Sydney
2λчиэλ
+783|7303|Reykjavík, Iceland.

Mavik wrote:

Sydney wrote:

FEOS wrote:

And there's no wind in space.
I read an article where it was speculated that solar sails could get us to 99.99% of light speed and make traveling huge distances easier.
Hard part would, naturally be to stop the space shuttle, would take an enormous amount of energy.
Turn the ship around as you close in on the target system?

Problem is, acceleration would decrease as you fly away from the sun and you would have to pass the sun very closely to get the most out of it to push you at a reasonable speed for interstellar travels.

In this book series http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Queendom_of_Sol they use it - but they have a lot of physics tricks more up their sleeves.
Wrong and wrong.

Turning the ship around wouldn't do anything, because the solar winds are always going the same direction.

Acceleration doesn't really matter, because there is no resistance in space, therefore the ship should accelerate almost instantly to the speed of the solar winds.
Mavik
Member
+22|6236|Germany

Sydney wrote:

Turning the ship around wouldn't do anything, because the solar winds are always going the same direction.

Acceleration doesn't really matter, because there is no resistance in space, therefore the ship should accelerate almost instantly to the speed of the solar winds.
OK, I was always thinking about interstellar travel - not interplanetary - so the targeted star would stop the ship flying backwards with the sails now acting as some kind of parachute. Perhaps I did not make this very clear as I had this picture in my mind.




There may be (almost) no friction in space (and it becomes an issue at greater speeds), but you still have to deal with the inertia of the ships mass.
Roomba
You will pay the price for your lack of vision.
+26|6952|Land of Cotton
Good topic.  I think you could combine one real aspect with one semi-real one:

The friction may be avoided by using super-conductors. You may have seen the magnets in liquid nitrogen experiment. Since space is cold, you may be able to reach those temperatures easily.

The other idea is the 'space elevators'.  Instead of travel, the extremely large tower could send the energy down to earth. I am not sure how plausible this is. I liked the suggestion of wireless energy better.

The only thing that has me scratching my head is the 'action/reaction' phenomenon in physics. If the windmill is spinning, the rigging to a base will want to spin the opposite way. The analogy I draw is to helicopters: they need a read rotor for stabilization from the main lift rotor.  The use of solar windmills on the moon could power a lunar space station.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6871|'Murka

Sydney wrote:

FEOS wrote:

And there's no wind in space.
Yes there is, ever wondered why the planets closer to the sun are so much smaller than the gas giants? Because the solar winds were concentrated enough to blow away the gas around those planets.
There's no wind that would turn aerodynamic blades, which is what the OP was referring to.

And the size of the planets has nothing to do with solar winds...otherwise, Neptune, Uranus, and Pluto would be gas giants, as well. And Saturn would be bigger than Jupiter, since it's further out from the sun.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
S.Lythberg
Mastermind
+429|6907|Chicago, IL

FEOS wrote:

Sydney wrote:

FEOS wrote:

And there's no wind in space.
Yes there is, ever wondered why the planets closer to the sun are so much smaller than the gas giants? Because the solar winds were concentrated enough to blow away the gas around those planets.
There's no wind that would turn aerodynamic blades, which is what the OP was referring to.

And the size of the planets has nothing to do with solar winds...otherwise, Neptune, Uranus, and Pluto would be gas giants, as well. And Saturn would be bigger than Jupiter, since it's further out from the sun.
not quite, the gas giants are such because of the weaker solar wind, or they would be little more than small, rocky cores similar to earth.

Pluto was far too small to ever have an atmosphere.
Sydney
2λчиэλ
+783|7303|Reykjavík, Iceland.

FEOS wrote:

Sydney wrote:

FEOS wrote:

And there's no wind in space.
Yes there is, ever wondered why the planets closer to the sun are so much smaller than the gas giants? Because the solar winds were concentrated enough to blow away the gas around those planets.
There's no wind that would turn aerodynamic blades, which is what the OP was referring to.

