[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Laser Aperture Size

> >Not if your still at near light speed.  Ignoring that, could you generate
> >that much power?  How much would it take?  And how do you decel to a stop
> >inside the star system?
> If you can manage to accelerate to near light speed in 100+ days, then you
> should be able to do a 180 in 300+ days. As for power, probably too much.
> doesn't matter what the propulsion method is, the amount of power necessary
> to accelerate a given mass to a given velocity is constant, the only thing
> that changes is how efficiently we can use that power. (Besides Forward et
> al never planned on doing a turn at near light speed, they were talking
> about 0.003c.)

> The Lorentz idea would probably consume 3 to 4 times as much power as a
> straight decel, its only advantage was that it removed the need for any
> retro mirrors, reflectors, advance robot missions, etc. Decel was by light
> sail on the same beam you came out on, but since you now have a vector back
> the way you came, it will now decelerate you instead of acclerate you.

But if the Lorenz turning would take 4 times as much power, and you can't
stay on the beam (or on course) to do it.  Does it help any?

> Of course, all this presupposes that a Sol based beam can even reach that
> far. Perhaps you could use the star's light to decelerate partially for a
> relatively low speed fly by then use Lorentz force to bend your vector back
> around to the star again and use the star to decelerate some more?

Doubt it.  The star wouldn't put out enough power.