Can Electromagnets Propel Starship Orion Using Nuclear Explosions?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the feasibility of using electromagnets to propel the Starship Orion by absorbing momentum from nuclear explosions. Participants explore the theoretical implications of replacing a traditional pusher plate with a magnetic field generated by a fission reactor, addressing both the potential benefits and challenges of such an approach.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that an electromagnet could push the ship forward by absorbing momentum from a nuclear explosion via a magnetic field.
  • Others argue that magnetic fields do not do work, suggesting that the explosion itself is responsible for the work done, and question the practicality of using a pusher magnet instead of a pusher plate.
  • A participant raises the issue of how charged and uncharged particles from the explosion would interact with the magnetic field, expressing concerns about the ability of the field to handle the energy of charged particles.
  • There are discussions about the engineering challenges involved in implementing such a system, including weight, maintenance costs, and shielding against radiation.
  • Some participants suggest that a hybrid approach, combining a pusher plate with an electromagnet, might reduce erosion and improve survivability.
  • One participant questions the seriousness of the initial proposal, emphasizing the need for detailed diagrams and technical explanations.
  • Another participant speculates about the viability of using an electromagnet if the explosion were to involve a fusion reaction with no neutrons, such as Helium-3 fusion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no consensus reached on the viability of using electromagnets for propulsion in this context. The discussion remains unresolved, with competing ideas and technical challenges highlighted.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations regarding the assumptions made about the nature of nuclear explosions and the interactions of various particles, as well as the complexities involved in engineering such a propulsion system.

darkdave3000
Messages
242
Reaction score
5
TL;DR
Can an electromagnet replace the steel pusher plate design?
Can an electromagnet push the ship forward by absorbing the momentum of a nuclear explosion via a magnetic field? Im thinking this will solve the problem of constantly having to repair the eroding plate if its replaced by a magnetic field sustained by a fission reactor generating power.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
darkdave3000 said:
Can an electromagnet push the ship forward
Magnetic fields do no work.

If you meant something else please draw the field lines and coils.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
Why would a steel plate work and magnetic fields not work if we are dealing with charged particles? Doesn't the Earth absorb the momentum of the solar wind?
 
Draw the coils and draw the field lines, or admit you aren't being serious.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
Magnetic fields do no work.
The explosion does the work. The question is about replacing the pusher plate with a pusher magnet.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
Well let's see what he says. What he wrote has the field doing some sort of "absorbing".

I don't think he has thought this through beyond "magnets". Like "plastics".
 
There's also the question of those uncharged neutrons and what they'd do to your DNA...
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: collinsmark and berkeman
Isn't that how you gain superpowers?
 
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: malawi_glenn
Vanadium 50 said:
Isn't that how you gain superpowers?
Not for long... :wink:
 
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50 and russ_watters
  • #10
darkdave3000 said:
Im thinking this will solve the problem of constantly having to repair the eroding plate if its replaced by a magnetic field sustained by a fission reactor generating power.
Magnetic fields don't help with all the uncharged particles and EM radiation from the explosion, and I fear the amount of charged particles might be too much for the magnetic field to handle. The energy of the charged particles is comparable to that inside a fusion reaction (I think, the temperatures appear to be of similar magnitudes), but while a fusion reactor has somewhere around a gram of material inside it, a nuclear explosion has hundreds of kilograms of 'stuff' flying out of it.
 
  • #11
You could have a fission reactor power the electromagnet with megawatts.
 
  • #12
darkdave3000 said:
You could have a fission reactor power the electromagnet with megawatts.
How heavy is that? What are the maintenance costs and the fuel costs on top of your drive fuel? How are you going to shield your passengers from the non-charged radiation and blast wave (which I rather suspect is the majority of the drive energy release)?

Engineering is never just a matter of saying "let's replace X component with Y component and everything will be better". There are always trade-offs, and I don't think we've even begun to scratch the surface of the support systems for the magnets that can turn the charged particles from a nuclear explosion. And you've removed the shielding against the non-charged stuff, so you need to think about that too.
 
  • #13
Ibix said:
How heavy is that? What are the maintenance costs and the fuel costs on top of your drive fuel? How are you going to shield your passengers from the non-charged radiation and blast wave (which I rather suspect is the majority of the drive energy release)?

Engineering is never just a matter of saying "let's replace X component with Y component and everything will be better". There are always trade-offs, and I don't think we've even begun to scratch the surface of the support systems for the magnets that can turn the charged particles from a nuclear explosion. And you've removed the shielding against the non-charged stuff, so you need to think about that too.
Solve 1 problem at a time and then figure out ways to deal with the substantially reduced number of variables. For example maybe you can still have a pusher plate but have an electromagnet built in that is powered by said fission reactor and the pusher plate could experience less erosion because now it only needs to deal with neutrons. So yes replace X with Y component and Component Z has better survivability.
 
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: Motore
  • #14
@darkdave3000 , this is swirling down the same drain as your previous thread. People are seriously trying to engage with you and you are just, to use an expression from your other thread "too much handwaving by the OP for this to stand in the technical PF forums".

As I said, "Draw the coils and draw the field lines, or admit you aren't being serious."

You didn't. What conclusion should we draw?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman and phinds
  • #15
Vanadium 50 said:
@darkdave3000 , this is swirling down the same drain as your previous thread. People are seriously trying to engage with you and you are just, to use an expression from your other thread "too much handwaving by the OP for this to stand in the technical PF forums".

As I said, "Draw the coils and draw the field lines, or admit you aren't being serious."

You didn't. What conclusion should we draw?
Hello, if I had all the answers I wouldnt bother creating a thread to ask such questions.

What if the explosion had no neutrons in the fusion? Lets say a Helium 3 type of fusion? Would an electromagnet become viable then?
 
  • #16
Then I have an answer for you. The answer is "no".

If you don't know how it works, we won't either.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Bystander and phinds
  • #17
Thread closed for Moderation...
 
  • #18
darkdave3000 said:
Hello, if I had all the answers I wouldnt bother creating a thread to ask such questions.
Well, you've gotten plenty of good answers in this thread. Thread will remain closed.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Bystander

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
16K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K