STARSHIP ENGINE
PLASMA ROCKET ENGINE
(ATOMIC POWERED ROCKET)

Inventor: Thomas Hulon Jackson Citizenship: United States of America
Starship1@sbcglobal.net

Universal Patent Number 1
Star Ship Operators License Number 1
Expiration Date- None
Disclosure Document Number: 210758
Authority: U.S.,PCT;
Patents pending
U.S. 07/247,498 Plasma rocket engine;
International Patent Cooperation Treaty
PCT/US89/05888 Star Ship.

Restrictive Notice:
Table of Contents

Brief Discription of the Drawings
Drawings -Figures 1 to 4
Legend of the Drawings
(Fig 5 Animation added year 2000 for net display)
Invention/Inventor
Background of Invention
Field of Invention
Description of the Prior Art
Summary of the Invention
Description of a Preferred Embodiment
Claims 1 to 7
Abstract

Drawings
Figures 1 to 4

Fig I A plasma rocket engine showing cross section of engine in
starting mode with a magnified view of the plasma generator in off
position.

Fig 2 Shows a means to obtain fuel disks from radioactive metal to be
inserted in a plasma generator and stacked above critical mass to
generate a plasma.

Fig 3 Shows a means to determine critical mass from a radioactive
metal to be used to manufacture fuel disks, also, a plasma generator
shown in off, on and plasma mode.

Fig 4 A preferred embodiment of a means to obtain a fully functional
plasma engine (shown with plasma generator in plasma state). This is
opposed to fig. 1 which is a one start, go where you point it basic
engine.

Figure 5 Engine Animation- added year 2000 for net display

LEGEND OF DRAWINGS
The following is (are) the preferred embodiment(s) of:
1 a solid casing open at one end to expel exhaust and with a
propellant storage and delivery system (shown with optional cooling
path) to a plasma chamber.
2 a liquid propellant.
3 a plasma generator assembly.
4 a means of nozzles and openings to direct propellant flow (four
shown)
5 a fuel disk(s).
6 a fuel disk guide post (2 shown).
7 an electric starter motor.
8 a worm gear.
9 a burning plasma.
10 a crucible with radioactive metal cubes.
11 a heat source.
12 a Geiger counter.
13 a fuel disk mold.
14 a Worm gear shape.
15 exhaust focusing nozzles (2 shown).
16 exhaust tuning nozzles (2 shown).
17 exhaust steering nozzles (2 shown).
18 optional magnetic containment coils.
19 electromechanical propellant pumps.
20 exhaust focusing tuning and steering pumps.
21 an exhaust port.
22 a plasma chamber.
23 separated metal cubes.
24 cubes arranged and stacked in a disk shape to determine
critical mass.
25 a critical mass graph with radioactive curve expressed as
a function of mass and radiation to determine Geiger
counter "runaway" of critical mass point (c.m). The
fuel disk mass is one half this point.


BACKGROUND OF INVENTION

1. FIELD OF THE INVENTION
My invention is an atomic rocket engine that contains a plasma
generated by radioactive metal above critical mass. It uses the heat
to accelerate a liquid propellant. The energy produced gives thousands
of times more thrust per pound than chemical rockets presently used and
produces greater efficiency and velocity than proposed atomic rockets.

2. DESCRlPTlON OF THE PRIOR ART
Theodore Taylor's Project Orion uses a series of small atomic bomb
explosions on a "pusher plate" to obtain thrust. The disadvantage is
that due to cooling time between explosions the time the engine is on
compared to the time it is off gives a very low efficiency or duty
cycle [Time on divided by (time on + time off) = duty cycle). One is
desirable.

The propellant shrapnel is expelled from the pusher plate
in all directions from behind it. This wastes the majority of the
energy used in energy vectors perpendicular to the line of travel. He
indirectly uses atomic energy to build bombs, then used these bombs to
build a rocket engine. A device that may work but is not energy
efficient; however, it will probably create more thrust per pound of
engine weight than chemical rockets.


His invention's problems are low duty cycle, inefficient exhaust,
indirect means of propulsion, and the use of atomic bombs subject to
theft. Also, the use of atomic bombs in space is forbidden by
international treaty. My invention eliminates all the above problems.
The other atomic rocket encounters one of the above problems and
one additional one my invention eliminates. He uses atomic energy to
operate a reactor and uses the electricity produced from heat to
liquid hydrogen and oxygen using electricity. He then uses
electricity to strip electrons from hydrogen atoms. He uses the small
remainder to accelerate the positive ions for propulsion. The safety
problem of a over heated reactor and liquid hydrogen is obvious as is
the inefficiency of the many steps he uses to get indirectly from
atomic energy to propellant through this is partially off set by the
production of oxygen and electricity for the pay load.


His invention's problems are indirect means of propulsion and a
inefficient atomic reactor with it's safety concerns. My invention
solves all the above problems by using all the power available in
atomic energy to directly accelerate the propellant in a line parallel
to the direction of travel in a continuous on state. This eliminates
the energy waste of the above rockets enabling it to accelerate the
same pay load mass to many times the velocity of prior art. The safety
factor of eliminating the atomic bombs and the liquid hydrogen is
considerable. The future chemical and nuclear costs of solar system
or galactic exploration with prior art will be astronomical. I
invention will reduce that cost astronomically.



SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

My invention is an atomic rocket engine that contains and
harnesses a Plasma in a liquid propellant and casing to directly
effect the rapid expansion of the propellant; thereby, expelling the
propellant out of an exhaust port causing acceleration of the engine
which consists of a means to contain the plasma in three dimensions,
whereby; the energy from the plasma directly causes the liquid
propellant plasma container to rapidly expand from chemical and atomic
change and this changed liquid propellant is contained in the two
dimensions of the casing with the "leak" in the third dimension used
to provide propulsion.


To make my invention fully functional in the environment it is
required to operate, the means are described to obtain the functions
of steering, starting once and multiple times, planned and emergency
stops, regulating propellant flow, tuning and focusing the exhaust,
casing cooling, artificial gravity, auxiliary power, increasing
velocity to permit intra and extra galactic exploration, replenishing
the propellant from deep space, manufacturing the fuel disks and
protecting the engine and pay load from meteorite collisions.
Also described is a means of converting the engine to a electric
generator to power a space and earth habitat as is a means of
modifying my invention to convert earth stored radioactive waste and
toxic chemical waste to harmless atoms and subatomic particles and
deliver the remainder to deep space economically.



DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT
(DETAILED DESCRIPTION)
My invention is a rocket engine that consists of a solid container
(casing 1) open at one end to emit exhaust from an exhaust port 21.
The opposite end and sides are closed but contain openings 4 to admit
a liquid spray (propellant 2) directed to contain a plasma 9
consisting of radioactive metal (fuel disks 5) above critical mass
located in a plasma chamber 22 (the hollow inside of a casing 1). The
vaporization of the liquid propellant 2 creates a vapor container for
the plasma 9 isolating and insulating it from the casing 1; thereby,
preventing melting. The plasma 9 is balanced and contained in the
liquid envelope balanced by the dynamic pressures created. (This is
similar to a ping pong ball in an air stream enclosed in a tube of
greater diameter than the ball to provide stabilization.) The energy
from the plasma 9 directly causes the liquid propellant 2
plasma 9 container to rapidly expand from chemical and atomic changes;
whereby, this changed liquid propellant 2 is contained in the two
dimensions of the casing I with the "leak" in the third dimension used
to provide propulsion by the action and reaction law.


Additional stabilization that may be required in some operating
modes can be obtained from electro-magnetic containment field coils
18, constructed with conventional technology, used to confine the
plasma 9 in one or two dimensions by using the electro-magnetic
properties of the plasma 9. Three of the above mentioned operating
modes of turning, starting and rapid acceleration change may cause
the inertial mass of the plasma 9 to increase to where it overcomes
the propellant 2 containment properties, therefore may require
additional containment to prevent the plasma 9 from becoming
unbalanced in it's plasma chamber 22.


A means to generate the plasma 9 is obtained by fuel disks 5 of
radioactive metal below critical mass which when stacked together by
a plasma generator assembly 3 using a electric motor 7 to turn a worm
gear 8, thereby; moving the disks 5 along the guide posts 6 to the non-
threaded portion of the worm gear 8 where they obtain critical mass
and generate heat in the range below the melting point of the
radioactive metal to the temperature of a blue white star depending
on the total mass of the fuel disks 5 and the quality of the fuel
used. The hotter and larger the Plasma 9 contained the more mass in
the propellant 2 and fuel disks 5 is converted to energy giving faster
acceleration effects and, therefore, velocities. Velocities based on
ratios of chemical rockets, mass and velocities, to projected atomic
rockets, mass and velocities, indicate a range of velocities from dead
stop to in excess of that of light, therefore, my invention may
provide a means to test Einstein's theory that a man made object other
than a particle accelerator may be found to travel faster than light.


A means of steering is obtained by directing liquid propellant 2
from the exhaust port 21 nozzles and openings 17 to alter the
direction of the ejected propellant 2. Another means is obtained by
the artificial gravity of acceleration for self regulation. A means
of pumping the fluid at various pressure is desirable for various
plasma 9 sizes and acceleration rates required of the engine
therefore, mechanical regulation can be obtained by conventional
pumping technology.


A means of constricting the exhaust propellant diameter to effect
plasma chamber 22 pressure; thereby, tuning and focusing the exhaust
for pencil thin efficiency can be obtained by directing with openings
and nozzles 16, 17 the liquid propellant 2 to the center of the
exhaust port 21 to effect narrowing and acceleration of the propellant
2 stream.


The solid casing I can be cooled by the internal circulation of
propellant 2 part of which is used for steering, focusing, and tuning
and The preheated remainder is directed at the plasma 9 for further
confinement and to prevent thermal shock that may be present.
Artificial gravity is provided for extended space flight by the
acceleration and deceleration rates of an engine that can burn
continuously providing one 9 of acceleration.


