Re: Another new? idea

[T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl (Timothy van der Linden)]

>> In fact it isn't a mirror anymore, we use a maser collector (analogy of a
>> solar-collector) and convert the whole bunch into electricity. > That
>> electricity is that used to power an array of masers, just like the ones at
>> the Solar home base. So then we have a neat non diffusive or divergent
>> retro-beam.
>
>I'ld say that was a clever idea, but since I'm sure I suggested it a couple
>days ago and no one noticed, I'll ignore you.  :-P

I'm sorry but I had no intend to make this idea look as if it was mine, I
just wanted to restate it since, at least I was almost lost in this avalance
of letters.

>> I could imagine that there are more efficient ways of redirecting and
>> refocussing the beam, but at the moment I only wanted to present the idea
>> to get some comment about the possible difficulties.
>
>Your talking about some heavy power equipment, but you've eliminated the
>almost impossible problem of cleanly reflecting the beam.

No, I wasn't reflecting it, I was retransmitting it by using maser-beams.
Doing this I assumed that we could make a maser-array that could direct its
beams accuratly enough. Note that I am using an array loose from the Asimov. 
The energy for this array would come from the maser-energy that came from Earth.

>While I remember.  Wern't you the one that said the momentum of reflection is
>greater than the total power avalible if you absorb the power?  How did that
>work again?

Yes that was me, but that isn't relevant here, I think you have
misunderstood my (or your?) whole idea of "retransmission".

>I was woundering if we could focus the beam on a reaction mass for some kind
>of plasm brake or something.  But can't remember the equations that were
>geting thrown about.

I didn't understand what you want to have, could you restate it?

Tim