ex nasa engineer suggests that there is a propulsion system that can do the distance of Earth to Mar

Originally posted by pstrron
When the engineer said that they had not figured out a way to keep warm, the OP's BS meter should have gone to 100%. Retaining heat is not difficult and even that issue was addressed by Robert A. Heinlein in 1974 regarding going between Earth and Mars. I know, another SF writer but like Issac Asimov, more than just a SF writer.

Still, a writer. A thoeretical idea, written by a fiction writer, is not remotely the same thing as an empirically validated and tested engineered solution or product.

When an engineer says "we haven't figured out how to do X" it does not usually mean "we don't even have any proposals" as opposed to "we do not have enough information and experience to know if any of the multiple ideas which have been proposed are feasible, cost-effective, manufacturable, reliable and safe".

Originally posted by BeReasonable
What ever happened to pursuing the NERVA program in the 50's and 60's. Surely this research was followed up it would have been to important to forget about, i know there were a lot of concerns about nuclear propulsion in space but surely it wasnt shelved just for that reason

en.wikipedia.org...

Actually, that was the secondary reason...the primary reason being that, by the time the NERVA system could have been flight worthy, there wasn't a mission for it. Never, never, never underestimate the power of overly vocal Luddites in large numbers...do you remember the mass hysteria when NASA was getting ready to launch the Cassini probe? There were people concerned that a launch accident could result in the extinction of life on Earth because of the nuclear material aboard the probe. *bangs head on desk*

Nobody has (as yet) mentioned the real problem with continuous-acceleration trips to Mars...namely, the massive amount of propellant you'd need for the trip. Remember, folks...Newton's laws still apply, and in space flight, they apply with a vengeance. To accelerate something in one direction, you have to accelerate something else in the opposite direction...and when 'something' is a spacecraft large enough for a manned flight to Mars, and you want to accelerate at 9.8m/sec/sec, you need a *lot* of "something else". This page gives you all the math and tables to figure out the numbers on your own. If you aren't into that much math (or, in my case, simply haven't had enough coffee as yet), the Cliff's Notes version is that your ship would get lost in its own fuel tanks.

reply to post by markygee


your calculator is off by a large margin of error.
38,000,000 divided by (9 x 24= 216) = 175,925.92592592592592592593

reply to post by MuzzleBreak


it would not take two months
to achieve that velocity

reply to post by Brother Stormhammer


You don't need a propellant if you can create a gravity field. If your going to try and figure out this propulsion system this engineer is claiming, I think you have to look beyond rockets.

Pladuim

Some research keywords;
ELECTROGRAVITICS, T.T. BROWN, PAUL A. LAVIOLETTE, BARIUM TITANATE

to me it sounds like the NASA engineer put his foot in his mouth and then try to reel the disclosure back in.

a primer on this propulsion system, it's not new at all;
www.etheric.com...

reply to post by Thunderheart




At least someone's on the same page as I am.

Pladuim

reply to post by Pladuim


I'm always surprised how few people know about this. people are still arguing about acceleration and deceleration times, the effect on humans because of it, fuel.,..blah blah blah, the answer has been around for decades.

Originally posted by Pladuim
Black Projects you say?

www.info-quest.org...

I'm currently working with a couple of engineers building our own gravitor. After a few simple tests, we were able to make a 3lb device loose 1/2 half of it's weight using around 14 KV. After reversing polarity we also got 1 1/2 lbs of downward force. We where able to produce these results multiple times until we fried our power supply. Also had some arching issues so we have had to regroup. Our final device should come close to 15lbs, can't wait to see the results from that. This is in no way ionic wind. I wonder what one million KV would accomplish?

Pladuim

are you able to share pictures of your experiments or would it give too much away?

reply to post by Thunderheart


I really can't post any pics right now, but when the time comes, I will be sharing the results here on ATS. We wil be recording video once we get a final device finished, with lab coats and everything. That's if the black helicopters don't show up first.

One thing you may be interested in reading is a letter Mr. Brown wrote to a man by the name of Ed Hull. I found this letter in the Grey Barker files. Any other questions I'll be happy to answer if I can. I can't give away any elements we are using, but if your as knowledgeable as I think you are, you should be able to make a good guess.