And the size of the planets has nothing to do with solar winds...otherwise, Neptune, Uranus, and Pluto would be gas giants, as well. And Saturn would be bigger than Jupiter, since it's further out from the sun.
Neptune and Uranus ARE gas giants, pluto never had any gas at all, didn't have enough gravity to begin with.

The solid core on Jupiter is heavier than the one on Saturnus, therefore it attracted more gas, and therefore it is bigger.
VicktorVauhn
Member
+319|6852|Southern California

Sydney wrote:

Acceleration doesn't really matter, because there is no resistance in space, therefore the ship should accelerate almost instantly to the speed of the solar winds.
Uhh.... check your physics book again...
Locoloki
I got Mug 222 at Gritty's!!!!
+216|7100|Your moms bedroom
then theres the problem of wiring a big enough cable back to the earth.....not going to happen as it would collapse under its own weight.
Mavik
Member
+22|6236|Germany

FEOS wrote:

There's no wind that would turn aerodynamic blades, which is what the OP was referring to.
The solar wind would work the same way as "air wind" does on a planet (with atmosphere) and the blades would have quite the same form.


Roomba wrote:

The friction may be avoided by using super-conductors. You may have seen the magnets in liquid nitrogen experiment. Since space is cold, you may be able to reach those temperatures easily.

The only thing that has me scratching my head is the 'action/reaction' phenomenon in physics. If the windmill is spinning, the rigging to a base will want to spin the opposite way. The analogy I draw is to helicopters: they need a read rotor for stabilization from the main lift rotor.  The use of solar windmills on the moon could power a lunar space station.
Super-conductors are for nullifying the resistance and thereby energy loss of electric currents not the mechanical friction of two things moving on each other.

The base would not turn in the other direction I think - and even if it does it would not be a problem as spinning helicopter is not quite useful, if the base of a solar wind power plant would turn it would actually speed up the generators.
But I have some problems imagining it right now, being 0130 in the morning, night.. whatever..

Last edited by Mavik (2008-07-28 16:33:54)

rh27
Not really a Brit
+51|7056|England
Use the concept of global warming to create energy.

Create a greenhouse full of Carbon Dioxide and Methane, situate it directly in the sun. Inside place steam driven turbines above water somehow. The greenhouse will heat up, the water will boil, and steam will operate the turbines. Same concept as nuclear energy, without requiring the nuclear bit.

Of course that's probably less efficient than solar panelling but there ya go. And of course eventually the glass would melt but that's someone elses problem.
Sydney
2λчиэλ
+783|7303|Reykjavík, Iceland.

VicktorVauhn wrote:

Sydney wrote:

Acceleration doesn't really matter, because there is no resistance in space, therefore the ship should accelerate almost instantly to the speed of the solar winds.
Uhh.... check your physics book again...
Yeah, I wasn't sure about that one, was too lazy to check.
Locoloki
I got Mug 222 at Gritty's!!!!
+216|7100|Your moms bedroom
I think we should figure out a way to use magnets for thrust in space set up some magnet portals that space ships fly through and they give you thrust as you pass through them... reverse thrust/polarity when you get to where your going to slow down....  like a train on tracks kind of deal, except no worries of flying off the track
Mavik
Member
+22|6236|Germany

Locoloki wrote:

I think we should figure out a way to use magnets for thrust in space set up some magnet portals that space ships fly through and they give you thrust as you pass through them... reverse thrust/polarity when you get to where your going to slow down....  like a train on tracks kind of deal, except no worries of flying off the track
So you want to build a track of perfectly alligned magnetic rings for millions of kilometers? I am getting dizzy thinking of it!
Locoloki
I got Mug 222 at Gritty's!!!!
+216|7100|Your moms bedroom

Mavik wrote:

Locoloki wrote:

