Weird California sighting

Another fast mover ?

originally posted by: penroc3
a reply to: StratosFear

hey thats the F23 i mean .....what?

www.notreally.info...

It was in the AX17 link but the image on that page isnt working anymore.

So, question: could the green color come from, say, oxidation of a coating on the inside of the ramjet?

I'm just going to leave this here...
www.google.com...

Also, this one is sort of un-related but super interesting nonetheless...
www.google.com...

a reply to: DirtyBizzler

no on the first part. and although positron production is pretty cool-not what's going on with green lady.

Fuel additive isnt it?

a reply to: BASSPLYR

I was referring to the boron nitride coating in the first one, and the second one is just surprising that it's just out there on Google scholar. It's also pretty interesting to see who was the owns the first patent now and who the original assignee was, all things considered. "Hey, we really like all that positron ramjet stuff. You should come give a talk about it, be sure to bring a PowerPoint".

a reply to: DirtyBizzler

interesting that they can store Ps* for a "relatively long time." Relative to what would be interesting to know.

a reply to: The one?

There's a patent from Positronics Research LLC. listing the duration as long as "several hundred hours".
www.google.com...

a reply to: DirtyBizzler

positrons are cool. but keep in mind that if the patent is public they probably aren't doing anything super secret hush hush with that patent. although on occasion they can get you on a right track. and sometimes a few do still linger in the public that are awful close to the classified patent.

with the storing of positrons. maybe to be used as a fuel for a positron engine...but more likely you wouldn't want to carry around a bunch of positron fuel to propel a big honking aircraft around. not even for weapon purposes. you'd probably want to make positrons on the spot for that.

if i were the air force and I wanted to store small amounts of positrons I would use the gamma rays from them the same way you'd use an x-ray machine. gamma rays can do the same thing but detect faults and flaws in things your trying to image or scan down to sub millimeter resolution. so maybe the air force wants a source of positrons to get them gamma rays to look for microscopic structural weakness in a aircraft or engines. to detect structural fatigue before it turns into a actual problem. or to chart lubricants flow through intricate parts. or to make sure there's no flaws (even down to the atomic level) on the crystalline metamaterial or whatever that makes up stealth skins. Raytheon owns that second patent you linked. raytheons way into the whole sensors and imaging thing.

probably not trying to make star trek style photon torpedos. if they wanted positrons for a weapon they'd probably build something approximating a phaser.

as for the positron scramjet. it could be used for aircraft but to be honest I wouldn't want to be on one using a positron scramjet. sure the tungsten rods used to absorb the gamma rays from the positron electron annihilation would get most of them but enough could get through that i wouldnt want to be irradiated with. gamma rays can go through just about anything. you know how when you get an xray they make you wear a lead apron a centimeter thick to shield you. for gamma rays that lead apron would have to be 16 inches thick. you gunna make a aircraft with 16 inch thick lead walls to stop the gamma rays from frying your crew? more likely their interest in a positron scramjet would be for standoff weapons like hypersonic rockets and missiles. note raytheon also is way into the standoff weapon thing too.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

we need an ats annon, to scramble i.p and user

a reply to: BASSPLYR

I would agree with you completely, until you get about 3/4 of the way through and you get to the paragraphs describing a method of operation of a position-initiated gamma ray laser. Also, more likely it relates more to ICF research than weapons projects, hence why it's still out there.

You also don't find it just a little odd that the first patent is taken over by the USAF and a few months later he's at Wright-Patterson showing his infamous PowerPoint? While I would agree that gamma would normally be a bad choice to potentially blast a pilot with, it does seem that it would be great for for an unmanned craft that flies very high and stays aloft for long periods of time without needing a refuel. There is also this quote:
"Anti-electrons (“positrons”) occur naturally as a by-product of radioactive decay, e.g., radioactive sodium emits positrons. Positrons are significantly less massive than an antiproton, so that their annihilation with electrons results in gamma ray emissions that are below nuclear reaction thresholds, making such annihilation acceptable for use in close proximity to humans, and in the atmosphere."
I'm not sure how true this is, but seems like a credible claim.

a reply to: DirtyBizzler

which patent did you see the laser in? I didn't see a laser. I saw a method for ducting gamma rays to the absorption assembly.

one thing I need to do is run this guys patent past a hardcore physicist. ats has a couple that show up on occasion. the author of the patent says gamma ray emmisions from positrons aren't dangerous to humans only positronium ones are. my understanding is unless the exposure is tinsy like in a pet scan all gamma rays just like xrays in any quantity that would be enough to operate a scramjet would be extremely dangerous to a human or any living cellular organism. I'll ask a physicist but I think they'll say very dangerous.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

"It may also be possible to coherently annihilate all of the Ps* stored in the photonic bandgap (PBG) device of the present invention. This makes possible a PBG device as a component of a 511 KeV gamma ray laser (GRASER) operating from the annihilation radiation."

And an interesting patent that it's citing from has this to say:

"Now the photons may invite induction annihilation of generated free positroniums, and the gamma ray generated at this time has a feature that it substantially becomes a monochromatic high-energy gamma-ray laser only of an energy 2βm0 C2."

But, there's no doubt there isn't a lot of overlap between this and the... other thing.

For what it's worth, I definitely wouldn't strap myself to a positronium trap.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

It's the Raytheon one for "High density storage of excited positronium using photonic bandgap traps". 3/4 of the way down.

a reply to: framedragged

Lots of overlap indeed.

"The present inventors are the first to describe a way to achieve sufficient storage density for a Ps BEC-based GRASER, with the absolute numbers of stored Ps atoms exceeding what is possible in the standard charged plasma traps or the conventional neutral atom traps. Furthermore, the present inventors describe a device that does not require substantial apparatus and physical plant. Moreover, in the present device, the Ps BEC is maintained for lifetimes many orders of magnitude greater than that in the prior art, allowing the user great flexibility in the timing for releasing the energy in the form of a GRASER.'

a reply to: DirtyBizzler

ohh. oops my bad I was looking in the scramjet one. my apologies. you're right it says it can make a GRASER.

a reply to: DirtyBizzler

I think he was implying that this patent isn't correlated with something else I think you may be trying to figure out how works.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Yeah, I misread.


"Prior to their departure from the device, the electrically neutral excited species can be ionized by an electric field. This separates the electrically neutral species into positively and negatively charged ions. In the case of positronium, this separates each positronium atom into its constituent positron and electron. Electric and magnetic fields can then be used to direct the ions or antimatter and/or normal matter out of the PBG device and into the desired direction, forming a particle beam. As the beam of antimatter ions interacts with ordinary matter, annihilation occurs, a process useful for example as a drill or for ablation."

So close, yet so far away, lol

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Fusion plasma propulsion engine using aneutronic fusion?

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Thinks that make you go Hmmmm.......

The silence is deafening........ 👍