Here is a link to the Ed Hull letter,

www.thomastownsendbrown.com...

Pladuim

reply to post by Pladuim


I've read that letter. Here is a neat compilation report I don't know if you have ran across it before;
www.cufon.org...
This tech is legitimate and has been legit since the 50's.

Also, have you ever visited Mrs Linda Brown's forum"
she is a wonderful lady and a pleasure to chat with.
www.cosmic-token.com...

I am also known there as "Thunderheart"

I have some interesting info on Dielectric enhancement to up the K value.
I don't know what you guys are working with but this is a recipe from A Chinese university that I found really interesting, I haven't the barium powder to try out the mix but I'm always looking for some that isn't priced higher than gold!

Originally posted by Pladuim
reply to post by Brother Stormhammer

 

You don't need a propellant if you can create a gravity field. If your going to try and figure out this propulsion system this engineer is claiming, I think you have to look beyond rockets.

Pladuim

edit on 19-5-2013 by Pladuim because: (no reason given)

Possibly...but even assuming some form of electro-gravitic drive that doesn't require reaction mass, the power requirements are going to be *immense*. Unless you're going to posit some form of techno-magic that sets aside the laws of conservation, the energy to accelerate your spacecraft is going to come from somewhere...either in the form of reaction mass, or in some form of direct energy expenditure.

Assuming that such an electro-gravitic drive *does* exist (Tesla knows physics has led to stranger things!), we might be up against Howard Stark's problem...we might have the theory for a device that our technology just can't build...available power has *always* been a problem with technological progress, and given the amount of power something like this would need, the 'suppression' of such technology might not be so much a conspiracy as a simple lack of ability.

reply to post by Brother Stormhammer
Man, is your head going to explode once you read up on this stuff...I wish I could see it when the veil is lifted from your eyes.
Godspeed friend.

reply to post by Thunderheart


I have had the pleasure of meeting Linda on a few occasions and yes, she is a nice Lady. Too much drama between her and others so I had to step back and concentrate my efforts on this project. The science is what I'm interested in.

I'd be really interested in that barium mix.

Oh, I could probably get you all the barium sulfate you need, then you could separate the barium.

Pladuim

Originally posted by mbkennel

Originally posted by pstrron
When the engineer said that they had not figured out a way to keep warm, the OP's BS meter should have gone to 100%. Retaining heat is not difficult and even that issue was addressed by Robert A. Heinlein in 1974 regarding going between Earth and Mars. I know, another SF writer but like Issac Asimov, more than just a SF writer.

Still, a writer. A thoeretical idea, written by a fiction writer, is not remotely the same thing as an empirically validated and tested engineered solution or product.

When an engineer says "we haven't figured out how to do X" it does not usually mean "we don't even have any proposals" as opposed to "we do not have enough information and experience to know if any of the multiple ideas which have been proposed are feasible, cost-effective, manufacturable, reliable and safe".

I agree I never felt that he had no idea just that they weren't sure what to do for the best. Hence his joke about recruiting Eskimo's as only they would be used to the cold.

Originally posted by slugger9787
reply to post by markygee

 

your calculator is off by a large margin of error.
38,000,000 divided by (9 x 24= 216) = 175,925.92592592592592592593

Thanks now I feel dumb and embarrassed looking at what you guys are talking about and I screw up the simple maths bit. My ego will survive though.

reply to post by Pladuim


are you talking about something like this:
www.youtube.com...

its cool but seems a bit inefficient.. the says he uses about 7kw or power.. the thing weighed about 2grams, although it lifted the 2 grams with relative ease, still seems like alot of power for something so light.. could work i guess.

reply to post by choos


No, we are not working on a lifter. A lifter is childs play compared to a gravitor. Here is Mr. Brown's gravitor...

www.rexresearch.com...

And here is a simple gravitor...

www.youtube.com...

Pladuim

reply to post by Pladuim


ntrs.nasa.gov...

is this it?? or am i wrong again??

to me it looks like a similar experiment, but i know nothing of this.. just that its NASA working on the biefeld-brown effect.. no idea if its the same deal though.