[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Orbit B
to Brian Mansur
>But the ship would be reacting to the stern thrust of the earth beam months
>before it would get to the mirror, and the mirror could respond.
You've pointed out a serious problem that only this morning I even realized
was there. You remember how nervous the Columbia crew was that their
tethered sattilite might bounce back at them? Think of see a really huge
sail falling down around you. It would, no doubt, bend the cable/guy wires
beyond use even if the sail didn't rip itself apart after crumbling down.
The solution is to move out of the Sol beam path, pack up your sail (and no,
I don't know how to do that), and wait for the retro-beam to reach the
Asimov's range. Then you move back into the Sol beam and then into the
retro-beam. You deploy your sail and voila. Just pray that the retro-beam
doesn't get jerked off target or else you'd better have a spare sail and a
good robotic team to put it up. Come to think of it, you'd need a lot of
bots just to deploy the main sail.
I don't follow your manuver into and out of the beam. Whats the pupose? The
beam from sol has to be on all the time the ship is in flight.
Furling in a 10,000 mile across, 5 million ton sail?! You must be runing a
worse feaver than I am.
>could you keep the mirror perfectly focused with all the random fluxuations
>in the beam? Keep the reflector tuned exactly to the sail, or know if the
>sail drifted a little due to problems, or back thrust from earth (that the
>reflector wouldn't see for months).
Random fluxuations from where? Not in my refocusing retro-mirror design.
Oh no, I just realized something. Even if you refocus the beam down into a
smaller one via a series of mirrors, it will still have the same energy
density distortions as the unfocuses beam. They would just be on a smaller
scale. Exactly like a picture from a telescope. Maybe the fluxuations
won't be so bad. Then again, maybe not. But I don't see how we could
correct for this.
You have E7 maser transmitters firing to make the beam. Is they arn't in
perfect phase and angle they will interfear with one another and you will
have hot and cool spots in the beam. Then iof course you are transmitting
this over 11 plus light years. So you can expect beam degradation.
By the way. It is possible, as I think you noted earlier this week, that
the mirror would cause plenty of fluxations in its own write. After all,
the huge reflecting surface is an ultra-thin sheet that requires tension for
shape and force from the Sol beam for tension. I see where fluxuations
would compound on fluxuations. E-GAD! THIS IS A NIGHTMARE!
Ever watch a sail ripple in the wind? Now imagine the reflections from those
ripples has to be precisly aimed at something light months, to light years
Stop screeming. I havent got to the bad part. As you travel parts of the
reflect/sail will breakdown due to erosion. As parts of the mesh and support
cables break apart. The sail will wrinkle and streach into funny shapes.
Stop screaming! <slap><slap><slap>
Ok. Now for the bad part. The beam presure on the reflector will push the
beam into curve droping down from its supporting points. Given the reflector
has to be flexible. It can't take the right shape for the reflections to be
aimed correctly. Its like trying to see yourself in the reflection from a
layer of soap film hanging in screen door mesh.
Now you can screem.
Time for a reality check.
For this entire light sail idea to work, you 100% HAVE TO assume that the
beam from the retro-mirror remains steady AND relatively free of
fluxuations. The Asimov will have to take care of itself and keep its
posistion dead in the retro-beam. Any mistakes and you have a wrecked sail.
Unless that can be replaced in a matter of a few days, your crew is going
to have to drop weights (hab shielding mass which is where half of the ship
mass is minus fuel/RM) and hope that whatever kind of sail you get up before
slamming into the retro-mirror can take the extra g's of deceleration. Not
to mention the crew.
Question: Why does reality have to bite so hard?
Hey if it was easy, other people would have figured it out. ;)
- From: Kevin C Houston <firstname.lastname@example.org>