Auxiliary power is provided by thermo-couples attached to the
casing 1 to generate electricity for the pay load requirements of
electricity. Also, oxygen may be generated from the electrolysis of
water. The waste products from the air and surplus hydrogen may be
added to the propellant 2.


A means of increasing the velocities obtained by multi-stage
operation for sensor probes in intra or extra galactic exploration can
be obtained by making stacked engines of a size to propel the engines
to escape velocity of earth, solar system, and milky way in that order
Two means of replacing the propellant 2 from frozen liquids on
asteroids, moons, or planets is obtained. One by directing the exhaust
at a frozen mass, two by a plasma generator assembly 3 started a body
of frozen propellant 2 will melt it; thereby, allowing conventional
pumping techniques to be used as with a propellant 2 found in a liquid
state.


A means of manufacturing fuel disks 5 from high grade radioactive
metal found extra-terrestrially can be obtained by the following means.
The maximum size a disk 5 can made changes with the ratio of
unstable isotopes to stable in a radioactive metal. 40% to 80%
reactor grade and 80% or higher bomb grade is suitable. The actual
size depends on the element and the quality available. The more
unstable and heavier (Atomic Mass) the greater the heat generated by
atomic parts hitting other unstable atoms producing heat. This is
best determined by experiment.


Arrange 1/2 inch cubes 23 in a disk shape 24 with a (5 to 4):1
ratio of diameter to thickness. The sides should be touching.
Monitor the pile with a Geiger counter 12. As the mass is increased
linearly, (one cube at a time). the radiation will increase
exponentially. Plotted on a graph 25, the y axis is radiation. x
axis is mass. The curve starts with a low slope going to a sharp
rise. The steep rise (marked as c.m. for critical mass) is that point
where the temperature rises. This makes it unsuitable in a fuel disk
5 resulting in melting the shape of the disks to changes it where it
is no longer the disk you designed. When the Geiger count starts to
'run away', physically separate the cubes 24 and take 1/2 the mass,
from this point and place in a crucible 10. (Caution) Give the
separated cubes 24 time to cool down. The cubes 24 are then melted
over a heat source 11. They should be monitored by Geiger counter 12
to assure the radiation is stable. 4 slight rise is expected. 4
rapid rise requires that the contents of the crucible 10 be scattered
by pouring in a sweeping motion through water. Begin again with a
smaller mass. Pour in a disk mold 13 with it's worm gear shape 14 and
a (5 to 4): 1, diameter to thickness, ratio. When cooled at room
temperature for 24 hours, measure the temperature. If the temperature
is more than 90 degrees thin with hacksaw or lathe. (Disk faces
should be parallel.) They can then be installed in the plasma
generating assembly 3.


A means to protect the rocket and pay load from projectile
collisions with dust and matter it may encounter may be obtained by
reducing the cross section of the craft, thereby, streamlining it. My
invention may be shaped as a long cylinder to aid in streamlining.
Another means of protection may be found with metals that have a shape
memory effect when heated. By anticipating the collision of solid
matter using conventional technology (such as radar or metal
detectors), a heating electric current may be generated through the
shape memory effect metal to resist the original penetration at the
time of impact by the force of the spring back effect plus the
thickness of the metal, thereby, creating an electric armor of my own
invention.


A means of converting the engine to a electric generator for
power a space and earth habitat is obtained by mounting the engine on
the ground of planet or moon with the exhaust pointed upwards and
using the thermo couples to power the manufacture of devices to
contain the uncontained third dimension of the exhaust port 21. In
practice 90% or less containment is needed for more containment may
result in the melt down of the engine. Energy present in the exhaust
as heat, light, mechanical and other forms can be tapped with
conventional thermo couples, turbine generators, solar cells and other
common energy converters.


Earth requires 100% containment so the harmful wastes of the 100
uncontained exhaust and any other from the conventional energy taps
may be collected in a low impedance container and recycled in the
propellant 2 directed at the plasma 9 where it's temperatures can'
render them harmless by altering the chemical and atomic structure;
thereby, decreasing the half lives of radioactive atoms to where they
stabilize in an ecological short time.


A means of detoxifying radioactive and chemical wastes is obtained
by mixing low level radioactive and chemical wastes with the
propellant 2. High level radioactive material can be combined with
the fuel disks 5. This allows the plasma 9 temperatures to break down
the chemical and atomic structures into harmless components. That
quantity not practical to convert to energy can be economically
delivered by my invention to deep space.

[To examiner]:
An atomic theory explaining the atomic alteration
of a liquid propellant 2 of water to it's exhaust form
"plasmelt" (coined from that which is melted and
vaporized by a plasma 9) from a plasma 9 of americium
241 in a steel casing I is beyond requirement for this
patent application for it's theoretical and therefore,
transient nature. A detailed atomic theory can be
found in the document disclosed at the time of this
application.


CLAIMS
I claim:
1. My invention is an atomic rocket engine that provides a means
to contain a plasma, generated by radioactive metal
above critical mass, by using a liquid propellant to contain
the plasma and insulate a casing from it; thereby, directly
changing the chemical and atomic structure of a liquid
propellant; thereby causing expansion which is contained
in two dimensions with the leak of the changed propellant from
the third dimension; thereby accelerating the engine.

I claim:
2. My invention uses a casing and propellant to directly
contain and harness the atomic energy of a plasma in the
dimensions required of a rocket engine and consists of all
atomic engines of this type in a range of the basic unregulated,
unguided, rocket to the fully functional engine
and that the operating temperatures of the plasma contained
range from below the melting point of the radioactive metals
used to the temperatures of a blue white star which can give
a range of velocities from dead stop to faster than light.

I claim:
3. A preferred embodiment of a means to generate a plasma by
the plasma generator assembly that can deliver one or more
multiple plasmas to the plasma chamber.

I claim:
4. My invention is a means to create temperatures of an
extent to effect the atomic and chemical structure of the
propellant; thereby, creating a means to reduce the half
life of radioactive atoms by using the plasma temperatures
to convert radioactive and chemical wastes in an
ecologically short time.

I claim:
5. My invention is a means to generate electricity
by harnessing the energy in the propellant with conventional
technology and that it effectively will contain a propellant
in two dimensions and future technology may contain it in
three dimensions therefore; should my invention be the basis
for this container in the life of this patent, I claim
credit as co-inventor.

I claim:
6. My invention is an electric armor that is a means of
protecting an object from projectile collision, whereby, a
shape memory metal is heated electrically at the time of
collision to use the metals spring back effect to add to the
effective thickness of the shield, thereby increasing the
resistance to penetration.

I claim:
7. My invention is a rocket engine that is a means to test Einstein's
theory that a man made object other than a particle accelerator
may travel faster than light.

ABSTRACT
My invention is an atomic powered rocket engine that
contains a plasma and harnesses it's energy directly to
accelerate a propellant It increases the velocities
and payload handling capabilities by many factors over present
rockets including chemical and atomic. It is more cost efficient,
more reliable, safer and faster than any previous invention
chemical or atomic. It has the potential to populate the stars with mankind.

__________________
Thomas Hulon Jackson
Scientist/Engineer/Technician

Einstein's relativity does permits warping time (time dilation) to permit faster than light velocities(warp speed) with respect to (wrt) the ship accelerating at 1 g wrt the earth even though the velocity wrt the earth is less than C. Derived from the same equations warping space by accelerating at a constant 1 g with respect to the ship one warps both space and time also thereby obtaining warp speed wrt earth.

Using Einstein's equations placed in a Java Calculator:


For a one way trip to the the closest star at a constant 1g wrt earth to mid trip point and decelerating at 1 g the remainder of the journey.

Trip length: 4.25 light years (ly)
Acceleration: 1.0 g wrt earth
Time on earth: 5.8780560467144 years.
Time on ship: 3.544401860293398 years

As Velocity = distance traveled/ time traveled

Velocity average wrt ship = 4.25 ly/3.5 year = 1.2 C = warp speed 1.2 wrt ship
Velocity average wrt earth = .732 C

In the case of a 1 g acceleration measured wrt the ship so that the crew "feels" a constant artifical gravity field of 1 g the entire trip the rocket man returns to earth to find his left behind evil twin his same age having warped both space and time to obtain warp speed 1.2 wrt earth.

For a one way trip to the edge of the observable universe measuring a constant 1g wrt earth to midpoint and decelerating at 1 g the remainder of the journey.

Trip length: 1.7E10 light years.
Acceleration: 1.0 g.
Time on earth: 1.7004884192539843E10 years.
Time on ship: 45.71651222563561 years.

Velocity average with respect to (wrt) earth =
17E10 light years /1.7004884192539843 years =
.99971277707718905089055716347216 C
Velocity average wrt ship
1.7E10 light years/45.71651222563561 =
371856888.C

1 g acceleration wrt earth wrt earth Velocity = .99971277707718905089055716347216 C
Velocity average wrt ship = warp speed 371856888.7
of case one (1 g wrt earth).

In case two (1 g wrt ship)
This is also the velocity wrt earth when measuring the constant 1 g wrt ship.

Therefore, the rocket man returns to earth 90 years later to find his left behind evil twin his same age instead of ancient bones having warped both space and time to obtain:
warp speed 371856888.7 wrt earth.

If Christ was resurrected after death and did ascended to the heavens on a 1 g rocket ship to visit his father at a 1000 ly distant star he could return today Obeying Einstein's laws some 27 years older and he might be ticked off so behave as:

Trip length: 1000.0 light years.
Acceleration: 1.0 g.
Time on earth: 1002.2235407106124 years.
Time on ship: 13.453214568643295 years.


