Discussion in 'Architecture & Engineering' started by kmguru, Sep 27, 2008.
Because YOUR BOSS says so?
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Because YOUR BOSSES AND PEERS say so?
It is very interesting to review the published work of many famous scientists of the late 1800s. A short list: Heaviside, Voigt, J. J. Thomson, Fitzgerald, Lorentz. They had worked out extensive mathematical theories explaining gravity, inertial mass, and, momentum, in terms of electromagnetic theory.
So, theoretically, gravity could be converted into electromagnetic energy. Except, darn it, all the work of those crackpots was proved totally wrong.......
I was wondering about something???? Why would you want to use a superconducter?? Magnetic fields can be overlapped in a way to create a magnetic field stronger then a superconducter.... Also why dont you use a non conventional way to increase the magnetic field strength through a non equilibrium gas or even liquid nitrogen and then electrify it by passing it through another set of electro magnets. I see all of this hard work that people want to do but get discoraged when they realize the daunting task ahead of them. why not simplify the problem to create a solution to the bigger issue. Why dont we have hyperdrive or ftl engines yet we have the knowlegde and the materials but what is holding us back.???????
Because we don't have the knowledge: and without the knowledge we don't know if we have the materials.
Well sure. It's all quarks and leptons and bosons after all. (Got that from our AE&C subforum.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!) But the GUTE (Grand Unified Theory of Everything) is not complete, and we in fact have not been able to fit gravity into a nice neat paradigm with electromagnetism and the two nuclear forces. So the conversion is only a speculation based on reasoning.
Huh??? I think you're confusing "Star Trek" with reality. Our state of the art in science tells us that FTL travel is impossible, with the possible exception of transmitting rudimentary information between pairs of elementary particles.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
probably compensates for string theory linear harmonic inconsistencies.
No, it compensates for clueless people spouting specious technobabble.
why troll ?
is that all you can do ?
step up to the debate and simply explain why that does not relate to what i have suggested as a theory instead of trying to look clever to the ignorant.
On the contrary, the trolling is yours.
"Look clever to the ignorant"?
This from someone who strings several unrelated words together in an effort to look technical?
"Suggested as a theory"?
Please, go ahead and show us:
1) these "linear harmonic inconsistencies" in string theory and then
2) how a rotating magnetic field compensates for them.
I'm sure there's any number of real physicists waiting with bated breath for your "insights".
Because your TIN FOIL HAT thinks you should build one?
The rotation has to deal with a concept called, "frame dragging."
You could engage in frame dragging in a linear fashion, but that wouldn't do you much good; as you'd be constantly running away from the generated field. The rotating coil (or superconductor, I've seen claims of either) keeps the region of dragging immediately over the device.
The last time I sat down and crunched numbers, the use of a rotating superconductor required a super conductor 1? 2? meters in diameter and weighing about 3 tons, spinning at about 10,000 rpm. I don't know of anyone with that much superconducting material.
I'm not sure if this is correct - something's flawed with the reasoning.
AlanCast said "If a spaceship could average 10 percent of light speed, this would be enough to reach Proxima Centauri in forty years."
It would be roughly 80 years - unless you didn't intend to stop.
I don't ever remember making this post. Seriously. :bugeye:
That was a little harsh. I'm sorry. :shrug:
Hmmm, I take it that mechanical advantage doesn't exist in hyperspace. Hmmm, maybe does. It would seem that they do.
Hmmm, that means that you could achieve the same results through application of systems that minic their physical space traits.
I suppose using stepped superconducting magnets would make the power easier to manage, and less than conventional magnets of the same weight. There have been some encouraging new developments in high temp superconducting wire recently as well reducing the need for super-coolants. I wouldn't want to be sitting near a 3-5 tonne ring spinning that fast when it decides it's bearings can no longer hold out.
I have seen an EM ring levitate, but have no idea how it was done. Maybe some hidden magnets. Also, some of the newer exotic superconducting magnets look quite cool, but whether they can be adapted for experiments like these is another matter, most of them appear to be dipole magnets.
While this may not be the place, since it is my OP (I forgot all about it) I am reading UFOs - myths, conspiracies, and realities by John B. Alexander, PhD. Very interesting in the sense that the UFOs were able to pull 40g and 90 degree turns. That means either the craft was unmanned or had the Star Trek type Intertial Dampners...
One of these days, after I set up my Research Lab for nuclear research in South Africa, I am thinking of sneaking in my pet project - to develop a 100+ Tesla field and play with it in various configurations...to see what happens.
The fact that UFOs seem to inhibit aircrafts electronics - high magnetic field could be a cause.
Even if a craft can handle such forces why should they?
I have an idea about a super-drive (no Hyperdrive).
But I will talk later about it.
Separate names with a comma.