seen both in the laboratoy, in satalites and by gravity lensing. Genereal and special relativity for the most part are rock solid my friend, so good luck. In any case it sound like we are ~5 years away from a unified field theory based on M thoery, so you'd better hurry up with yours!
Would you mind indulgeing me on you alternative gravitational, quantum mechanic, unified field and cosmological thoeries?
If we could alter the fundimental forces within our universe then we could do all manner of things, however since we do not even have a complete understanding of said forces how can we be expected to manipulate them.
If you really want to work on something achieable, try affordable orbit. there was a lobby for the space elevator which looked promiceing.
Locking thread due to being Off Topic.fftopic
This forum is for the discussion of international defence matters, as such, a space shuttle to moon mission is outside the scope. Even more so given that much of what is mentioned in terms of technology are devices or capabilities more appropriate to a Star Trek episode given physics as it is currently understood. In the future, please confine discussion to Defence and related matters, and not delve into areas of physics worthy of Nobel prizes if they can be discovered.
Thread locked.
-Preceptor
fftopic This forum is for the discussion of international defence matters, as such, a space shuttle to moon mission is outside the scope. Even more so given that much of what is mentioned in terms of technology are devices or capabilities more appropriate to a Star Trek episode given physics as it is currently understood. In the future, please confine discussion to Defence and related matters, and not delve into areas of physics worthy of Nobel prizes if they can be discovered.
Thread locked.
-Preceptor
- Status