For the energy requirements and atomic rocket technology
for say a minimum distance to mars?
Minimum Trip length: 5.7605E-6 light years.
Acceleration: 1.0 g.
Time on earth: 0.006683627669698874 years. (1.73 days)
Time on ship: 0.00668361442242196 years.(1.73 days)
Velocity Max= 1g times time to mid distance = 687.960 km/sec

Estimating the ratio of mass final/mass initial >=.99 as atomic powered rockets are a minimum of 100,000,000 times as powerful as
chemical rockets of the same size when operating at near 100% efficiency like current chemical rockets so for same size payload to
given velocities the engine can be 100,000:1 for fission engines to 1,000,000,000:1 to one for fusion engines smaller by that factor.

Algebraic shorthand operands
: denotes defined as;
^denotes exponent;
~ approximate
delta denotes "change in"

Variables
V=velocity; Vr=velocity of rocket; Ve= velocity of exhaust
E=Energy; Ek = kinetic energy; Ep = potential energy
M=Mass; Mr=mass of rocket; Me = Mass of Exhaust

Constants
1 HorsePower = 33,000 Foot Pounds / 1 Minute
C = 186,000 miles/sec as constant velocity of light
g = 1gravity= 32.2 feet/sec^2
Gearth =earth gravitational constant = 6.67 x 10^-11 N*m^2 / kg^2 (Gmars ~1/3Gearth
r =equatorial radius of Earth =6378 km
mars distance =Minimum = 54.5Ee6 kilometers; Maximum 401.3e6 kilometers

Equations(eq)
(eq. 1) MeVe=MrVr :=momen6um conservative static science equation of rockets conserving momentum
(eq. 1a) Vrfinal = Vrinitial Ve * ln([Mr Me] / Mr := nonconservative engineering dynamic rocket equation
Not useful for atomic rockets as the Mf is much greater than 10 but very useful for chemical rockets
with typical Mf much less than 1 .(082 for space shuttle) so not used below as the difference in
calculated values as it is thought insignificant if not zero and 1a introduces errors with high Mf.
(eq.2) Ek = (MV^2)/2 := kinetic energy
(eq.3) Ep = MC^2 := potential energy
(eq.4) Ve=MrVr/Me := exhaust velocity
(eq.5) Vr = MeVe/Mr := rocket velocity
(eq.6) Vescape=square root ( 2GM/r)
(eq.7) Thrust =Mr * deltaVr/delta T = -Ve* delta Me/delta t
(eq. specifc impules(Isp) = Thrust /mass flow rate times g or = Mass flow rate* Ve; or
Isp = Ve/g
(eq.9) V=AT = acceleration times time
(eq.10) Mf= Mass fraction= (Mr Me)/Me

Calculated constants or Specified constants
Mr=100,000 tons
Me~=1000 tons
Thrust== -436 trillion horse power
Mass converted to energy ~= 1 ton
Total Impulse Momentum(Itot) =2887799039640 tons- feet/minute (deep space)
Isp = 1,494,200 seconds = specific impulse in earth's gravity field
Vescape from Earth = 11.2 km/sec; acceleration time at 1.2 g = 97.2 minutes
Vescape from Mars ~= 3.7 km/sec; acceleration time at .53 g = 32.4 minutes
Vrpeak at mid point=687.960 km/sec
Tmin = minimum distance one way trip time= 1.73 days 129.6 minutes = 1.82 days
Tmax = maximum distance coasting at zero mid journey for 1.45 days Tmin = 2.64 days
Round trip = 5.3 days (plus 1 day minus 3 days) depending on where Mars is at launch time using line of sight navigation

__________________
Thomas Hulon Jackson
Scientist/Engineer/Technician

Thanks for the thumbs up and hearty welcome Tom2Mars and StarLab. Good to be aamong friends and fellow manned space enthusiasts.


Actually the path to my warp drive began with a few simple steps. In 1963, I
read a signed 1955 work of Albert Einstein correcting the public
misconception that he taught of a universal light speed limit. He said he
never taught that as it was possible that a machine, other than a particle
accelerator, could be found to exceed light speed. I went looking for that
machine with out knowing if I was a victim a faked signature hoax or if he
was right or wrong.

Any how I lost the reference in 1968 so I found this reference some 40 years later.................
Therefore I conclude Einstein indeed denied ever making a light speed limit for mass claim or ever constructing such a mechanics as Henry Poincare suggested in 1904 perhaps must be constructed.

In high school in 1966, I calculated that if a object of mass was dropped into
a hypothetical constant one g gravity field of unlimited size for >355.25 days
of 1 g acceleration it would exceed light speed regardless of the mass and
energy as Velocity=Acceleration times time without mass and energy being
in the calculation.

Of course the 1 g field of unlimited size does not exist in nature, so one has
to create an artificial 1 g field using Einstein's equivalence principal of general
relativity combing gravity with inertia stating the effects of equal acceleration
and gravity are equal and indistinguishable from each other.

Looking at chemical rockets in production, I found one capable of perhaps 15
g of acceleration for perhaps 15 minutes which is the the same power as a
constant 1 g acceleration for several or more hours (3.75). Doing a little
ballpark math as there are 8544 hours at 1 g to light speed and dividing that
by 3.75 hours returns 2278.4. I therefore I would need 2278.4 times the time
of acceleration of chemical rockets to date hence 2,238 times the power.

It was clear I would need an atomic powered rocket.

Atomic power has 10^7 (fission) and 10^9 (fusion) times the power (enmergy density) of equal masses of chemical rocket engines when both operate near 100 percent efficiency. Therefore ideally I could accelerate at 1 g times 10,000,000 times 3.75 hours - 1,000,000,000 times 3.75 hours = warp speed 4389 to 438900

As both fission and fusion reactions are present in all known atomic powered
machines then a hybrid fission/fusion engine at 10^8 times the power of
equal mass of chemical rocket would reach warp speed 43890 in 42778
years and since I only need 49 years ship time at 1 g wrt ship to reach the
edge of the observable universe than a very inefficient atomic rocket at .1%
efficiency would do the job. If I could only get 1 g wrt earth I could still reach
all stars withing 43,000 light years distance from earth.

Calculating the efficiency (output power / (output power plus power losses)
known atomic rockets with best calculated trip time to near star at 45 years

such as:

Project Orion (pulse drive)
=.00025 %
Nuclear electric Propulsion (NEP)(ion drive - Project Vasimar)
.001 % efficiency
Nuclear thermal Propulsion (NTP) (solid core - Project Nerva)
= .0001 % efficiency
reference http://www.islandone.org/APC/Nuclear/chemnuke.gif
www.islandone.org/APC/

Therefore I needed to invent an engine operating near 100% as that is
common with chemical rockets. An necessity is indeed the mother of invention. I became a mom giving birth to a new invention so to speak. Easy to do as I was a teenager, but painful as I spent the next 33 years convincing others I was not crazy as I lost the signed Einstein work.

As Mass times velocity of exhaust = mass times velocity of rocket I just reduce the the 100,000 tons of the Mars rocket mass to 100 tons to achive warp speed 1.7


For the sample mars trip..
Trip length: 1.1521E-5 light years(ly).
Acceleration: 1.0 g.
Time on earth: 0.006683627669698874 years. (1.73 days)
Time on ship: 0.00668361442242196 years.

Velocity wrt earth = 0.0017237644838045070670356650784331
Velocity wrt ship = warp speed 0.0017237679003967890619212280596506

As the engineering constants have not been calculated
by physical measurement from 100's of atomic Rocket
engine tests like they have been measured and calculated
for chemical rockets I cannot just calculate
them looking up some values in engineering constant tables
as they do not exist yet for atomic engines.

Therefore I have to use analytic methods to calculate them
based on empirical equations.

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Einstein-At times like this when physical evidence
is not available one can rely on closeness to
experience (empirical evidence)"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In Little boy bomb tests the ideal shape for the gunpowder chamber was an elliptical cavity of eccentricity if 1/4 of width to length, In that manner the minimum volume of gun powder was found to accelerate the uranium disk (10kg) 70%U235 and it's tamper (40kg)99%U238 to some 3,000 miles per hour to collide with a fixed 70%U235 disk.

Giving a disk face Force of impact (Fi)=MVR with R being a constant of rigidity twixt zero and one with one being diamond Uranium being .98 Guinness world record pressure was achieved.

I use the same shape for my plasma chamber with the super critical mass at one focus and the liquid reduction nozzle at the other as any ray or particle of water or steam heated gaining velocity in any direction from the metal plasma's temperature of above 50,000 Kelvin will bounce (reflect) off the chambers walls arriving at the exhaust convergent nozzle entrance. Likewise the balancing force of all the pressure reflected from the chamber walls arrives at the plasma wall of a magnitude psi = x(surface area of plasma chamber) / 2(surface area of plasma).

This keeps it solid and in position as if it moves then the pressure opposite the direction it moves to drops and the low pressure and the local chamber pressure the direction it moves to increases and therefore the unbalanced force accelerate the plasma ball back to it's focus.

The constant 1/2 is in the above equation as half the chamber wall pressure is on one focus and half on the other.

Using just the exhaust velocity required for the Mars ship, I can now build my engine from the exhaust port forward like they did the Redstone sounding rocket knowing just the exhaust velocity required.

Total impulse 1000 tons Ve= 481299839.94 feet/sec times 1000 tons

Using a 1000 :1 reduction nozzle the velocity of average exhaust particle mass of a hydrogen atom, the mass flow rate and thus pressure remains the same at the entrance and exits with the in and out area of 1000 :1

The velocity of the mass it the entrance area of a plane intersecting the chamber at the aft focus is 481299 feet/sec and since this area is approx. 1/16 the surface area of the chamber the average velocity a typical particle colliding with the wall is 30081 feet per second or approx Mach 29 with Mach = speed of sound.

Convergent nozzles for A titanium circulating band saw using a band of sandy water flash heated to steam obtains an exhaust velocity of Mach seven to cut the titanium. The steam than cools back to water and reheated circulating like the continuous loop band in a metal band saw.