I think we should figure out a way to use magnets for thrust in space set up some magnet portals that space ships fly through and they give you thrust as you pass through them... reverse thrust/polarity when you get to where your going to slow down....  like a train on tracks kind of deal, except no worries of flying off the track
So you want to build a track of perfectly alligned magnetic rings for millions of kilometers? I am getting dizzy thinking of it!
yes

wouldnt need to be perfect either, could probably figure out a way to change directions with minimal thrust along the way... like send a bunch of magnets from one side of the vessel to the other at a fast rate of speed and mass to alter the direction a bit... (would that work?) for minor adjustments
VicktorVauhn
Member
+319|6852|Southern California
The energy used getting through space isn't really a big deal compared with the energy needed to escape earths orbit... I don't really see the point in building such a huge infrastructure in space....
Mavik
Member
+22|6236|Germany

VicktorVauhn wrote:

The energy used getting through space isn't really a big deal compared with the energy needed to escape earths orbit... I don't really see the point in building such a huge infrastructure in space....
I too think an orbital "railgun" like assemby - which you practically proposed - to just accelerate the vehicle would be enough.
As there are long distances involved minor changes with a conventional drive will be enough to adjust the vector.

Stopping the vehicle should rather involve the gravity of a large mass like the destination planet itself, aiming for a little loop seems a bit risky..
"Damn, missed it again - ah well, another ride around the sun.."
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6871|'Murka

Sydney wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Sydney wrote:


Yes there is, ever wondered why the planets closer to the sun are so much smaller than the gas giants? Because the solar winds were concentrated enough to blow away the gas around those planets.
There's no wind that would turn aerodynamic blades, which is what the OP was referring to.

And the size of the planets has nothing to do with solar winds...otherwise, Neptune, Uranus, and Pluto would be gas giants, as well. And Saturn would be bigger than Jupiter, since it's further out from the sun.
Neptune and Uranus ARE gas giants, pluto never had any gas at all, didn't have enough gravity to begin with.

The solid core on Jupiter is heavier than the one on Saturnus, therefore it attracted more gas, and therefore it is bigger.
The effect on a planet's atmosphere has more to do with the existence/strength of the planet's magnetic field than distance from the sun.

Source

So we're both right and we're both wrong.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Roomba
You will pay the price for your lack of vision.
+26|6952|Land of Cotton

Mavik wrote:

Roomba wrote:

The only thing that has me scratching my head is the 'action/reaction' phenomenon in physics. If the windmill is spinning, the rigging to a base will want to spin the opposite way. The analogy I draw is to helicopters: they need a read rotor for stabilization from the main lift rotor.  The use of solar windmills on the moon could power a lunar space station.
The base would not turn in the other direction I think - and even if it does it would not be a problem as spinning helicopter is not quite useful, if the base of a solar wind power plant would turn it would actually speed up the generators.
But I have some problems imagining it right now, being 0130 in the morning, night.. whatever..
Alright. You forced me to geek it up a bit: Newton's Third Law "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." It is about the exact action placed on the mounted part that the sails are attached to. So the forces that turn the sail to rotate will apply the same force in the opposite direction. The problem is that in space the friction is almost nullified. The opposite force from the sails mount may cause undesired movement that will be amplified on a free floating station.

Quick source for the Laws.

http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect … 3laws.html
Blehm98
conservative hatemonger
+150|6923|meh-land

Roomba wrote:

Mavik wrote:

Roomba wrote:

The only thing that has me scratching my head is the 'action/reaction' phenomenon in physics. If the windmill is spinning, the rigging to a base will want to spin the opposite way. The analogy I draw is to helicopters: they need a read rotor for stabilization from the main lift rotor.  The use of solar windmills on the moon could power a lunar space station.
The base would not turn in the other direction I think - and even if it does it would not be a problem as spinning helicopter is not quite useful, if the base of a solar wind power plant would turn it would actually speed up the generators.
But I have some problems imagining it right now, being 0130 in the morning, night.. whatever..
Alright. You forced me to geek it up a bit: Newton's Third Law "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." It is about the exact action placed on the mounted part that the sails are attached to. So the forces that turn the sail to rotate will apply the same force in the opposite direction. The problem is that in space the friction is almost nullified. The opposite force from the sails mount may cause undesired movement that will be amplified on a free floating station.

