If you can Ionize the air just in front of a fast moving aircraft, Rocket, Car would it reduce the d

a reply to: crzayfool

Thank you very very much for your quick reply.

I fear that finding such a video would probably be quite difficult.
Do you still remember, what kind of propulsion it used? How was it explained, the thrust would work?

originally posted by: crzayfool
If you could control it yes.

I saw a demonstration of this about 10 years back.

What happened was the object had a form of plasma fired out in front. It would effectively get sucked into the low pressure/vacuum that had just been created in front of it, with zero air resistance/friction, causing the object to accelerate at a rate that is practically impossible for any large object to withstand, using mankind's current understanding of aircraft construction.

Excuse me? really? I'm very interested to hear why this is impossible when in fact its not only possible, but has been done for well over that decade and beyond.

Here is where they stopped testing. It was uncontrollable and they were unable to use it for that fact that running it for even 1 second would make the craft accelerate beyond practical application.

Please, beyond practical application? really? you cannot see any reasons why this would suddenly vanishes 'poof' like a puff of smoke in a hurricane wind once they realised they had duplicated the technology that ....... well, duplication is time wasting or it gets attention and halted as not to reveal certain aspects that are needed to stay very black.

It's a good idea but could you imagine how fast a space shuttle would go under the pull of Earths gravity with zero resistance - terminal velocity wouldn't exist.

The strange thing about mankind is that it fails to realise how bloody clever it is as a collective. People slept on this problem and it was solved pretty easily.

The key being 'slept on it'. How strange our world really is.

originally posted by: crzayfool

What happened was the object had a form of plasma fired out in front.

That would create a force in the opposite direction to which you'd want to move.

It would effectively get sucked into the low pressure/vacuum that had just been created in front of it, with zero air resistance/friction,

What and how would have created that low pressure/vacuum?

causing the object to accelerate at a rate that is practically impossible for any large object to withstand, using mankind's current understanding of aircraft construction.

You completely lost me here. Why would the object accelerate in the same direction as the plasma that it ejected (and which got sucked into the vacuum in front of it that got somehow created)?

Try to remember the basic laws of physics before you write stuff like that. There is reaction for every action, and an aircraft moving through the air will encounter air resistance anyway.

Here is where they stopped testing. It was uncontrollable and they were unable to use it for that fact that running it for even 1 second would make the craft accelerate beyond practical application.

No, I think they stopped because it was a woo-woo hoax, and they didn't want to get debunked. A charlatan displays a trick, and moves on before he gets caught.

You completely lost me here. Why would the object accelerate in the same direction as the plasma that it ejected (and which got sucked into the vacuum in front of it that got somehow created)?

Well, let me explain here. If there's some way, to decrease pressure above the craft, by some way, by the plasma, then the craft would obviously be accelerated into this direction. And if one could even create a vacuum, then there would be no more friction.

But the question is, as you said, why should such a plasma decrease the air pressure.
But as I indicated in another thread, there are also other stories, where it is e.g. said, that by shooting high energy electrons into the air (e.g. by a lenard tube), the air pressure decreases.
But I have no idea, if this is true, or why exactly this would happen.

The only, not really convincing, explanation for me would be, that it splits quite a lot of molecules, so that in total the mass of the air molecules is decreased. This would then finally result in a lower density, and so the air below it should push it upwards.
But I can hardly believe it would be possible to split that many molecules.

Although I really do not give much about Kraspedon's story, as many of it is IMHO simply nonsense, I looked up again the described section:

[...]In addition to this we make cathode rays intersect the anode rays at an angle of 45 degrees. This we achieve by using high voltage and current.

Q: Where is the cathode ray apparatus situated?

A: All over the peripheral area. That is to say, the whole of the outer edge of the craft acts as a cathode ray emitter. These rays are deadly and can only be projected outwards. If a human being were to be exposed to rays as powerful as the ones we use, his cells would be destroyed, and he would suffer lethal burns. [...]

If I think again about this, then it could make actually sense.
If you use electron guns to ionize the air at the rim of the craft negatively.
And if you then have something which ionizes the air at the top middle positively, then the positive ions would be attracted and accelerated to the negatively charged rim. They would drag along with them neutral air particles. So the air above the craft never reaches the top of the craft. If you then make the craft itself rotating, the any excess air molecules making it inside the dragging plasma "wall" would be transported away mechanically, so as to keep an underpressure above it. Like that you could theoretically get quite a strong lift and have additionally no air friction.

But I would guess, you would need really big ionization currents, to get this effect to work.

a reply to: Astr0

United States Patent 3713157

originally posted by: mbkennel
a reply to: Astr0

United States Patent 3713157

A man who does his home work. Commendable.

a reply to: Xeven

no, even if you applied enough voltage and amps to split the atmosphere your flying thought into its component gases it,ll still have the same mass per volume.

originally posted by: suicideeddie
a reply to: Xeven

no, even if you applied enough voltage and amps to split the atmosphere your flying thought into its component gases it,ll still have the same mass per volume.

Then look at ways to create that corridor.

This technology is already in use by the US military, the B2 bomber was the first to use it I believe.

originally posted by: Astr0

originally posted by: mbkennel
a reply to: Astr0

United States Patent 3713157

A man who does his home work. Commendable.

Not really.

The patent he linked has nothing to do, with what crzayfool said.

Also his quote:

Excuse me? really? I'm very interested to hear why this is impossible when in fact its not only possible, but has been done for well over that decade and beyond.

