Re: starship-design: Collision sails and various things

[Steve VanDevender <stevev@efn.org>]

kyle writes:
 > >  > 3. Field drives: To alter space in a way providing propulsive force
 > >  > (falling into your gravity well, etc.)
 > > 
 > > Huh?
 > 
 > Like rolling a barrel down a valley, but continually creating the valley
 > in front of your ship. Doesn't need negative matter! (a good thing)

Violates several conservation laws and is pretty close in concept to the
perpetual motion machine.  A bad thing.

 > >  > 4. EM drives: distort gravity via electromagnetism. (ZPF is an
 > >  > electromagnetic phenomena).
 > > 
 > > Gravity is not an electromagneetic phenomenon, so far as anyone
 > > understands it currently.
 > 
 > Not Gravity, ZPF. ZPF is affected by electromagnetism, and gravity in
 > turn by ZPF. Gravity can't be directly altered by magnetism. (at least
 > we don't think it can).

There is some interesting speculation on inertia being an interaction
with the vacuum, but it is untested and there are no obvious
applications that were presented along with the speculation.

 > >  > 5. ????ideas anyone????
 > > 
 > > I'm willing to consider new ideas, but let's not rehash all these
 > > speculative ideas that we seem to agree are just too new and unproven to
 > > be useful in an engineering context.
 > 
 > But we can at least consider them, and create basic ideas of them. If we
 > don't, we'll probably stay stuck on matter/energy problems forever.
 > Besides, if we don't work on such ideas, they will never come to pass. 

Then I suggest that this is not the forum for working on them.  I see
this as an engineering forum, not a speculative science forum.  We work
on matter/energy problems because they are fundamental to interstellar
propulsion, and I expect them to remain so.  Even the speculative ideas
will likely involve energy and fueling problems, should they pass from
speculation to fact.