What is the best feasable energy source for a space craft?

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 27 2003 @ 07:00 PM
there are many idea's however due to einsteins theory of relativity it is impossible to exceed the speed of light.

posted on Jul, 27 2003 @ 07:08 PM
I'm not sure if i agree with your categories (as zero point and 'gravitational' drives have yet to be demonstrated, at least in publuc)... but, I picked Ion drive simply because it's the best thing we 'have' right now... though, even an ion drive is technically a 'nuclear' one, as a reactor supplies the drive with raw electrical power.

It might be better to re-write your poll to include these other, known, options:

Fission with a working fluid (as in the NERVA project)
Fission Pulse (as in the Orion project)
Fusion with working fluid
Fusion Pulse (as in the conceptual daedalus project)
Ion-Electric Drive
Ion/Plasma Drive (as may be used in Project Prometheus)
Ramjet/ramscoop Drive
Solar Sail
Laser Sail

Also, i think you need to mention what the mission parameters are... certainly, if I'm just going to the moon chemical rockets are OK with me... if I'm going to Pluto I want an Ion drive...

Each system has benfits and drawbacks that make it a 'best fit' for different missions.

posted on Jul, 27 2003 @ 07:41 PM
I see what you mean, however is'nt an ion drive slow? I know it has staying power but if you were going to pluto you'd be dead before you get there, unless you were in stasis. however i beleive Gravitational drive is promising, i know it is not a reality yet, its potential is great, you'd be there almost instantly, however would'nt you require a protective bubble for the space craft to travel in? as i think that the space dust etc would destroy the craft instantly.

posted on Jul, 27 2003 @ 07:48 PM
Gravitational energy. Reflecting off of the gravitational fields of large objects, moons, planets, asteroids, starts, black holes, etc...

Much like the HyperSoar.

If we could figure out wormhole technology, we could use black holes to travel, but that'd take forever plus a couple of centuries.

Japan has created a matter teleportation beam, but it's kept more secret then some of our aeropsace projects.
It's discovery and installment would end hundredsof millions of job.


posted on Jul, 27 2003 @ 07:55 PM
When I speak of gravitational power I mean actually creationg the gravational pull inside the craft by means of harnessing the power and density of a black-hole or singularity. the power output would have to be converted as if it was'nt you'd attract planets stars etc to your craft, lol.

posted on Jul, 27 2003 @ 08:15 PM
And how do you propose they control singularities?

With electromagnetic balance?
Not happening for at least 200 years.
Hell, w haven't even been to Mars yet and we hit the moon almost 35 years ago..

We're not going anywhere.


posted on Jul, 27 2003 @ 08:22 PM
im not talking about now or the near future, you ignoramus. im talking possible future technology, my theory of gravatation power is the most favoured power source for E.T flying saucers, also I am not basing this only Bob "Liar" Lazar's claims of working at S-4.

posted on Jul, 27 2003 @ 08:24 PM
In the near future I am guessing nuclear or some kind of ion engine. Also there are some advanced projects NASA and others are workign on. One is called the mini-magneticosphere plasma propulsion. It works by a craft uses powerful magnets to create a magnetic field around its self. Then the the field is "inflated" by pumping ionized gas into the field. The craft is moved forward by charged particle from the sun that push on the magnetic field. Also steam rockets may be a choice for space craft.

posted on Jul, 27 2003 @ 08:30 PM
hmmmmm, quite an intersting theory, however what if your nowhere near a sun where those particles would be minimal if not there even. I beleive that there are already forms of ionic propultion systems. I know what the ideal system would be an Ionic solar sail. it could use the solar sail around the sun etc, sling shot itself from a planet near a sun then turn its ionic drive on.

posted on Jul, 27 2003 @ 08:45 PM
The Fusion Ram Jet is THE best source propultion unit you can have for a space craft...to travel any faster you will have to find a way to bend space or go through sub-space blah blah whatever.

Physical travelling, the best source is Fusion Ram Jet...there is no "if ands or buts"...that's a fact. Capable of getting us over 40 light years in under a century.

posted on Jul, 27 2003 @ 08:51 PM
As i think my theory being in a bubble you may only be traveling at a low speed, 1800 mph or so, however this bubble be stretched to the point in space you wish to travel, then the other end let go. for example if the space craft was at point A and you were sitting at point B, then the craft is streched to point B you would see it instantly appear, however it would first appear streched then normal. I hope people can understand this.

posted on Jul, 27 2003 @ 08:57 PM
lol you thought of the bubble theory too?