Quick source for the Laws.

http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect … 3laws.html
forcing the station to spin would take a lot more energy than it would take to make a fan spin, depending on how loosely fitted it is onto the station
Otherwise space stations would be gyrating out of control from forces solar winds on their solar panels

i don't think solar winds have enough energy to spin a fan anyway, tbh
Archer
rapes face
+161|6884|Canuckistan
Here's an even more idea:

We maek car that runs on human fat and lipids

Gas companies pay for Liposuction

Obesity solved

???

Profit!

Last edited by Archer (2008-07-29 10:19:03)

Defiance
Member
+438|7131

Sydney wrote:

FEOS wrote:

And there's no wind in space.
Yes there is, ever wondered why the planets closer to the sun are so much smaller than the gas giants? Because the solar winds were concentrated enough to blow away the gas around those planets.
What are you talking about? No, no. Explain the smaller planets behind Saturn.

There's a theory that solar winds can strip away some of the atmosphere, which seems plausible but I can't find much on it, but physically making the planets smaller is moot.
Mavik
Member
+22|6236|Germany

Blehm98 wrote:

Roomba wrote:

Alright. You forced me to geek it up a bit: Newton's Third Law "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." It is about the exact action placed on the mounted part that the sails are attached to. So the forces that turn the sail to rotate will apply the same force in the opposite direction. The problem is that in space the friction is almost nullified. The opposite force from the sails mount may cause undesired movement that will be amplified on a free floating station.
forcing the station to spin would take a lot more energy than it would take to make a fan spin, depending on how loosely fitted it is onto the station
Otherwise space stations would be gyrating out of control from forces solar winds on their solar panels

i don't think solar winds have enough energy to spin a fan anyway, tbh
Right on the Newton but then you are neglecting something. In a helicopter the force to spin the blades comes from the engine built fixed into the helicopter. So as the engine puts force on the blades to rotate them, it receives the same force to rotate itself/the helicopter it is built in.
A solar wind fan receives the force from the solar wind/particals, the station just sits there and looks nice.

But I concur that the problem of a free floating space station would be the remaining force in the original direction of the solar wind that would push the whole installation away from the sun.


Well, if solar winds have enough energy to push a ship with appropriate sails (of an appropriate size), they should be able to rotate a fan - cause a fan is nothing else but a sail twisted to redirect winds and being "pushed" not in the direction of the wind but sideways to rotate.
Superior Mind
(not macbeth)
+1,755|7153
Besides all of the many reasons already stated explaining why this idea would not work in practice there are also the issues of exposure to cosmic debris, radiation, and extreme cold and hot. Solar panels are the only feasible way to harvest energy from space at this point.

1. Cover all roof tops in solar panels.
2. Put solar cells in road ways and car roofs and hoods.
3. Put solar cells on planes for endless flight potentials.
4. Put solar cells in our clothes for an easy way to charge phones and mp3 players on the go.
5. PROFIT
Mavik
Member
+22|6236|Germany

Superior Mind wrote:

1. Cover all roof tops in solar panels.
2. Put solar cells in road ways and car roofs and hoods.
3. Put solar cells on planes for endless flight potentials.
4. Put solar cells in our clothes for an easy way to charge phones and mp3 players on the go.
5. PROFIT
Buy interests of companies selling sunglasses? Oo
Archer
rapes face
+161|6884|Canuckistan

Archer wrote:

Here's an even more idea:

We maek car that runs on human fat and lipids

Gas companies pay for Liposuction

Obesity solved

???

Profit!
HEY GUISE LET ME POINT YOU TO THE WINRAR HERE

srsly guise

Last edited by Archer (2008-07-29 10:56:20)

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard