Take On Mars | Short Story Series | Teaser (Ep. 01)

show more
Upvotes (4)
Comments (3)
Sorted by:
  • Star_Wars6collector reply I really enjoy our conversations but you would have more then enough thrust using a magnetic vortex engine using the correct type of venting system to control or stabilize the star ship in flight,
  • [ – ] Star_Wars6collector reply How come they don't sent avatar robots there right now to do the work of setting up
    • [ – ] Haladmer parent reply Part of it is cost. If you send a robat capable of doing any real delicate work, there is a very real chance for hardware failure. The more delicate the work, the more delicate the robot's manipulators/arms would need to be. You could send up an "industrial" bot to do the major lifting/basic base construction, but then if you are still going to need to send up people for the mission itself. just more cost effective to do 1 trip instead of two.
      • [ – ] Star_Wars6collector parent reply I agree they need to send construction equipment and underground bore machines, there should be some level of oxygen the deeper you drill because the core still rotates,
        • Haladmer parent reply Another article you might be interested in https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/all-we-really-need-to-get-to-mars-is-a-boatload-of-cash/ touches on the subsurface watertable subject as well :)
      • [ – ] Star_Wars6collector parent reply come on they can send up cheap satellites to cross navigate the planet for a communication system, they could start launching rockets now with supplies, and your going to tell me that simple avatar robots could not be made to do the job, NASA needs some real action now not 10 years from now, if the Polar Shift will be as bad as our past history shows then they have 4 to 5 years left to do something,
        • [ – ] Haladmer parent reply I never said they couldn't do it, just that the financials may not work out for them to do it currently. Last I heard NASA contracts with SpaceX and Orbital Sciences for orbital delivery, but I'd have to look it up and see if this is still accurate. They have a current payload limit of ~5k to 8k lbs I belive? They're working with SpaceX on the Mars project, and there was just a conversation about this week :D http://www.universetoday.com/133549/begins-red-dragon-delayed-2-years-2020/ Basically, they don't have a viable system to launch materials enmass like this yet. The Falcon Heavy has a projected lift capacity of 119k lbs, but I don't have numbers on the launch cost for a full payload flight out to mars. At current prices per launch with SpaceX/Orbital Sciences, each pound of materials (just aiming at Earth orbit) runs ~$9k and up. Putting a cube-sat (4inch cube - upto 2lbs) in LEO (low earth orbit) is something like ~$1k-$5k I think? As for robots/avatar systems, the only ...morereal problem with using remote controled systems is that the comms lag is measured in hours, which makes it that much trickier to do detailed work (fixing circuit boards for example)
          • Star_Wars6collector parent reply It is shameful that NASA's idea of space travel is using primitive rockets when magnetic energy is simple and far more practical, the most ideological thing they came up with was to fire nukes to propel a star ship or a steady beam of lasers to fuel it, lol So if NASA used nano carbon's mixed with metals they would have star ship that would weigh far less, as well when you have a star ship that simulates it's own gravity you need not worry about the weight, with vortex magnetic fusion energy you use specially designed propulsion or if NASA is that stupid to make some thing correctly then I will give you the most simple answer, you build a magnetic launching pad that is just like an invisible elevator, the superior magnetic or super sized launch pad you charge up with vortex energy fusion and then send the charge to the magnet to lift your space ships off the earth, the magnetic energy will elevate them right into space, When I think about how stupid NASA is it only makes me prove my po...moreints faster, but ideally you would build a magnetic rail launching system and fire the space ships out to space using that, now tell me again how primitive NASA is, I don't have much patience for incompetence, ,
          • [ – ] Star_Wars6collector parent reply they throw away billions on stupid things like the Hadron Collider , so when I look at NASA I see a waste of poor organization and old ways of thinking, now if they are that primitive that they cant make a magnetic engine to power a star ship or make real space craft that are made from nano carbon mixed with desired metals, as well as simulate gravity using a gyro, then all they have is junk, they want to fuel there ships with lasers, lol not have powerful magnets that last for up to 400 years, so that to me tells me how there so called advanced idea's are how you say lacking
