Re: USING A ELECTROMAGNETIC BEAM TO PROPELL A STARSHIP

[kgstar@most.fw.hac.com (Kelly Starks x7066 MS 10-39)]

At 11:15 PM 6/6/96, Timothy van der Linden wrote:
>Reply to Kelly
>
>>>Oh wait, you are pointing at two things here:
>>>maser: needs an extra step, easy to convert to electricity
>>>laser: may not need an extra step, less easy to convert to electricity
>>>Did I get it right?
>>
>>The sail system for a microwave beam sail is simpler and lighter than for a
>>laser sail.
>
>Yes, that would be a pro.
>
>>Of course if your using my hybrid fuel/sail configuration you want a havyer
>>sail...  ;)
>
>Laser forth and maser back?

Doesn't really matter.  On the way out it depends on what lithium reflects
best.  On the way back probably the same thing, just so you don't need to
build new beaming facilities.

>>>It may become a technical difficulty if the shift becomes too large, then
>>>the reflectivity (and absorption) may change for the worse. While it may not
>>>matter much that some energy is lost, it may matter that a small part (even
>>><0.001%) of high intensity radiation enters the crew space filled with
>>>sensitive computers etc.
>>
>>Given the power levels were tossing about a .001% absorbtion would melt the
>>ship.
>
>That's exactly what I mean. It is very well possible to make something
>almost 100% reflective for one wavelength, but the better for one, the worse
>for different wavelengths.
>
>>Did you mean to say return masers?  Obviously the 2 year pulse bit works
>>outgoing, but not incoming, ships.
>
>Incoming ships need less energy than outgoing ships (because of blueshift),
>does it really matter how long the beam is on?
>
>Timothy
>
>=============================================================================
>
>Subject: Re: Engine (EM radiation) problems
>
>Reply to Kelly
>
>>>One thing that I'm worried about is the question of how much EM-radiation
>>>would be formed during the reaction, I know you said none, but any collision
>>>of particles (or acceleration, or deceleration of charged particles) would
>>>create EM-radiation. Since it will not be easy to deflect this radiation, we
>>>need a solution for it.
>>
>>I worry about EM and secoundary reactions in the plasma.  We are after all
>>talking about hellish amounts of power.  Even small percentages could
>>incinerate the engine and ship.  (Even a mile of Lithium might not protect
>>the crew.)
>
>OK, then we're back on one line...

One line?

Kelly


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Kelly Starks                       Internet: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com
Sr. Systems Engineer
Magnavox Electronic Systems Company
(Magnavox URL: http://www.fw.hac.com/external.html)

----------------------------------------------------------------------