Chemical rockets chamber velocities are limited to Mach one at the convergent divergent nozzle choke point as the shock wave from breaking the sound barrier blocks the chamber causing the chamber to explode at higher velocities therefore they use the divergent nozzle outside the chamber
to get supersonic exhaust velocities.

When these rockets as Polaris missiles were fired underwater from a submarine launch tube, the water blocked the divergent nozzle causing the internal chamber pressure to build up making the rocket explode like a bomb. They solved the problem by ejecting the rockets from the launch tube with large amounts of steam or air creating gas large bubbles around the exhaust port to keep the exhaust nozzle open and at low pressure. Once the engine starts it works fine underwater.

Likewise for atom rocket exhaust velocities exasperating the problem, air itself will block the nozzle with the same effect. Therefore atomic rockets of my design must be started from a launch tube underground in which most of the air has been removed.

Putting my head in a Saturn 5 exhaust nozzle, I observed how flimsy the nozzle and chamber were consisting of relative thin structures to keep the mass required to a minimum. Atomic rockets do not have this mass constraint.

Spherical pressurized oxygen chambers used in buzz bombs of world war II have the thin iron walls wrapped with iron wire so they can be highly pressurized.

My engine therefore would be approx 100 tons 20 feet long (10 foot plasma chamber plus 10 foot reduction nozzle) with walls two feet thick of water cooled cast iron as it has one of the strongest molecular binding energy known. It is then wrapped with two feet thick 1/4 inch Iron wire topped with 900 ton tank of water propellant.

I will then test three 1/5 scale models to destruction with incrementally higher super critical masses until its operational limits are determined and measured expecting it to obtain the required exhaust velocities building one same scale flight test engine with 50% more engine mass added providing a safety factor of 50%. I will then build operate the full scale engine at 50% max rated power, to extend it's life and number of firings. I then will place all the mass (approx 100,000 tons) I can get on it while maintaining a constant one g acceleration for manned flights or (approx 7692 tons) at 13g for unmanned flights.

__________________
Thomas Hulon Jackson
Scientist/Engineer/Technician

Tom2Mars sez,
starship1- I don't know whether to say, "Welcome to the Forum", or "We're not Worthy!"

I'm sorry I missed your first post
You slipped that in when I had responded to Asei and then spent a few minutes writing about light bulbs.

And your second post...Wow. I'll have whatever StarLab's having right now, and make it a double, then I'll try to absorb some more.

I can tell you've spent some quality time on this.

Again, Welcome.

Star Lab sez,
Umm...Holy C******p!.... :huh: :wacko:
I'll say it for Tom: Welcome to the forum! We, the members, moderators and administrator, look forward to your input.

I cannot describe in detail what I'm having right now, but it could be one of the following: seizure, shock (& awe), relief, or just plain satisfaction that I'm not the only critical thinker in the entire forum

Starship1 sez
I am blushing


Spike sez,


Starship sez,

No, It is correct as the relativity equations are derived from Newtonian mechanics equations so relativity is not possible without them.

The effect you refer to is the "infinite energy argument" and it indeed holds true for conventional machines to date and is measured for particle accelerators whose particles are limited to sub light speed as the energy required from the accelerator base frame interacts to accelerate the particle whose relativistic mass increases towards infinity tends towards infinity. This is not the case with all machines such as rockets. Einstein warned do not mix frames of reference in relativity.

The argument fails in non conventional means of accelerating a mass as, in the case of the rocket moving mass to some velocity near c as one only need to eject some mass to accelerate the rocket further and since the energy is provided from the inertial frame of reference instead of a rest frame then the energy tending towards infinity is not observed or measured or calculated.

This can be easily visualized by observing an infinite number of observers outside the rocket traveling an infinite number of velocities each measuring and calculating an infinite number of different relativistic masses. Einstein determined all would then be incorrect as relativistic mass and relativistic energy had no real meaning as there was no absolute velocity or absolute frame of reference. Therefore both the rocket man and the external observer at rest can use the distance traveled and his own clock to calculate different velocities as V=AT. In simple terms Einstein's relativity applied to a car on a race track. Both the official and the driver can calculate the different velocities using their own watches with both velocities being valid eliminating the need for an "official" or proper time from Lorenz's relativity equations.

As he found velocities were relativistic than acceleration was relativistic so he derived the equation for relativistic acceleration in which A'=A times (gamma to the third power) with gamma being the time dilation factor.

Replacing A of 1 g and Plugging that Agamma^3 into Einstein's equations of the given Java calculator from the deasy site the gamma factors in both the denominators and numerators both cancel out so Einstein's relativity equations returns to V=AT permitting one to calculate both light speed and above light speed relativistic effects. It is observed that once the ship meets or exceeds light speed wrt earth the ship disappears from the observer ability to observe.

Emitted or reflected light from a C plus V object travels towards the observer at a constant light speed of C in a vacuum, However since the wave front is traveling at C wrt the ship of c plus v it obtains a minus velocity wrt the observer so traveling away from the observer at some v velocity never to be observed. Light from a rocket at C then would hang in space from where it was emitted. All is normal in space and time aboard the moving rocket at minus C, C and C plus V velocities.


Is that clear and have I answered your question?

__________________
Thomas Hulon Jackson
Scientist/Engineer/Technician

So starship1, let's chat about costs for a minute.

Whenever I come up with something that might be hard to explain or predict, or calculate and veryfy to my satisfaction, I build it. If I can, I find a simple way to build something for the lowest cost that can answer the basic questions and verify basic assumptions. Fortunately, for the kinds of things I am working on, costs are fairly low.

I can understand that for the engine you are describing, even for an initial small scale test engine, the costs would be higher. Are you, in a general way, able to quantify the costs in terms of:
a) the basic cost of the raw materials(at today's market prices)
b ) the pro-rated cost of equipment needed(for example, a 15 year lifespan milling machine used for x number of years)
and,
c) roughly the number of person-hours to fabricate and assemble the engine and associated systems?

What would you estimate, roughly, the cost in money and time to be? Roughly.

__________________
Pre-Quote: 'To survive one has to experiment. When the environment changes, the traditional way of doing things doesn't work.'

Quote:
"It's the outriders, the organisms that seem to be maladjusted before the change, which are the only ones that survive these changes...in that way a species continues."

Carl Sagan

Best to copy and paste the following text to notepad with font arial, reqular and size 10 to view the table. <_<
Oct 3 2003
Production ramp up.............. Year 1..................Year 2..................Year 3..................Total
Direct Labor......................... $200,000............$8,140,000.........$55,180,000 ....$63,520,000
Other Direct Costs – Subcontracts
Other Dire - Consultants....... 100,000..................200,000.............1,000 ,000.......1,300,000
Other Dire - Equipment......... 400,000..................800,000...........40,000, 000.....41,200,000
Other Dire - Supplies............ 50,000..................100,000............1,000,0 00.......1,150,000
Other Dire - Travel................. 40,000..................160,000...............320, 000..........520,000
Other Dire – Other (facilities).. 150,000..................300,000...............500 ,000..........950,000
Indirect CostsResearch......... 60,000..................300,000............2,000,0 00.......2,360,000
Fuel Disks/shared Costs....... <2,000,000>.........<500,000>.........<3,000,000>. .<5,500,000>
Subtotal - Estimated Costs:.. 3,000,000...........10,500,000.........103,000,000 ...116,500,000
Less: Proposed Cost Sharing* 2,000,000...............500,000.............3,000, 000.......5,500,000
Budget Total........................ $1,000,000.......$10,000,000.........100,000,0 00.. $111,000,000

* Cost Sharing: Department of Energy/NASA –provide fuel disks/oversight/security/cleanup

Last month I talked briefly to Dr. Steven D. Howe
for a proposed test site for the three scale model tests of year one to make sure its cost was within my previous budget.
It would take 16 million dollars to prep the site (retired chemical rocket launch tube) for testing and If I show up at the gate with an engine to test it is $2 million per test with 6 month cool down period between testswhich is doable in my three year budget. Therefore 6 million
can be moved from year two to year one to maintain my launch date for the full scale engine at the end of year two and full scale mass production capabilities at the end of year three..
The $16 million prep costs is a DOE cost as it is the only test facility for all other atomic rocket tests proposed as will be considerd a previously contaminated site suitable for reuse.

As I own the national and international patents I will then sell each 1000 ton engine to NASA and other countries for $1 billon each if the above costs to not increase significantly due to delay in NASA funding or to meet their future arbitray non requirements stated as requirements

As one engine will deliver approx 80,000 tons of payload both to and from Mars the cost per ton is $12,500 = $6.50 per pound payload.

As the engine is by design reusable for at least 100 such missions and the refueling costs each round trip of 900 tons of water and appoximately 1000 kg of radioactive metal from recycled reactor fuel waste and decomissoned atomic bomb fuel is considered insignifigant if not zero the cost drops to 6 1/2 cents per pound delivered to Mars or anyplace else in the solar system.

Example: The sample Mars engine reaches 689 km/sec peak velocity at mid trip therefore to make the journey to Pluto using the same engine. payload and line of sight navigation coasting at zero gravity at that velocity for 100 days one tranverses the 5.9 billon km to pluto in aprroximately 100 days.

__________________
Thomas Hulon Jackson
Scientist/Engineer/Technician

Sorry, I was gone for a few days there. So, if I was to try my cost-saving strategy on something like this, which is mostly labor and that's the easiest part to improve on, and also save on the facilities costs, share some techniques with the vendors with the equipment needed(the next biggest number), this could easily come down to less than $50 million, maybe $35 million.

At $15,000 profit per home, that represents the profit from about 2500 homes, which just happens to be the number of homes a local county cut from a developers planned 6,000 units because the developer couldn't provide the necessary utilities infrastructure...which my house designs wouldn't need in the first place.

So, if you know a developer that is having a problem getting their project approved somewhere, we can help them get through permitting and zoning process and build those extra houses and share in the profits, and there's your money.