            • [ – ] Haladmer parent reply I won't disagree with the idea a lot of government based research organizations being poorly organized, more that the need to "protect the public" implies the need for a lot of, let's say.. managerial oversight (org is "Top Heavy"). But to my knowledge NASA has not directly contributed to the LHC project, where the Federal Government, Department of Energy, and the National Science Assoication have. While they all get their funding from the same pool, NASA has no control over how the rest spend their funding (and continues to see their own funding reduced) As to the fusion wave/vortex systems, the problem with any fusion system is that there are not currently any established and commercially viable product to build off of (to my knowledge). Building a payload carrying system, regardless of how much energy as reactor/power supply can provide, you still need to know how much mass is being lifted (for those who don't know, I specifically call out the mass calc since weight is the effect ...moreof gravity/intertia on the mass present) Even using artifical gravity (AG), another technology that doesn't yet exist in a working version, the mass is still there, you're just countering local the effect of gravity on the mass. Yes, once you have a working AG field, you should then be able to use it to make a "repulsor field" for lift (again for those outside the conversation, the AG field would be controlled the ship's internal gravity, allowing the laws of interia to be 'side-stepped' (think inertial dampeners), where the repulsors would be controlling the ship's total mass/lift). Two applications of the same technology. The magnetic rail launcher (mag-catapault) requires you to (A.) Accurately calculate the unassisted orbital trajectory for your target or (B.) Have some means of repositioning/redirecting the mass in motion. Even then, the initial high-G acceleration would make this viable only for non-living, non-collapsable cargo (think circuitboards, plates, etc..) if you don't have some form of inertial dampening. Which requires even more research to find ways of storing goods for use in the launcher. Honestly, I'm surprised you didn't bring up space elevators, since a "from space" launch would reduce the need of 'exotic' (i.e. still in development) power/fuel systems and allow for currently in-operation technology (ion drives/solar sails/etc...) to be used as a viable system for 'human-cargo' craft. It's thought that current nano-tube strength is there to support the elevator concept, but that's a lot of carbon tubing to 'grow'.
              • [ – ] Star_Wars6collector parent reply The magnetic elevator only needs power full magnetic's so you elevate your craft to launch from it as the magnetic levitation brings you to the suitable elevation, and creating your own magnetic field will change the weight of gravity by using a gyro magnetic field, so your star ships match the gravitational pull/gravitational field as they ascend into space, that is how a UFO does it,
                • [ – ] Haladmer parent reply Using a mag-field lifter would not alter the intertial effect of gravity on a mass, it simply makes it easier to accelerate that mass since some part of the lift would be from the mag-field itself. Moving the mass from its fixed position still requires force vs the mass to provide motion in a given direction. A better example might be the mag-rail trains since those deal directly with the mechanics we're discussing. Basically you use the mag-field to reduce the frictional drag on the mass (the rails in this case), but this doesn't change the interial force of the mass being lifted/moved. Without an ability to actually alter the gravity influence (intertial force) on the mass being 'moved' you're simply replacing 'thrust' from one type ('rockets') to another (magnetic lift). For those playing along at home, a gravitronic type of drive would fully cancel the gravity/intertial effect on the mass (hopefully in a controlled manner), not simply 'float it' like the mag field, providing 'l...moreift' with a 0-force result, which is why mag-lift systems are not counted as anti-gravity devices, since they still exert a measurable force/counter-force to achieve any 'lift'. TL;DR version, if you place a scale under the mag field, you'll see a displacement (the scale will show weight/pressure). A grav field would achieve the same result, with no displacement. Btw, thank you for the great conversation on the topic, really making me have to dust off some of the areas of my brain! :D
                  • [ – ] Haladmer parent reply Correction(s): throughout my reply I said "intertial" when it should have been "inertial". not sure why I keep adding an extra 't' in there :D
                    • [ – ] Star_Wars6collector parent reply other interesting idea's would be to make a tractor beam wave you could beam from the moon through the stratosphere to pull your space ships through it like opening up a window, lol
                      • Haladmer parent reply the scale of power needed for something like that... there would be much better ways to use that power source :D
                    • Star_Wars6collector parent reply a sound wave frequency causes rotation so you could build a sound wave engine, and that is still magnetic engines,
                    • [ – ] Star_Wars6collector parent reply now if we went with how NASA will use a laser to power some thing, would it add consistent power to levitate the craft for an elevator?
