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


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?

>>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

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?



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...