Know any builder/developer's?

__________________
Pre-Quote: 'To survive one has to experiment. When the environment changes, the traditional way of doing things doesn't work.'

Quote:
&quot;It's the outriders, the organisms that seem to be maladjusted before the change, which are the only ones that survive these changes...in that way a species continues.&quot;

Carl Sagan

I'm skeptical, but I'll play along for a minute.

How do you get a 1000 ton (2,000,000 pound) engine into orbit? Does that include the propellant, or would you need to lift 900 tons of propellant, too? What about payload size and the size of the rest of the space craft?

How much propellant would you require to make one of your lightspeed trips to Wolf359 (constant 1g acceleration)? How big would the vehicle have to be to hold that volume?

How would you protect your vehicle from impacts with dust, solar wind ions, and micro-meteorites at high velocities? At just Earth orbit speeds a speck of dust will shoot through like a bullet. A baseball size rock would destory a space ship...

And, most importantly, with the fight against using RTG's, how are you going to convince the public to let you launch this thing loaded with 1000kg of radioactive material???

__________________
...and we'll be saying a big hello to all intelligent life forms everywhere; and to everyone else out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together, guys...

Sorry John L.
Convincing skeptics is not part of any scientific method I know of as skeptics demonstrate little if no training or formal education and do no real work, relying on the other fellow to do all the proof work and leg work so I do not play that game and instead spend my energy really working.

For the earth launched 1000 ton engine powering a 100,000 ton rocket to Mars at a constant 1 g

Mrocketr=100,000 tons of payload and ship skin
Mexhaust~=1000 tons of 100 tons engine and 900 tons of propellant
Thrust== -436 trillion horse power
Mass converted to energy ~= 1 ton over 1.73 days
Total Impulse Momentum(Itot) =2887799039640 tons- feet/minute (deep space)
Isp = 1,494,200 seconds = specific impulse in earth's gravity field
Vescape from Earth = 11.2 km/sec; acceleration time at 1.2 g = 97.2 minutes
Vescape or landing on/from Mars ~= 3.7 km/sec; acceleration time at .53 g = 32.4 minutes
Vrocket peak at mid point=687.960 km/sec
Tmin = minimum distance one way trip time= 1.73 days 129.6 minutes = 1.82 days
Tmax = maximum distance coasting at zero mid journey for 1.45 days Tmin = 2.64 days
Round trip = 5.3 days (plus 1 day minus 3 days) depending on where Mars is at launch time using line of sight navigation

let me see; since I can get 100,000 tons to 687.960 km/sec at 1 g what payload mass can I get to light speed at 299792.458 km/sec? Ans. 1/435 that or 229 tons but as that makes the ratio of rocket mass / (rocket mass + engine mass) much less than one a rough numerical integration sez 115 tons flying by Wolf 359 at near light speed in 8.5 years since it took 356 days at 1 g to reach light speed.

However; for the constant 1 g trip the distance
Trip length: 7.5 light years.
Acceleration: 1.0 g.
Time on earth: 9.239173075887965 years.
Time on ship: 4.391194445054074 years.

therefore distance traveled / ship time gives a average warp speed of 1.7 and v peak at warp 3.4 then the ball park figure of 115 tons / 3.4 or
33.8 tons payload size with the single 1000 ton Mars engine is more practical and fitting your specifications and converting 1 ton of propellant fuel to the required energy.

Interstellar space is mostly empty as particle mass collects in stars gravity wells and I am traveling at a very small fraction of light speed in those wells so steer away from the asteroids and ort cloud of comets. Well outside those wells I am traveling at light speed and beyond and the probability of collision decreases when velocity increases so the probability of me colliding with any mass at light speed and beyond is insignificant if not zero.


Shhh. I am going to launch without telling anybody and just let them catch me if they can which they cannot.

Seriously. My engine cannot explode like chemical rockets often do and on earth launch I emit only a few grams of radioactive metal out the exhaust port collected at the bottom of a 300 meter deep launch tube in 1000 tons of water to be recycled. Likewise on earth landing in the same launch tube I turn the engine off by flushing approximately 1000 kg of hot radioactive metal out the exhaust port to cool in the 1000 tons of water at the bottom of the tube for recycling.

In any case earthlings become much safer as I remove the radioactive metals from decommissioned nuclear reactors and atomic bomb from the surface of the earth and deliver them to deep space out of the hands of terrorists at the cost of 6.5 cents per pound.

__________________
Thomas Hulon Jackson
Scientist/Engineer/Technician

No I do not know any.

Do you have a weblink to your housing plans?

Do you have any idea what to put in a 100,000 ton rocket to provide a space colony with comfortable enough home and supplies for 10 years. I read a NASA site showing that for any trip less than 12 years in length it is more cost effective to just carry food and water supplies rather than growing them but I lost that link which is a shame as it was quite a detailed list. I recall it was from the Lunar Instititute of technology (LIT) for starship design plans archieves but the list was a nasa link. Thanx for the comment Tom2Mars

__________________
Thomas Hulon Jackson
Scientist/Engineer/Technician

de-starship1I could have saved a lot of time coming up with that years ago! Good Comment.

Actually, using that line in a public forum indicates that you are well on the way to fueling your engine, since you obviously have a significant quantity of ultra-dense mass(most likely nuclear material) which you are currently using as Kahuna's already!

__________________
Pre-Quote: 'To survive one has to experiment. When the environment changes, the traditional way of doing things doesn't work.'

Quote:
&quot;It's the outriders, the organisms that seem to be maladjusted before the change, which are the only ones that survive these changes...in that way a species continues.&quot;

Carl Sagan

__________________
Thomas Hulon Jackson
Scientist/Engineer/Technician

Since the total mass of the ship including propellant mass is constantly decreasing, are you varying Ve or q or both to maintain acceleration at one g? How many kg/sec of propellant is actually being discharged (if variable, on average)? What material is actually being discharged? What is the ratio of mass loss to energy conversion to that of the actually expelled propellant?

Indeed it is mostly empty, but only mostly. The center of the Oort cloud, radially speaking, is about one light year away; how fast do you plan to go through it. We can not be sure that the intragalactic density of Oort-cloud-like-stuff is insignificant. Caution is advised. It is not unreasonable to expect a cloud similar to the Oort around most stellar systems.

Why do you think going fast reduces the chances of collision? My guess is that stellar systems are slingshotting projectiles into individual galactic orbits from time to time thereby keeping intragalactic space well stocked with things to run into. Have you considered what limits to put on the radius of curvature of course changes required to avoid obstacles as a function of ship velocity? Even relatively small changes in direction at velocities near light speed can generate very strong g-forces perhaps sending you and other loosely anchored objects through the side of the ship if not ripping off the engines. Also, as you approach 0.5c radar-type detection of objects won't return data in time to initiate a successful maneuver.

__________________
For those inclined to oppose human meddling with the structure of the universe or the composition and configuration of objects and groups of objects within the universe, consider:
Whether there is a limit to the magnitude of a modulation of chaos below which order remains invariant? Or, is order but a fiction invented by perspectives applied over finite, however large, time intervals?

Those were the points I was trying to make, Gourdhead. If you are going to accelerate at a constant 1g, then you have to constantly be expelling propellant to do so. If a flight is going to take even days for an interplanetary trip the amount of propellant has to be large to maintain that thrust, which is why I questioned the ability for this system to even place itself into Earth orbit before launching on its trip to Mars or Wolf359 (total vehicle weight vs thrust). Or will this have to be assembled piece by piece in orbit?

And even encountering a diffuse gas at near lightspeed would destroy the craft without some form of protection, which at the moment doesn't exist. You could use magnetic fields to protect against ions, but that doesn't stop molecules. Just hoping not to hit anything is not a wise way to fly.

And, starship1, I'm an accountant, but I try to keep up with physics and general scientific advancements. I'm was previously aware of the old Nerva system and the new Project Promethius, as well as most of the theoretical systems detailed on the JPL website you so often refer to. I don't appreciate being insulted because I question the feasibility of your system.

__________________
...and we'll be saying a big hello to all intelligent life forms everywhere; and to everyone else out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together, guys...

starship sez,
....33.8 tons payload size with the single 1000 ton Mars engine is more practical and fitting your specifications and converting 1 ton of propellant fuel to the required energy.

Guordhead sez
Using the Mars engine for star travel I vary both Ve and q as the average propellant flow rate (q) for the Mars engine is 6.8 pounds/sec ejected at .44 C. The Mars rocket configuration arrives with the approximate same mass (99,000 tons) as it left earth with 101,000 tons so both Ve and q vary only slightly over the trip time of 1.73 days and so the mass converted to energy in that time is approx. equal amounts.

For the star journey as the payload is reduced to 38 tons the mass taking off is a very small fraction of the mass arriving with the mass fraction estimated at 48 tons / 1038 tons. That requires I vary both Ve and q with the adjustable liquid reduction nozzle used to vary Ve but as q remains the same at the input and output of the reduction nozzle, to very q I decrease the number of radioactive fuel disks inserted as the ship becomes lighter. A balancing act twixt Ve and q so to speak by varying the one ton of converted mass to energy in plasma generator steps and smoothing the "step" shaped acceleration curve of incrementally smaller plasma generators inserted over the travel time with changing the exhaust velocity over time maintaining a constant one g acceleration the total rocket time of 34.9 years to wolf star with a varying ship mass.

As average velocity of a exhaust particle at the liquid ablative walls of the elliptical plasma chamber is Mach 30 of a molar mass of hydrogen and the force 16 times that inserted on the supercritical metal plasma of surface area 1/16 that of the plasma chamber so compresses it to it's liquid state with the viscosity of asphalt on a cold day remaining for all practical purposes a solid though liquid undergoing fusion converting some mass to energy. As the water propellant is heated to it's plasma state the oxygen fissions to hydrogen atoms converting some mass to energy. So the ejected propellant is mostly hydrogen mixed with a small percentage of water and a smaller percentage of oxygen fission products coined "plasmelt" with an average molar mass of hydrogen. In both the Wolf trip and the Mars trip approximately 1 ton of the 1000 tons of supercritical mass and water propellant is converted to energy.

