It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

EM Shielding for spacecraft.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 1 2004 @ 08:38 AM
link   
Ok so there is a big problem probably the biggest about going to mars. The Radiation. The particle radiation that would be bombarded onto the DNA of the crew would be 1.5 times higher then that of the Rad aboard the ISS. Now the ISS is protected by earths EM field which shields them from most of the harmfull rays. Now normal Rad shielding like lead is heavy and no good for space missions because of the cost of propellent etc. Now how about using a low level EM field emmiter to protect the space craft during the journey to mars? Nothing to high that would damage instruments onboard or cause damage to the crew. You could even combine the EM emmitter with a bussard collecter or even as part of the bussard array. Then you could collect atoms for the ships fuel etc. Any thoughts on this?




posted on Feb, 1 2004 @ 10:41 AM
link   
NASA already has a new anti radiation space shield for new space ships, it was on news probably about hmm 2 months ago NASA said they had a new type material that would protect astronaughts from space radiation and it would be fitted to new ships.



posted on Feb, 1 2004 @ 11:15 AM
link   
Then why does it say on the nasa and jpl website that radiation is the biggest problem even being or having a base on the moon could be a problem. Unless NASA has some sort of exotic material that blocks space rads



posted on Feb, 1 2004 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Excuse my ignorance, but if radiation is such a problem now, then how did they land on the moon before then? What radiation shielding did they have on the lunar module then, that can't be used today?



posted on Feb, 1 2004 @ 12:24 PM
link   
The radiation shielding for the moon missions wasn't that great. They only had to stay there for small time. Radiation isn't as large a problem then as it is when you have to stay in space for months or even years. The astronauts would have died of radiation if they had stayed in space for months. They only did for a few days.



posted on Feb, 1 2004 @ 12:26 PM
link   
um they didnt spend a lot of time on the moon. Second the amount of rads they recived was well below the NASA standard. here are the facts

Shuttle (Average Skin Dose) ~433 mrem/mission
Apollo 14 (Highest Skin Dose) 1,400 mrem/mission
Skylab 4 (Highest Skin Dose) 17,800 mrem/mission
Shuttle (Highest Skin Dose) 7,864 mrem/mission
(Houston Background 100 mrem/year)



posted on Feb, 3 2004 @ 01:34 AM
link   
possibly the new material is the new carbon nanotubes??? i hear they are extremely strong, should be cheap to manafacture soon and can block electromagnetic waves(is radiation a form of this??)

links about them* read both *

Carbon Nanotubes

This One some more stats about the material

[Edited on 3-2-2004 by quiksilver]



posted on Feb, 3 2004 @ 07:03 AM
link   
Some radiation is electromagnetic, some isn't. Gamma and rntgen are electromagnetic, but alpha, beta and other high velocity particles are not. If I'm right those high velocity particles are the largest problem in space. Cosmic radiation particles can have more energy than we can produce in a supercollider.



posted on Feb, 3 2004 @ 07:55 AM
link   
interesting on the nano tubes it didnt say how heavy they are. And as far as beta rad that is the most dangerous. I wonder if they could set the em field to frequency that would cancel out gamma rays is that possible?



posted on Feb, 3 2004 @ 01:10 PM
link   
idea 1.

lol those beta radiation particles are fermions right(if the're bosons hu cares). Why dont u just have a insulator of those beta radiation particles around the ship that are at absolute zero making a condensate( and only a slight magnetic field is requied also), so whenever it is bombarded the particles will go through most of the condensate, but not anough energy to reach the ship and will then become part of the condensate too ?
. (if the radiation particles do decay then why cant u just use some other particles.)

btw those carbon nanotubes are light as. a bulletproof vest made out of it is resistant to EM, 3 times or so more resistant that current kevlars to bullets and weigh as much as a t shirt! kool aye


btw amantine can u change my name on ur resoucres to "quiksilver" if thats alrite
cheers



[Edited on 3-2-2004 by quiksilver]




top topics



 
0

log in

join