Is simply not true.
Such plasma sheath designs have been tested to decrease drag by boundary layer control and for stealth purposes or even to prevent sonic booms. But noone used it to make, what crzayfool said: Namely to create a vacuum so that the craft gets sucked into it.

no, even if you applied enough voltage and amps to split the atmosphere your flying thought into its component gases it,ll still have the same mass per volume.

Not quite true.
If you could really split the air molecules, and if they would remain so stable for a certain time, then you would first get a pressure increase, and expansion of the air, and after reaching equilibrium the air would be less dense (so would have less mass per volume).
The reason is simple: The number of molecules is fixed for a certain pressure/temperature condition. That is defined by the Mol, which defines the number of molecules at STP in a gas like air within 22.4 dm^3.

But this is anyway just a theoretical assumption. I can not believe, that these monoatomic particles would be stable for a long time, but would immediately again aggregate to molecules.

But in this relation another thought maybe would be interesting:
If I create a slight underpressure above it, and if I manage to aggregate over time only the lightweight molecules from the air there, due to their high velocity. Then although there are quite a lot of molecules above it, the density of this air would be much smaller.
Although I wouldn't know, what would be the advantage for this, as although the density might be smaller, the pressure wouldn't change due to that.

a reply to: hulli

HEre is a though. Astro has alot of experience with this stuff. There are things him and zapfod both know that we cant or else we would be sent away to a very dark and windowless place if we did know. You may think its impossible and not true but do YOU have the access they have had over the years?

a reply to: yuppa

Lol I don't give anything about this "playing the paranoid card" stuff to give any special importance to a post...

Fact is: the named patent has nothing to do with what crzayfool said.

Edit:
But I have to say, that I anyway do think these seen crafts are manmade. That's why I would be interested, how they should be able to fly, by creating a vacuum in front of them. How should such a vacuum be created by a plasma, without tying the force experienced at the boundary to the craft?
That's the question related to crzayfool's post.

The only more or less reasonable idea, I could come up with, is what I posted, mainly by building something like a giant plasma window, above the craft, to get an underpressure. But this would need a really big amount of energy.
Sure you could get an underpressure by other means, e.g. by acoustics, but then you will always get a counterforce, so that you will not get a levitation by that.
Sure you could also propel acoustically, but that's another story.

To try to explain better, on what my idea would rely on (on which I think it would not be doable, due to energy constraints).
You create basically an ionization cloud at the top middle, which you accelerate electrically to the rim. Any uncharged air particle getting into this stream will be forced to flow along with the others, if the flow is strong enough from the charged particles.
It's basically similar to the lifters you see on the net. But you would not use this wind directly to lift the craft, but you would just create such a strong ion wind, that almost no outside air particle can get through it without getting pushed along by the wind.
Like that an underpressure can be built under this stream, so that the normal air pressure on the underside will push the craft upwards.

Actually it would be kinda like to Coanda-Effect, but just in extreme, so that the airfoil shape has no meaning anymore, as the air deflection happens electrically, before the air reaches the craft itself.

Probably it could even work better, if one would accelerate the air from the rim to the center top. This would probably additionally create a vortex ring, which already deflects the incoming air. It would also actively push against the incoming air, and not just try to drag it along... But then you would really need use stuff like electron guns, as otherwise the air would be electrically tied to the craft, and push you down. By using an electron gun, one could circumvent this tie.

As said, currently that would be the only at least slightly reasonable explanation for me, on how to create a vacuum for propulsion by a "quasi"-plasma.
I would be quite interested in other ideas, how the plasma created vacuum as described by crzayfool can be generated to create a lift.

a reply to: hulli

Read what the patent says


Now i read this. You might had found a patent that was similiar. This patent is exactly how the aircraft goes that fast. read the descriptions below and in its entirety. Its not BS apparently. Also the power needs are not astronomical either.

Picture of Aircraft using said tech?

a reply to: yuppa

I think we are seriously talking of different subjects.
I relate to the subject, that crzayfool said, the plasma would generate a vacuum, which again sucks the craft upwards at a crazy speed.

As I understand it, you are relating to the subject on how to reach such a high speed (by Boundary layer control).

The second thing, is, what is in the patent, the first subject is not handled by the patent.
It has long been known, that boundary layer suction or blowing has helped. And you can surely drastically increase this effect electrically. But that's not the same as generating a vacuum for actual propulsion means.
Although if you would push such an electrical boundary layer blowing to the extreme, you would end up, with the idea I mentioned before. But again, for this huge amounts of energy for air ionization would be needed.

a reply to: Xeven

Doesnt increase speed but has other unusual effects.

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: hulli

Notice i said the wrong patent is what you prolly saw. OR a relevent peice of the total picture. I went to th epatent office website and found my data. using google gets you crap. But hey its your perogitive to not believe but its a hell of a coincidence mine included a drawing of said patents use.

a reply to: yuppa

Doesn't really make sense to me, what you're saying. I have no idea, what you wanna try to say???

My point: The patent posted, which is again the same you reposted does not have any relation in it's topic relating to creating a vacuum for propulsion means by a plasma.

It's topic is about boundary layer control to reduce drag and for stealth purposes (decreasing radar reflection).

a reply to: hulli

I agree, I don't see anything useful for propulsion. Supposedly the radioisotope stuff was on early F-117A's or maybe just the test aircraft but no longer. Now dielectric barrier discharge is being published.

a reply to: mbkennel

What do you think of Astr0's description (www.abovetopsecret.com...) of ultrasound/microwave generators creating drag reduced/free corridors? Coherent? Plausible?