Interstellar space is mostly empty as particle mass collects in stars gravity wells and I am traveling at a very small fraction of light speed in those wells so steer away from the asteroids and ort cloud of comets. Well outside those wells I am traveling at light speed and beyond and the probability of collision decreases when velocity increases so the probability of me colliding with any mass at light speed and beyond is insignificant if not zero

As I said I do not plan to go through the Ort cloud. Like our galaxy our solar system is basically flat with the planets, asteroid belt and ort cloud forming a relative thin orbital plane. I take to the stars in a trajectory perpendicular to that plane. I could go through it as dispacement(distance) = Acceleration times (time squared)/2 so by the time I get to light speed in 356 days at a constant 1 g I am far beyond the Ort cloud.

I observed the Monte Carlo simulations for particle collisions in 1968 programmed with the laws of probability. In probability theory's rain drop effect one gets less wet running from his house to the door way across the street than he does by walking as he gets hit by fewer water drops from the field of drops as his velocity increases. I also use the same effect in reverse to keep all radiation from the crew and melting the engine casing. Place a radioactive source near a detector and place a 1/2 inch thick wall of water in a class tube between the source and detector. Increasing the velocity of the water and soon the radioactivity detected drops and any heat emitted drops to zero.


That is a dramatic scenario and so good grist for science fiction novel; however the math does not support the conclusion.

Besides my rocket shape is streamlined as the probability decreases with the cross section as it does with velocity so the probability of collision is considered insignificant if not zero besides the electric armor of my own invention adds additional protection as does precise steering controls and a window facing forward .

__________________
Thomas Hulon Jackson
Scientist/Engineer/Technician

When I multiply 3600 seconds per hour by 24 hours per day by 356 days by 6.8 pounds per second and divide by 2000 pounds per ton I come up with 104578.56 tons as your propellant tonnage to reach light speed. When I multiply 3600 times 24 times 1.73 times 6.8 and divide by 2000, I come up with 3599.858832 tons of propellant to reach max velocity to Mars. What am I missing?

No one has seen the Oort cloud; it has been postulated from the somewhat random orientation of the planes of the orbits of long period comets. The cloud is assumed to be spherical, a spherical shell around the solar system. If so, it will be hard to reach any other stellar system without passing through it. I'm assuming that the spherical shell is several tenths of a light year thick and ranges from about 50000 to 76000 AUs although I've seen other values for its size. If we can't observe the Oort cloud directly, we can't know how thick intragalactic space is populated with similar objects because our current instruments can't see them either. Again, caution is advised. Remember you can't acquire data fast enough to detect and avoid objects after the ship passes about 0.4c. The radar round trip is the time required for the ship to travel 0.8c-seconds (148800 miles) then you add detection and processing time to determine whether and where trajectories will intersect and to compute and command steering instructions.

What is the maximum rate of steering angle change the math will support. Have you constructed a safe rate of direction change as a function of ship velocity? At velocities equal to or greater than 0.5c you can't detect an object on a collision course much less avoid it.

When traveling at c, 186000 times 5280 = 982080000 feet per second. The cosine of 5 degrees = 0.999614. A five degree change in direction per second would generate (1 - 0.999614)* 982080000) feet per second velocity change = 379082.88 feet/sec. If it takes 5 seconds (the ship will have traveled 5*186000 miles) to effect the change in direction, the g force is 379082.88/5/32 = 2369.268 g's. This seems a bit much for people and equipment mountings to withstand. Science fiction writers conveniently avoid troublesome unpleasantries.


From d = at*(1 + 0.5*t) and using 32 feet/sec^2 for a, I get a tad over
1433453381934.54 miles or just under 15413.48 AUs traveled in 356 days. Due to uncertainities of our understanding of the distance to the inner radius of the Oort cloud you may not have reached it before you would have reached light speed.



Should this value be 987.960 km/sec?

__________________
For those inclined to oppose human meddling with the structure of the universe or the composition and configuration of objects and groups of objects within the universe, consider:
Whether there is a limit to the magnitude of a modulation of chaos below which order remains invariant? Or, is order but a fiction invented by perspectives applied over finite, however large, time intervals?

I am glad to have the chance to use my new calculator with the metric conversions to check this math.

As usual, GOURDHEAD is the guiding light of the practical mind, and I trust his analysis of the radar return and analysis timing.

But all my openmindedness has hit a wall with the mention by starship1 of I don't understand, is this humor? If there is a window, where is the shape reforming mnemonic metal?

There is an old trick where someone holds a dollar above your open (and ready to grab) forefinger and thumb. When they release the dollar, you do not have sufficient reaction time to grab the dollar. Of what use is a window to not only see but protect against a speck of dust or grain of sand, impacting with the explosive force of a couple of kilotons at 1/2 the speed of light?

Arthur C. Clarke went to great length to describe the ablative ice shield protecting an interstellar ship in the book, "Songs From Distant Earth". That I understand. :unsure:

__________________
Pre-Quote: 'To survive one has to experiment. When the environment changes, the traditional way of doing things doesn't work.'

Quote:
&quot;It's the outriders, the organisms that seem to be maladjusted before the change, which are the only ones that survive these changes...in that way a species continues.&quot;

Carl Sagan

Gourdhead and Tom2Mars
Hold your horses please I am trying to get a three year old to bed plus trnsfer many of my text files to this computer for=e ease of reference and get some time of focus and consentration to reply. The questions your both raise are good ones so you deserve a good answer.

Adressing the oort cloud now, I will recheck my math as time permits Gourdhead may of found an error. I rejoice when a reader actully checks my math as two heads are better than one.


Like I said I need only to take off perpindicular to the ecliptic plane to avoid the comets-well 5/6 of them any way. the remaining 1 trillion are spread so thin the likelyhood of me hiting one with a 10 meter diameter rocket is insignifigant if not zero.

I can best explain this if you can visulize my trajectory path being roughly a cylinder 10 meters in diameter and 7.5 light years long. I do not care if 10 million baseball size rocks at various velocites intersect that volume over the trip times of 4.5 years as the chance that one will be where my ship is at any one time is next to zero.

Good math does not replace good measuremnt test so the best I can do is send unmanned probes and see how many take the trip without damage.

__________________
Thomas Hulon Jackson
Scientist/Engineer/Technician

A window would be great! but how do you even get an effective radar system operating?

I'm a big fan of C + V theory, and would love to see it work. But, I will fight tooth and nail before any sort of Nuclear Propulsion sets off near earth.

Get out past the Asteroid belt. put some space between the Earth and your engine.

I think, for a window, you would be better off building a path, using unmanned probes and setting up a radar array along your track with a preceding 'plough' before any sort of manned vessel.

I hate being a wet blanket. The maths you speak is a lot beyond me. but good luck.

__________________
My Webpage

I am not going without a window as the Mercury astronauts demanded one and received it and I will have a radar at sub light speeds. I do not know why I would even need a radar as I would use simple line of sight navigation at sub light speeds and navigate with my clock and 3 axis accelerometer at superlight speed to plot my position in space and time. Any communication with external rockets would establish their position relative to mine.

I am on your side so why fight as the problems atomic technology has caused in the past can be solved with atomic technology in the future. I just use algebra and any high school graduate should be able to follow my math or at least read my bold calculations and the seven simple equations [Eq. 1-7] as windows scientific calculator has the natural log number function LN like so:

At one billion dollars/engine I can deliver 80,000 tons of payload to Mars for $6.25 / ton in 1.73 days and as each engine can be used 100 times reducing the cost to 6.25 cents/pound, or I can deliver 8,000,000 tons of Earth's radioactive metals waste from dismantled nuclear reactors and decommissioned atomic bombs to deep space low solar orbit for 6.25 cents per pound. This puts radioactive metals out of the hands of terrorists who will given time convert it with public domain atomic bomb plans to atomic bombs and blow up reactors bypassing the safety systems preventing a China syndrome effect greatly amplifying the destructive effects of even small atomic bombs. It is equally likely they will detonate a small atomic bomb in a atomic waste dump site making it airborne fallout.

Would you like to calculate yours our your children's number years remaining of surviving here. Would you like to calculate how long of time it will take them if you leave the hundreds of thousands of tons of toxic metals on earth if you do not let me get rid of the stuff?

My guess is you would not last very long unless you let me get rich as a toxic garbage man so I can fund my trip to the stars when the job is done. I will fight tooth and nail - Resistance is futile.

