On Monday 02 May 2005 20:17, Mike Carrell wrote:
> Standing Bear wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > Good use for it. Another use may be to utilize it for rocket propulsion.
> > There was a government funded study that stopped short of testing
> > the power of this rocket. Then nothing. Probably working now and
> > highly classified. This just may have been the real ticket for actual
> > operation of the recently cancelled single stage to orbit shuttle, one of
> > the 'X' series, X43 or something...could look it up but some of you know
> > of this anyway. What we need is a good single stage to orbit shuttle.
> > Would'nt this be nice if it worked?
>
> A tangle of missing information and unjustified conclusions.
>
[[[[Point taken! An 'error' concerning missing trivia; but much science
concerns data previousely lost in 'trivia', like integrals involving the base
of natural logarithms and where the solutions led, and the eventual
solution of problems involving the radius of gryation of a solid objects
bounded by ,say, discontinuous functions....like a rectangular cross
section. However, focusing on trivia in a rhetorical sense often says
more about the character of the critic than the original author who
at least has the guts to present material for peer review, not to mention
debating devices such as straw men which become obvious in the
next paragraph. ]]]]
> Rowan University in New Jersey got a Phase I project from a NASA brand to
> investigate BLP reactioors for possible use as thrusters for deep space
> probes where specific impulse overlong times is of the essence. The grant
> was for $75,000 which was very effectively spent by the Rowan crew,
> including getting used high vacuum hardware on eBay. By the tiem the money
> ran out they had not been able to positively demonstrate high veolcity gas
> from the reactor by spectroscopy because of the glare from the plasma
> itself. A planned experiment to measure the thrust of the gas in a vacuum
> chamber was not completed because of lack of funds. NASA declined to find a
> Phase 2 program, and the project died.
>
[[[[Data above shows an interest in the project that led to discovery of many
heretofore unknown details. The project ended in all likelyhood not because
of its lack of merit but because of bean counters who lacked vision, a
frequent occurance with government projects not in current fashion no
matter what the merit. Conversely, the British once fully funded studies on a
battleship made of ice, purely to mollify a fearful public during the depths
of World War II. Many phase one studies did not get a second chance. The
non-award of a phase II for this was shortly after the cancellation of the
Breakthrough Propulsion Physics office and the phase down of NIAC. No new
studies came after this 'Bush cut' a couple of years ago. Just ask Dr Mark
Millis!
Somebody will claim no proof of this kind of 'science driven by accountancy',
just like anti-war columnists waffled when confronted by the mass murder in
Cambodia. They said there was no proof as well, while knowing that no one
would venture into Cambodia into the heart of darkness of the Angkha Leouw
and be alive long enough to even get anywhere near to the proof. The
hypocrisy was palpable! ]]]]
> At the present level of applicaitons work at BLP only feeble thrust could
> be expected, suitable for a deep space probe where thurst with a high
> specific impulse operating over long periods can achieve very high
> velocities.
>
> Mike Carrell
[[[[Perhaps the high glare was indicative of high energy output per
reactant mass. Energy output may have more forms than just
imparting force to gaseous reaction products. The radiation
is energy as well, and at lightspeed! Given the theoretical
quantum nature of light as some solutions of the Schroedinger
equations impart a particle like behavior now represented
by 'photons', it becomes logical to ask how much mass could
a photon have? Many references claim no mass for these,
however they qualify the statement by claiming this to be true
for the particle's rest mass, leaving unclear the mass when
the photon is not at rest. Since traveling at the so called 'speed
of light' is the photon's usual condition, and light has been
proven to be influenced by static gravity (gravitational lensing
effect), one can easily speculate a non-zero mass for the
photon that is not at rest. Brian C. Doyle, on his web page:
http://www.pa.uky.edu/~doyleb/current.html
gives ideas of measuring the mass of photons by measuring
their quantum chromodynamic products.
Rodrick Lakes of the University of Wisconsin theorized
an upper limit for the rest mass of the photon to be about
7 x (10 ^ [-17]) eV back in 1998 in a report on the
following web page:
http://newton.ex.ac.uk/aip/physnews.361.html
There have been other studies since. The possibility of a
rest mass for the photon has broad implications for physics, if
it can be proven. At this point, the issue is open wide enough
that even the most rabid pathoskeptik would not be able
to convincingly close it for long. But we do not have to
prove a rest mass. All we have to do is prove that light
has pressure and that it can be influenced by gravity. Light
can be influenced by magnetism as well. This was proven
by Michael Faraday on 12 March 1862...see the following
URL:
http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/1902/zeeman-lecture.html
Now an intense light source should be the most efficient thruster
that we would plausibly want. Supposedly feeble now, like the
early lasers. It is open to debate just how powerful they could
be made.
The statement was already made that measurements of particulate
thrust were made ...difficult.... by the glare of the plasma. The
pictures on Dr Marchese's site showed a violet glare. This means
a high energy light source...higher the frequency, the higher the
energy. Extend a little more and logically postulate that knowing
the above, this energy, however small, emits a force, a momentum
of non zero mass photons travelling at the limitations of whatever
medium they are in. The Newtonian reactive force will be the
thrust from the device.
We made the lasers larger. Now a megawatt class laser mounted
on a cargo plane will be able to shoot down an ICBM in the boost
phase from a great distance. When first invented they were a
horribly inefficient laboratory curiousity roundly derided by the
pathoskeptics of the day. The ABL, as it is called, has its own
web page:
http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/abl/sitemap.html
Understandably, Dr Randall Mills has his own program, part of which
is to make money. He will! I might even invest some of my money
there and put my money where obviousely my mouth is.
He will love every pathoskeptic out there
that was able to actively or passively discourage competition. I do
not care for his website....to much PDF! But he is what he is, and
will probably make more success of his hydrinos than some of us
will care to admit is possible. The Black Light Power website
can be found at:
http://www.blacklightpower.com/
I am not a salesman for Dr Mills. In fact, I do not encourage
others to invest, for if they do, the price of his stock, assuming
he has any, may go up too soon.
Standing Bear
