Plasma Rocket Could Travel to Mars in 39 Days

Knowing NASA, plans for such a mission would not be put in motion for another 5 years, even given the data that the possibility of a 39 day trip [or so] towards Mars. Oh well...I suppose we can all dream. Not that they would divulge much information towards us.

Originally posted by zorgon
SCI/TECH: Earth to Mars in 3 hours possible?

New Scientist magazine have an article noting a new theory that may allow the creation of engines able to power a spacecraft to Mars in 3 hours and to the next solar system in 80 days.

5-1-2006
www.abovetopsecret.com...

AN EXTRAORDINARY "hyperspace" engine that could make interstellar space travel a reality by flying into other dimensions is being investigated by the United States government.

The hypothetical device, which has been outlined in principle but is based on a controversial theory about the fabric of the universe, could potentially allow a spacecraft to travel to Mars in three hours and journey to a star 11 light years away in just 80 days, according to a report in today's New Scientist magazine.

The theoretical engine works by creating an intense magnetic field that, according to ideas first developed by the late scientist Burkhard Heim in the 1950s, would produce a gravitational field and result in thrust for a spacecraft.

Also, if a large enough magnetic field was created, the craft would slip into a different dimension, where the speed of light is faster, allowing incredible speeds to be reached. Switching off the magnetic field would result in the engine reappearing in our current dimension.

news.scotsman.com...

Info comes and goes and is rediscovered anew

In case there is just thrust to propel the spacecraft then how much time is accounted for the breaking stages?
In case they suppose they would do this through "shifting physical dimensions" then how could they manage for preparing for departure, targeting the destination and then calculating a safe arrival?
There is a whole lot of yet uninvented tech and unrealized concepts plus unforeseen problems that may arise that could keep them busy for at least another 100 of years even if they had the means and the technology to achieve what they claim. Say, even if we hypothesize they already had the ability for this kind of propelling technology to work 50 years before our time, they surely would need another 50 ahead in the future to maybe find the solutions to supplement this entire technological concept that could guarantee safe travel at some percent.

I even find the 39 day trip unfeasible since probably I don't think they account the needed time for the breaking process too. Adding any necessary mission preparation period time in this equation I would say probably more than 4 months for each mission, or even 6 taking in consideration their current records of failure in achieving pre scheduled mission deadlines.
Still it looks better than what we currently have but obviously they don't seem to take their own claims seriously since it still would require far more time than what they want us to believe.

[edit on 7-10-2009 by spacebot]

[edit on 7-10-2009 by spacebot]

reply to post by Arbitrageur


But if we can't do what's right on our own world, why should we get to inherit another? Long term, I agree with you, but there are pressing concerns, easily solvable, that need to be addressed here and now imo.

Just a point of update... it looks like the public relations folks at Ad Astra Rocket Company have had a pretty busy season...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by OmegaPoint
reply to post by Arbitrageur

 

But if we can't do what's right on our own world, why should we get to inherit another? Long term,

In the new colony, democracy as you now know it will not exist. It is to be a primary military/scientific outpost. Earth has far too many differenet social species for it to become a eutopia as it has been written in countless books and ideological speaches.

reply to post by OmegaPoint


Sad to say, but you can't fix stupid.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Nor can you, or should you attempt to stop evolution through survival of the fittest.

Yeah, we could do a better job of taking care of our planet, but people forget it has only been about a 120 years since we first turned on the lights, and began using electricity to power our technology. Already we have a global movement to start taking better care of our planet, so we are moving in the right direction.

Great thread, thanks for starting it.

It seems that we are just beginning to explore plasma technology, even though it has been around since the early part of the last century. Who knows what they could accomplish if they had a plasma research station in space, or on the moon, where there they are already in a vacuum.

We already have 12 mile long tethers that are used to maintain the orbit of satellites. Imagine what could be done if wires were sent out around a vehicle and gases were released and powered up with electricity. A very large plasma field could easily be created, and if properly harnessed, could probably create a great deal of thrust, maybe the hypothetical warp field.

Ah, but what will the plasma inhabitant of space think about all this?

Originally posted by poet1b
Ah, but what will the plasma inhabitant of space think about all this?

Probably give us a thumbs up for finally getting with the program

I like the nuclear idea. Supposedly they fill a giant container (part of the ship) with BB sized uranium pellets and the pellet is zapped one at a time with a laser creating a small (well relatively small) nuclear explosion. They use this explosion as thrust. And supposedly you wold only need to zap a few pellets to get going...and going really fast. They theorize 1/10th the speed of light. And with a container holding millions of these pellets...well lets just say there would be enough fuel for a very, very long trip.

reply to post by princeofpeace


From my understanding, nuclear fission isn't that easy to start, or to stop.

What is going to protect the crew from the radiation coming off of all of those nuclear pellets, that would have to be enriched with plutonium before they could detonate in small nuclear blasts.

I think plasma would be a far easier energy source to control, but maybe not.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by princeofpeace

 

From my understanding, nuclear fission isn't that easy to start, or to stop.

What is going to protect the crew from the radiation coming off of all of those nuclear pellets, that would have to be enriched with plutonium before they could detonate in small nuclear blasts.

I think plasma would be a far easier energy source to control, but maybe not.

Quite the opposite, nuclear fission is easy to control. It has been done in nuclear reactors for many years with very little accidents.

The crew could be protected by enough distance and packing their fuel and water between the reactor and crew module.
The real concern is not reactor radiation, but cosmic rays and such.

EDIT Oh, you meant the pellets, idea! Then I think you are right...

[edit on 11-10-2009 by Maslo]

Im concerned about this being weaponized. If they truly can cause a nuclear explosion by zapping uranium pellets with a laser, then why cant we have lasers in orbit and then have say a golf ball sized uranium capsule with a tracking device inside so the laser can home in on it and just blast it wherever it happens to be? You could have thousands of these and drop them over a large area via airplane then zap them with the orbital laser.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by princeofpeace

 

From my understanding, nuclear fission isn't that easy to start, or to stop.

What is going to protect the crew from the radiation coming off of all of those nuclear pellets, that would have to be enriched with plutonium before they could detonate in small nuclear blasts.

I think plasma would be a far easier energy source to control, but maybe not.

reply to post by princeofpeace


Knowing the basics of how fission works, the whole pellet idea does not sound technically feasible. Like I said, the uranium needs to be enriched, and then given the opportunity to to heat up, kind of like a soup, or charge like a battery. Maybe I am wrong, I don't know that much about it, but I don't think it could happen that easily.

The plasma concept doesn't seem to take the same sort of danger.