Drat-These fellow's below also have a plasma engine able to get to Mars in a few days but I can find no details <_< - they must keep it very secret however you are lucky you have me to talk to. h34r:

The final velocity of a rocket propelled projectile depends upon how much
propellant you have and how fast the exhaust velocity is. The formula for
determining the speed of a rocket is called the "dynamic" ROCKET EQUATIONS:

^denotes exponet like x squared = x^2

[Eq. 1] Vf = Ve * LN((1/(1-u)) where Vf=final velocity, Ve=exhaust velocity of 81840 miles/sec
u=propellant fraction, c = light speed 186,000 miles/sec
LN:=Natural Log: that is log e, where e is the natural constant that is approximately 2.718281828. So x=log y <=> e^x=y. do not confuse with exhaust e

(Eq. 2) Vf=Ve[ln(Minitial/Mfinal)]

(Eq. 3) Vf = Ve * LN(1/(1-u)) ---> u = 1- 1/EXP(Vf/Ve)

Of rocket
90.227 % Propellant = 902.727 tons propellant
6.000 % Structure = 60 tons structure
3.773 % Payload = 37 tons payload
u = .90227 = 902.727 tons of propellant / 1000 tons of rocket
Ve= 81840 miles/sec therefore:

Vf = (81840 miles/sec ) (LN(1/(1-.090227))
=(.44 times 186,000 miles/sec ) (LN 10.)
=(81840 miles/sec)(2.3255467)
Vf =190,322.7 miles/sec = 1.023 C or warp speed 1.02 arriving with 37 tons of payload and 60 tons of structure.

checking my results of equation one with equation 3

Vf=Ve[ln(Minitial/Mfinal)]
(190,322.7 miles/sec)/(81840 miles/sec) = ln(1000 ton / 97tons)
2.3255 = ln 10.10.30927
2.325546 ~ =2.33304 rounding to 3 signifigant digits
2.33=2.33 so answer checks correct with either equation

A round trip to Mars with the same engine at a constant 1 g acceleration to midpoint and a constant 1 g decelleration to stop at Mars requires an engine capable of substaining 1 g the entire trip time of 1.73 days and so an engine capable of obtaining a velocity = 1g times 1.73 days as

[Eq. 4] V=AT therefore a

Vmars in miles / sec = 1 g times 1.73 days
= [(32.2 feet/sec*sec)/(5820 feet/miles)](1.73 days)(24 hours/day)(60 minutes/hour)(60 seconds/min)
= (0.005532646 miles/sec*sec)(149472 seconds)
Vmars = 826.975670 miles/sec = 0.004446105 C

Vf/Ve=[ln(Minitial/Mfinal)
(826.97567 miles/sec)/(81840 miles/sec) = ln (Minitial / (Mintial-902.727 tons)
0.01010478 = ln (Minitial) / (Mintial-902.727 tons)
1.01015601 = (Minitial) / (Mintial-902.727 tons)
1.01015601(Mintial-902.727 tons)= (Minitial)
1.01015601Mintial -911.895105 =Minital subtracting Mi both sides
0.01015601Mintial -911.89510=0 adding constant both sides
0.01015601Mintial = 911.89510
Minitial=911.89510 / 0.0101560
Mintial = 89,788.7 tons for the Mars rocket

Propellant = 902.727 tons propellant with Ve=of 81840 miles/sec and Vf= 826.975 miles/sec
Structure + payload = 88,886 tons as 80,000 tons is payload and 8,886 tons is structure
propellant fraction (u)= 902.727 tons / 89,788.7 tons = 0.0100539 ~= 1/100

[Eq. 5] E=MC^2
M=E/C^2 tells one what energy that some mass converts to.

[Eq. 6] Ekinetic = (MV^2)/2 so I need to convert mass to energy to propell 902.727 tons of propellant to 81840 miles/sec
Ek=(902.727 tons )(81840 miles/sec)(81840 miles/sec)/2
Ek=6046271901331.2/2 tons-mile^2/sec^2
= 3023135950665.6 tons-mile^2/sec^2 therefore

M = (3023135950665.6 tons-mile^2/sec^2) / C^2 as C= 186,000 miles /sec
M = (3023135950665.6 tons-mile^2/sec^2) / 34596000000 miles^2/sec^2
M = 87.3839736 tons of propellant mass coverted to energy ~= one part of propellant in 10 parts converted to energy

[Eq .7] Power=weight x distance traveled/time (P=WD/t)
distance traveled=AT^2/2 = (32.2 feet / sec^2 )(149472s)(149472s)/2 = (32.2 feet / sec^2 )(2.9929 days)/2
____Horsepower can be determined by dividing the result of this equation by 550 foot-pounds per second.
____Example 1: A rocket totals 89,788.7 tons, If the rocketman flies his constant 1 g rocket past Mars a distance of 359,704,248,422.4 feet vertical feet in 1.73 days, his horsepower can be calculated as:

Power = 179577400 pounds times 359704248422.4 feet / 149472 serconds
= 64594753700648693760ft-pounds /149472 sec
=1305683087416087.7619663648124191 ft-lb/sec
= (1305683087416087.7619663648124191 ft-lb/sec) / (550 ft-lb/sec) dividing by one horsepower
= 2,373,969,249,847 horsepower ~=2.4 trillon horsepower or 1,770,981 gigawatts for the light speed or Mars misson with approximately a thousand ton engine

Eq. 1-7 is an incomplete set of Rocket Science equations.

As I am ejecting the propellant at .44 C a small amount of relativistic effects limit the exhaust momentum transferred to the rocket estimated at 5% loss and as I convert 1 propellant part in 10 to energy than that mass is not considered in the propellant momentum estimated at 10% loss so the final mass and velocity calculations above are estimated at 15% high until I recalculate with relativity equations and propellant mass lost converted to energy so the above are to be considered ball park calculations until that time.

In any case, simply decreasing the payload mass a relative small amount estimated at 15%, I can achieve the stated velocites as calculated above for both the light speed and Mars trip.

I may have missed some previous repliers questions they really want answers to. If so please ask them now and thank you for your patience. :unsure:

__________________
Thomas Hulon Jackson
Scientist/Engineer/Technician

The heat from nuclear fission is high enough to vaporize a liquid, and expand a gas, and even to convert some gases into a plasma, but it will not generate 2,000,000 pounds of thrust! Your 1000 ton vehichle will require more than that in order to achieve Earth orbit.

And although I can't find an original quote of you refering to the energy that can be obtained from chemical versus nuclear reactions, you seem to be mistaking the efficiency of nuclear processes. You refer to 100,000's to 10,000,000 times the energy in nuclear versus chemical, but you can't use a straight mass to energy calculation to determine the energy obtainable from a nuclear process. Fission in a reactor style process is slow and only a small percent of the mass of the material is actually converted to energy. Even in a bomb style critical mass reaction you are only converting a few percent of the material's mass into energy. The fission byproducts constitute the majority of the mass and is not itself converted to energy. Even in fusion the vast majority of the mass of the fusion reactants are maintained in the fusion product.

You mentioned maintaining temperatures from the melting point of the material to that of a blue-white star, but how will you contain that heat let alone radiate it away? We have to use highly exotic materials and massive systems to generate intense magnetic fields to contain the plasma in a torus fusion reactor. You mention an engine of only a 1000 tons, but that pales in comparison to the size of the best systems we have of containing the high temperature plasmas you seem to be contemplating.

Bomb grade radioactive material require warehouses filled with gas centrifuges and years to produce enough material for a single bomb. It is a massive undertaking and the size of the ship you are refering to could not hold that many gas centrifuges. And even then non-bomb grade material is never found in consentration, but must be concentrated from tons of ore in complex smelting processes, which is another system your ship lacks the size to hold.

First, the US army is currently testing electro-magnetic armor for the next generation tank, but your design may be unique to you and I'll leave that point. The energy released from a single atom impacting you're ship will not be held off by a simple electro-magnetic shield, and the shield will not work on neutral molecular particles which also exist in in interstellar space.

The BIG problem is that you are talking about streamlining a vehicle designed to operate in a vacuum. The particles you encounter aren't going to pass across a streamlined surface like a car body in a wind tunnel. They're going to impact the surface of your vehicle and explode with the force of tiny atomic bombs. If you are really going to be traveling at greater than the speed of light then the impact velocity will be that high as well. Single atoms will quickly pit the surface until it loses structural integrity and grains of sand will blast fist sized holes straight through the skin at the speed you're talking about. You claim that interstellar space is virtually devoid of matter, but that's simply not true. The Sun is almost surrounded by gas clouds of varying density, there is interstellar dust, and no one, not even you, knows what the maximum mass for a non-stellar body is in the depths of interstellar space or the density of those bodies. I still find your assumptions in this regard baselss.

WHAT!!! Altering the atomic structure? Now your atomic rocket is capable of alchemy? Radioactive decay is not powered by any heat you can generate. It is a reaction of the weak nuclear force!

__________________
...and we'll be saying a big hello to all intelligent life forms everywhere; and to everyone else out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together, guys...

I really want an answer to these questions. If this is a workable design then I say lets get going! I just don't see it working, though.

__________________
...and we'll be saying a big hello to all intelligent life forms everywhere; and to everyone else out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together, guys...

Good questions John and I will answer them soon as I have FAQ I can pull most of them from it, though you did ask one or two unique ones I will have to give some thought to; however I have to move some boxes to a warhouse tonight and I am already beat so it may be a day or two.

Thanks for your good questions and you interest. BTW I meant no personal insult when I expressed my feeling for skeptics developed over 40 years of teaching the possibility of faster than light and starships and my atomic bomb designs.

As I have encountd 100's of skeptics and if I let each one work my body or mind I would of had no time for designing atomic rockets and bombs. As sketptics are a contining precence in my life for so long, I even take comfort in their precence as I see them generally as dump as fence posts marking my path through life and when one pops up I know I am on the right path so am comforted though I rejoice to see them in my review mirror

It is could to know you are an accountant so you at least posses the rare ability to know how to count, so I can teach you to count velocites faster than light with the real nyumber system.

Again I have read many of your posts and you demonstrarte knowledge greater than the average bear regarding rockets so your questions are always welcome.

__________________
Thomas Hulon Jackson
Scientist/Engineer/Technician

Skeptics can mean one of two things. You've either figured out the truth, and are battling against the dogma, or your terribly wrong, and everyone is just trying to put you back on track. Personally, I hope you're right, but I still don't see it.

And my first passion is science, but I went into business school for the money. I still subscribe to some science mags (not the technical journals but stuff like New Scientist, Nature, Sci Am, Popular Science) and I come to sites like this to follow the latest developments and discuss my and other peoples views. I also download the occasional abstract when it involves string/M theory as those are two that I'm interested in, but I can't quite follow that math.

PS, as for my alchemy comment I think the way you explained that may have not been totally clear. If you could just clarify that I'm sure it'd make more sense.

__________________
...and we'll be saying a big hello to all intelligent life forms everywhere; and to everyone else out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together, guys...