Stretch space above you so your linear distance travelled = a greater distance which is stretched over the "bubble"...or the "warp"...yes...that's always been a favorite of mine, but the energy required seems impossible.

posted on Jul, 27 2003 @ 09:00 PM
ok a few adjustments to my theory, the bubble does not get streched, the space around it, behind and in front gets stretched or squashed instead! this then sorts out the problem of impacting space dust destroying it then, because the ship is not actually moving, its just being placed else where!

posted on Jul, 27 2003 @ 09:09 PM
freemason, thats were i beleive Zero point energy could be applied, as it is meant to be infinate.

posted on Jul, 27 2003 @ 09:26 PM

there are many idea's however due to einsteins theory of relativity it is impossible to exceed the speed of light.

Ahh...but you are thinking of linear travel, when we exist in a dimensional universe. Just because it may be "impossible" is no reason to rule it out. We take many things for granted today, that just decades ago, were "impossible". Considering the prevalent theories of UFO propulsion (namely, a gravity drive that folds space/time), you could "get around" the relativity issue, without breaking the laws of physics. Just that we still have yet to figure out the details...or do we?

Just remember, any military/space technolgy in public view, is at least 20 years or older...

posted on Jul, 27 2003 @ 09:48 PM
Quite right Gazrok, I also beleive that the military and space military technology is much more advanced than we all think, dont tell me the CIA and NSA want the large space-shuttle payload bays for nothing! spy satallites, V1 space modules. I should also think that the international space station serves some other military use either. the military have set the public space program back years.

posted on Jul, 28 2003 @ 12:55 AM
What about the obvious:

Dilithium powered warp core!

Delorian with some flux capasitors that runs on garbage!

I think ZPE is probably a good choice (if we can get it to work). Either that or D'stridium (which as far as I can tell is a flawed theory as of yet).

posted on Jul, 28 2003 @ 02:06 AM
Let's not forget about antimatter annihilation (stronger than nuclear). We also have warp drive (and perhaps subspace drives) that are used to propel, but require a fuel. I don't know if subspace has any fuel.

"Dilithium powered warp core!
Delorian with some flux capasitors that runs on garbage!"

We already have dilithium batteries
. I believe we have trilithium batteries, too. Of course, the dilithium crystals are different, I guess. Warp drive would be an awesome sight.

As far as the Delorian, the flux capacitor ran off of time energy (or something of the sort), which was powered by plutonium and lightning. Mr. Fusion came along later, which is just a nice fusion reactor for a car of the future

I personally support the idea of Zeropoint Energy existing. I also support Aetheric energy existing (perhaps what you might call subspace energy). Zeropoint energy is actually black hole gravitational energy, as I understand it. Oh well, unless one of you guys can make a nice engine that runs off the stuff, you'll just have to settle for a nice car, like this one:

Bugatti Veyron

posted on Jul, 28 2003 @ 02:35 AM
WOW... I didn't know Bugatti had moved past the EB110. That's really a bad @$$ car. I drive an Audi TT Coupe'. I love 'futuristic' looking cars.

I wonder if there's any way to just use like 1000 of the engine in the Cadillac Sixteen (also an awesome car) to power a spacecraft
It's a 16 cylendar gas hog though... so it wouldn't really be efficient.

ANYWAY. We have dilithium batteries? I thought it was just plain lithium. So what is it, just Li2.... like O2?

posted on Jul, 28 2003 @ 02:09 PM
I did a few searches on the topic of dilithium, but I can't find much. My old chemistry professor told me about dilithium and the possibility of trilithium chemical batteries (not crystals). I doubt he was lying--for one, he's probably never seen Star Trek in his life. My statement was hear-say, but I did find that some type of dilithium does exist:


If you look down at the bottom, you'll see that there are chemical complexes that deal with dilithium.

Sorry that I couldn't find more, but there is just too much stuff on Star Trek to go through to find any real information. Most likely, it is either connected by carbon chains or by some extra flourines or hydrogens. Who knows? Most chemical reactions are much more complex than what Star Trek will ever explain.

I like futuristic cars too. Too bad it costs roughly $1,000,000 US and about 750,000 Euro. 950-1000+ horsepower makes me believe they should attach wings to it.

new topics
top topics
<<   2 >>

log in