Harnessing Light for Spacecraft Propulsion

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
36 replies · 12K views
D H said:
This? http://pdf.aiaa.org/jaPreview/JSR/2008/PVJA32284.pdf ? A more detailed description: http://www.niac.usra.edu/files/studies/final_report/1047Bae.pdf.

Bae does identify yet another problem that I did not list in post #25: The "Laser Elevator: Momentum Transfer Using an Optical Resonator" paper by Meyer et al. has a fatal flaw: destructive interference. Bae's solution to this problem: Don't use a laser to power the back-and-forth reflections between the source and the target vehicle. Instead make the space between the light source and vehicle the resonant cavity of the laser. To quote the ads for Guinness, "Brilliant!"

This does solve the destructive interference problem, but only at the cost of immensely upping the ante on the alignment problem. He barely addresses the alignment problem. He hints at a solution, he doesn't specify the accuracy requirements, and he doesn't address the fact that the alignment issue needs to be addressed on both ends of the laser.

Regarding the use of this for as a launch platform as opposed to a solution for the precision spacecraft formation problem, he calls out for a mirror with a reflectivity of 99.9998%. "Brilliant!"
destination coordinates instantaneous teleportation. Even a monkey could slay a god with that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
flashprogram said:
if perfect mirrors do indeed exist

They don't.
provided an infinite source of energy were found

No such thing.
it is hypothetically possible at least that such instructions could mysteriously result in progress.

Based on the above, this is a futile statement.

It's the equivalent of saying "if a warp engine did exist, star trek ship designs could prove ideal for interstellar travel".

Any 'if' qualifying statements such as those above would allow for the possibility of the latter. But the 'if' statement itself is non-sensical and so doesn't prove / allow for anything. It certainly doesn't provide a valid basis for arguing the latter is possible.
 
Last edited:
the problem is people will tend to obsess over the truth of hypothetical mythologies and ramblings of philosophers. In fact such knowledge would be so dangerous, that it is conceivable that at the first sign of progress individuals are so entralled by the marvel of truth that further progress becomes fundamentally impossible. thus it is that you get philosopher ramblings for eternity and doing nothing about anything because it is fundamentally pointless and hopeless at the same time.

move one philosopher just one bit and it is instant game over.
 
flashprogram said:
destination coordinates instantaneous teleportation.

And where in your little snippet did you pull those four 'lovely' words? Or even the concept?
flashprogram said:
the problem is people will tend to obsess over the truth of hypothetical mythologies and ramblings of philosophers. In fact such knowledge would be so dangerous, that it is conceivable that at the first sign of progress individuals are so entralled by the marvel of truth that further progress becomes fundamentally impossible. thus it is that you get philosopher ramblings for eternity and doing nothing about anything because it is fundamentally pointless and hopeless at the same time.

move one philosopher just one bit and it is instant game over.

What exactly does this have to do with the thread? Philosophical ramblings are best left in the philosophy forums, and given the new rules I don't see this being acceptable even there.

You can give all the 'what if' questions you like, as I pointed out above, but we need to stick to facts and not hypothesise based on non-sensical statements such as those above.
 
jarednjames said:
And where in your little snippet did you pull those four 'lovely' words? Or even the concept?

it has been used in mythology since the time of zeno, fundamentally impossible and dismissed as entirely irrelevant and useless... look where that got the greeks going? LET ALONE THE PHILOSOPHERS, perhaps the greatest failure in existence.

An axis to the dimension of time
 
flashprogram said:
it has been used in mythology since the time of zeno, fundamentally impossible and dismissed as entirely irrelevant and useless... look where that got the greeks going? LET ALONE THE PHILOSOPHERS, perhaps the greatest failure in existence.

An axis to the dimension of time

Your saying that "destination coordinates instantaneous teleportation" is used in mythology? Care to back that up?

I'm honestly not sure what your ramblings are about and I certainly don't see how they apply to this thread.