Hey Starship1, I certainly have empathy for your feelings about skeptics. The concept of "skeptics" came up quite a bit in the book/film, 'Contact' and reminded me of an appropriate Carl Sagan story.

Many years ago, I presented a paper at a couple of conferences that Carl Sagan was at and he expressed interest and I sent him a copy to look over. Basically, I outlined the technology whereby we could do a Mars Mission for about 250 times less than Nasa had estimated(their mission came in at over 350 billion dollars).

Well, Carl could certainly have focused his attention on some specific detail and tried to discredit the whole approach, like some folks are fond of doing. But being a great man, and having seen and appreciated creativity in all kinds of people, he chose instead to be as encouraging as possible, with a bit of humor thrown in. At the end of his response to me, he wrote, "even if you are only 1% correct, it would still be worthwhile to pursue some of your ideas." Then he recommended me to the National Space Council, which seemed to indicate that he thought I was doing a bit better than only 1%.

So, considering the potential speeds of the vehicle you have designed and the capabilities of your engine, I would like to paraphrase Carl Sagan and say, "even if you are only 1% correct, your ship would still be the fastest one in the Solar System."

__________________
Pre-Quote: 'To survive one has to experiment. When the environment changes, the traditional way of doing things doesn't work.'

Quote:
&quot;It's the outriders, the organisms that seem to be maladjusted before the change, which are the only ones that survive these changes...in that way a species continues.&quot;

Carl Sagan

My invention is an atomic rocket engine that contains a plasma
generated by radioactive metal above critical mass. It uses the heat to accelerate a liquid propellant. The energy produced gives thousands of times more thrust per pound than chemical rockets presently used and produces greater efficiency and velocity than proposed atomic rockets.

My 2.4 trillion horsepower engine accelerates at 1. 2 g for 97 minutes obtaining Earth escape velocity as one g cancels earth's gravity leaving it with a net .2 g acceleration to leave earth with. As that horsepower, my Mars engine accelerates at 1 g for 1.73 days to Mars or 2491 minutes so 97/2491 times 100 only ~= 4 percent of the engines power is used to escape earth as:

Earth's gravitational constant
r= radius of earth
M=mass of earth
Vescape=square root ( 2GM/r)
G=6.67 x 10^-11 N*m^2 / kg^2
r=6378 km
M= 5.976 * 10^24 kg
Vescape= 11.2 km/sec


Conventional reactors are limited in the percent of the mass they can convert to energy by the melting temperature of those reactors so only a small fraction of the mass is converted to energy. Bomb casing s are limited to a tenth of a microsecond containment time as the amount of time they can contain the accelerated decay rate so only a small fraction of available mass is converted to energy.

My engine does not have those same time and temperature limitations so a much higher percentage of the propellant and fuel mass converts to energy.


original a supporting reference I have not read or checked
Robert Zubrin's Entering Space: Creating a Spacefaring Civilization as reference for the efficiencies.
quote....Lord Flasheart read it an commented -Now, what I don't get is how your design, the Hybrid Fission/Fusion rocket, can achieve the effective-ness of a rocket propelled by antimatter and matter. If you combine the percentages so they apply to your rocket, then you'll have:

Fission-3%
Fusion-10%
Plasma- aprx. 15% end quote.........

I need only convert 100 tons of 907 tons of propellant and fuel mass to energy and 10% of some 907 tons is 90.7 tons of which 1 ton is radioactive metal fusion energy and 900 tons is oxygen fissoning to hydrogen and 6 tons miscellaneous fission and fusion products of the fuel and propellant.

The equations to calculate Engine efficiency
These equations give:

Nuclear electric Propulsion (NEP)(ion drive - Project Vasimar) .001 % efficiency
Nuclear thermal Propulsion (NTP) (solid core - Project Nerva) = .0001 %
Project Orion (Nuclear pulse propulsion(NPP) =.00025 %
Inertial Confinement Fusion (ICF) = 32% (d/t fusion)
Beam Core = 16%
Chemical powered rockets > 99% (space shuttle main engines)
Hybrid Fission/Fusion > 99% (Americium 241 plasma rocket engine)

I did the proof of principal tests in my lab where I generated a 3000 degree plasma heating water to it's steam point then sending it to a reduction nozzle increasing the exhaust velocity demonstrating I did not need exotic materials or a magnetic field to contain a plasma. I used a unwaxed paper cup to heat the water in and a snow cone cup with the tip cut of to reduce the exhaust cross section increasing it's velocity out the exhaust port. To simulate the plasma generating the heat I used a candle flame. The paper cup did not burn over the flame (plasma) as the conductive, convective and radiant heat paths were under control. When I repeated the experiment with a waxed cup, I lost control as the wax from the paper ignited burning a hole in the cup loosing the propellant. My engine uses the exact same methods of convective conductive and with added radiant heat path control as all excess heat is ejected from the exhaust port.



Interstellar mass density has been measured by calculating the mass of the universe and dividing it by the volume of the universe after subtracting the mass in the estimated solar systems. It is something like 1 gram times 10 to the - minus 37th power per cubic kilometer within a wide error range. I multiply that amount of interstellar mass by a million factor so my calculations are on the conservative side using 1 gram times 10 to the -31 power / cubic kilometer with the mass contained in various size and velocity objects ranging in size from atoms and dust, rocks, meteors, comets.

Do the math- taking to the near star in a cylindrical trajectory path 4.25 light years distance for a 15 meter diameter 150 meters long streamlined ship even if there were 10,000,000 baseball size rock crossing the path at various velocities in 4 or five years the chances of even one being where my ship is at any given time is insignificant if not zero. But you miss the point. At any significant fraction of light speed a collision with such a rock is catastrophic so there is not need to calculate how catastrophic.

There is a chance when I drive my car or ride in a plane I will have a head on collision at 55 miles/hour or hit a goose at 700 mph and die. That does not limit me from getting in my car and driving my car faster and flying as fast as I can nor does it limit my rocket to sub light speeds. I just do what I can to reduce the probability and until you calculate correctly the probability for collision it serves no purpose to calculate any magnitude for the collision or draw any conclusions from incomplete math just ion the basis of "if" I hit something. I am just as dead colliding wit a space rocket at 1/00 light speed as I am at 100 C so I do not let that fact keep me from going as fast as I can as the faster I can go the less the probability is I will hit any thing.

WHAT!!! Altering the atomic structure? Now your atomic rocket is capable of alchemy? Radioactive decay is not powered by any heat you can generate. It is a reaction of the weak nuclear force![/quote]

Nope speaking of Alchemy. The alchemist Roger Bacon more than 400 years ago coined the terms fission and fusion for use in his transmutation of base metals into gold by fissioning (splitting) heavier metal atoms into gold or by fusion (combining) lighter atoms into gold atoms. Though he knew that making gold was not cost effective as one got a little bit of gold by expending large amounts of energy (*** demonstrated in minutes amounts of gold found in today's breeder reactors), the King just thought a good scientist could turn lead into gold. So Bacon wrote the king volumes of promises that it could be done thereby transmuting his empty pocket air into the kings gold while he spent the money on more worthwhile experiments writing his lab books in code so his fraud would not be discovered..

Any way I do not believe in strong and weak nuclear forces.

the DOE keeps the physical properties of Uranium and
Plutonium as a top secret allowing only the neutron chain reaction to be published publicly for smoke and mirrors hiding the fact that radioactive metal atoms explode on impact with other atoms as they are so unstable even by themselves 1/2 split over the half lives. Heat them by stacking the atoms above critical mass or hit them hard enough and the momentum from colliding atoms accelerate that decay rate and that accelerated decay rate is used in bombs and reactors and rocket engines.

__________________
Thomas Hulon Jackson
Scientist/Engineer/Technician

Define "1g acceleration."

__________________
&quot;Human curiosity and the desire to make the intangible tangible, has led us into a new age where the New World has been settled, and the West has been won. But if you think that we, the human race, has conquered everything there is to conquer, then just look to the sky--at space--last and greatest of the frontiers.&quot;

One gravity is defined as 32.2 feet per second per second or 9.8 m/s^2 as the force the earth exerts on a mass at the surface.

Artifical gravity of one g is produced by a rockets acceleration rate matching those numbers from Einstein's equivelance principal unifying gravity and inertia.

__________________
Thomas Hulon Jackson
Scientist/Engineer/Technician

Boy this stuff is interesting, but so deep and detailed, and time consuming, I couldn't begin to have time to read it all.

I'm beginning to consider trying to find some way of copying an entire string like this to a diskette. Then perhaps when I'm off work over Christmas break I can sit back and read them, (after also sending my wife on a trip by herself far enough away that it takes her a couple weeks to do all there is to do. But then she would just send me E-mails as long as some of these postings telling me of her travels with details I must remember to stay out of the doghouse.)

Indeed you will be.

Consider that the objects that you may run into will be near stationary relative to your speed such that those crossing your trajectory even at right angles to your line of travel will take several tens of seconds to cross the cylinder of your trajectory. Those crossing at a more acute angle may occupy the cylinder from 100's of seconds up to hours. For any specified length of time, the faster you go the more likely you are to occupy the section of the cylinder being occupied by a hazard because each will not have time to get out of the way and you have no way to detect nor avoid them. At sub-c you can not only detect the ones in the way but also those that may enter your path at places where you will be when they get there and you can avoid them. In 10 seconds traveling at 10c the volume that must be hazard free is r^2 times 18,600,000 miles and as v increases so does the volume of space that could present a hazard to your ship i.e., the larger the probability of encountering a hazard and the smaller the probability of you surviving it.

What don't I understand.

__________________
For those inclined to oppose human meddling with the structure of the universe or the composition and configuration of objects and groups of objects within the universe, consider:
Whether there is a limit to the magnitude of a modulation of chaos below which order remains invariant? Or, is order but a fiction invented by perspectives applied over finite, however large, time intervals?