                      • [ – ] Haladmer parent reply Are you referring to the laser collector array (laser created 'net' that 'farms' hydrogen from space) or one of the ionic drive systems?
                        • Star_Wars6collector parent reply if NASA is that cheap they would make a hot air balloon launch pad to get them to a higher elevation launch system, because they are not intelligent enough to use magnetics, lol
                        • [ – ] Star_Wars6collector parent reply ionic drive system,
                          • Haladmer parent reply You might like this article https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/02/nasas-longshot-bet-on-a-revolutionary-rocket-may-be-about-to-pay-off/
                          • Haladmer parent reply Ionic drive have high specific impulse (highly efficient at converting energy into thrust), but very low thrust, even in space/0-G. The theory is with enough of them, you could 'float' a mass within an atmosphere, but the power needs would be staggering, let alone the number of thrusters needed. They use these on satellites now, and even the largest array is only measured in millinewtons.
                    • Star_Wars6collector parent reply the Hutchinson effect, too bad he is a cross dresser, but he does interesting experiments,
                    • [ – ] Star_Wars6collector parent reply I know what your saying, but if your star ship matches the gravitational field then it raises but this is what I mean by using an elevator and this is also how they assembled the pyramid Iron Ore stone and the granite stone also had the Iron ore stone mix because the pyramid stones are all cast-stones https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAcuWva9Yho
                      • [ – ] Haladmer parent reply If matching a planet's specific gravity allowed for it, theoreticallly there would be a drive effect until you were out of the planet's gravity field/influence since the ship would start being increasingly influenced by other gravity wells/fields. So the further you got away from the source, the less 'thrust' you would generate. This would lead to a need to reconfigure the drive system dynamically as you moved through gravitational wells/fields to utilize the drive long term/far afield. If this was based on chemical compositions, there would be a need to carry a large supply of materials, even if as a simple 'bio-mass', in order to be making these changes in-flight.
                        • Star_Wars6collector parent reply there are lots of interesting idea's out there https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQmksAABbI8 the gyroscope https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Lka6d6DDBs I almost forgot the capacitor design gives the energy the boost, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkTj-NwLG0Y now that video has some very interesting things, but the point is a real design of circles for the capacitor top gives your batteries more power, so the amplification of energy provides more power, so you can make photon beams or powerful vortex engines
                        • [ – ] Star_Wars6collector parent reply the whole point of the vortex magnetic engine is that you don't need fuel, but yes you match the gravitational field through frequency vibrations and using a gyro scope to create your star ships gravitational field,
                          • [ – ] Haladmer parent reply So a zero-point energy system powering, what effectively could be used as a 'disintegrator' with a bit of tweaking. Basically a focused beam from this type of emittor would allow for selected gravitonic isolation (point this at something, use the resonance field to counter the molecular resonance of that item, and things just fall apart since you would be neutralizing the overall gravity effect holding the target together)
                            • [ – ] Star_Wars6collector parent reply say you have an iron ball with a vortex shape within it, now you have powerful magnet's compressing it to spin it, your generating your gyroscope gravitational field, so it is that easy the more you compress the magnets the faster your gyroscope spins generating your own magnetic field, so you see what I mean
                              • Haladmer parent reply You're equating gravity/gravitational fields to magnetic fields in this description. Are you saying this format would create a gravity field, or a magnetic field? While they can impact/influence each other, they are not normally considered interchangable. If there is a source/paper on the concept though, I'd be interested in reading it :D
  • [ – ] harjar reply This is cool Hal!
Download the Vidme app!