Near light-speed space travel?

In summary: All right, so here it is!Archer Enterprise states that they have a theoretical device (in process of proof of concept) that can reach speeds near that of light. Looking at the description of the theory of the device, it looks like this could work, at least in electrically propelling space vehicles without using conventional fuel (it uses electrons as fuel). This device, i think, doesn't break anyphysics laws known.In summary, the device seems to use classical mechanics and does not seem to violate any known laws of physics. However, it is still in the early stages of development and has not been tested in
  • #1
Durato
38
0
All right, so here it is!
Archer Enterprise states that they have a theoretical device (in process of proof of concept) that can reach speeds near that of light. Looking at the description of the theory of the device, it looks like this could work, at least in electrically propelling space vehicles without using conventional fuel (it uses electrons as fuel). This device, i think, doesn't break any
physics laws known.

Before anyone has a nervous breakdown:rofl:, before you visit the links I would like to clarify what certain terms mean. When the say reactionless, they do not mean that it breaks the law of momentum or conservation of energy. Here is the really basic ideal of how it works
First, you have your classic ufo flying saucer shape that is symetrical in the x and y axis. If you don't know what I'm talking about, go google it! (or look on website). Anyways, the edge of the saucer is charged to a very negative voltage while the two hulls at the top are charge to a very positive voltage (all done by electrostatic induction). This causes electrons to stream from the negative to the positive side. These electron's arcs are influenced by a dynamic electric and magnetic field (see diagram on website). The electrons are accelerated to near the speed of light and are impacted onto the bottom and top hull, producing a large thrust one each hull. The current flow can be made different between the top and bottom hull (changing resistance), thus a net force can be produced in whatever direction.

I encourage you to calculate the force, using relativity kinetic energy, that an electron with, say, 30 MeV (reasonable?) of energy can produce and then find out the total force produced in 10+amps of current. Or, better yet, calculate the energy that the electron will 'receive' as it accelerates from negative to positive side (lol, you'd need a lot more info, including hull shape, resistance, etc. which is in patent if interested, i think)

Anyways, here's links

(about halfway down, right after they talk about book!, it explains in general the device)
stardrivedevice.com/

News:
stardrivedevice.com/news.html

Patent with full description (39 pages of small text!):
v3.espacenet.com/origdoc?IDX=WO0209259&RPN=US6404089&DOC=dcb65d04ab6823da954c0bcb944cf3c36a
So, what's your feedback?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
Sorry about that patent link. for some silly odd reason when i paste it it gives an error. Since i can't post a link (not 15 posts yet), you'll just have to go here
v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?IDX=WO0209259
and click on US6404089 (B1) pdf file

EDIT: Um, that's a little weird, espacenet is now down for maintenance?
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Simply, electrostatic induction is used to amplify voltage to high levels. Look at a van-de-graff. What does it require? a simple motor, plus some other stuff. A small sized (OK, small relative to a person) could produce 100 kV. This apparently uses electrostatics isimilarly to produces large voltages.
Oh, and by the way I just picked 30 mEv off the top of my head because I remember in my physics book that this was what electrons using a van-de-graff generator in the original particle accelerators could produce.
 
  • #4
Um, did a post get deleted? I could have sworn there was a second post that wasn't mine, saying something about how it was 'ridiculous?'
 
  • #5
Durato said:
All right, so here it is!

Before anyone has a nervous breakdown:rofl:, before you visit the links I would like to clarify what certain terms mean. When the say reactionless, they do not mean that it breaks the law of momentum or conservation of energy.

They may not claim as much, but for their engine to work as advertised it would have to break the laws of physics. Essentially they are saying that can accelerate the electrons up to near light speed and then essentially absorb their energy in collision. IOW, they make use of Newton's Third Law in extracting momentum from the electrons but ignore it when it comes to giving it to them in the first place.

It's pure flim flam.
 
  • #6
Umm... Explain better? I don't see how this violates any laws. All its doing is converting electrical and magnetic energy to kinetic energy and then transferring the resultant energy to the hull? In addition, did you consider that the magnets are 'permanent' magnets and that in order to propel the electrons (which are exerted on by magnet), one doesn't have to add energy to the magnets?. Permanent magnets last quite a while
 
  • #7
"For every action there is an equal an opposite reaction". When you accelerate the electron's in one direction, there is an equal force that pushes back on the magnets. This will completely cancel out any momentum gotten by impacting the electron against the hull. Result, no net motion. There is no way around this.
 

1. How fast is near light-speed space travel?

Near light-speed space travel is defined as traveling at a speed that is close to the speed of light, which is approximately 299,792,458 meters per second or 670,616,629 miles per hour. This is an incredibly fast speed, and it is nearly impossible for any current spacecraft to achieve.

2. Can humans survive near light-speed space travel?

At this time, there is no known way for humans to survive near light-speed space travel. The speed itself is not the issue, but the acceleration needed to reach this speed would likely cause severe damage to the human body. Additionally, the high levels of radiation in space at these speeds could also be harmful to humans.

3. How long would it take to reach a nearby star at near light-speed?

Traveling at near light-speed, it would take approximately 4.3 years to reach the nearest star, Proxima Centauri. This is assuming that the spacecraft could maintain a constant speed and does not take into account the time needed to accelerate and decelerate.

4. What are the potential benefits of near light-speed space travel?

Near light-speed space travel has the potential to greatly reduce the time it takes to travel to distant planets and stars. This could open up new opportunities for exploration and colonization. It could also lead to advancements in technology and our understanding of the universe.

5. What are the challenges of near light-speed space travel?

One of the main challenges of near light-speed space travel is the enormous amount of energy needed to reach and maintain this speed. Another challenge is the potential dangers to both the spacecraft and the human crew, such as collisions with debris or exposure to high levels of radiation. Additionally, the time dilation effect of traveling at near light-speed could make communication with Earth and other slow-moving objects difficult.

Similar threads

  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
2
Replies
46
Views
9K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • Science Fiction and Fantasy Media
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
65
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
23
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
1K
Back
Top