Engine theories developed and not used because they are not widely known

[The Thinker]

Nikolai Tesla developed a radiometric thruster that could be used to get to mars and back using less energy than it takes to fall 5 mm in earths gravity when that said energy is converted into electromagnetic energy. the energy provided would be introduced at high frequency and high voltage through two parallel plates separated by two more parallel plates that act as insulation.   

 fig.1

please leave a comment or another design.

https://www.greenoptimistic.com/build-ufo-anti-gravity-spaceship/#.XBGB4VswiM8

[Green Baron]

I fear this is a misconception. The MHD works by accelerating a conductive propellant. It is useless in space.

Even on earth (am thinking of marine applications) it is too inefficient to do something useful with it.

 

The text you linked doesn't make any sense to me ...

Edited December 12, 2018 by Green Baron

[YNM]

So, ion drives basically ?

Going up and down 5mm on earth's surface isn't a measurement, it's just an error.

[Scotius]

I'm still bummed about EMdrive being a bust. But even biggest enthusiast of exotic propulsion should understand you can't exchange minuscule amount of spent energy into interplanetary flight. It's just not that easy...

[Cassel]

Does that count?

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/11/181123135137.htm

[Green Baron]

For flying to Mars ? No. It needs a medium to accelerate.

For flying in an atmosphere ? No or with goodwill not yet. Too ineffective to be useful. It was only a prolonged glide angle.

"There is still a long way to go." they say.

Length undefined :-)

 

Edited December 13, 2018 by Green Baron

[p1t1o]

13 hours ago, The Thinker said:

Nikolai Tesla developed a radiometric thruster that could be used to get to mars and back using less energy than it takes to fall 5 mm in earths gravity when that said energy is converted into electromagnetic energy. the energy provided would be introduced at high frequency and high voltage through two parallel plates separated by two more parallel plates that act as insulation.   

 fig.1

please leave a comment or another design.

https://www.greenoptimistic.com/build-ufo-anti-gravity-spaceship/#.XBGB4VswiM8

Hi and welcome to the KSP forums!

I could be wrong - though I'd eat a figurative hat if I was -  but that website looks like pure garbage. There is a lot of misinformation and myth surrounding Tesla, mainly it exists just to generate clicks/hits/likes or to sell something equally garbage or just to ask for money.

"using less energy than it takes to fall 5 mm in earths gravity" - this (amongst other things) is a big red flag that violates conservation of energy, a very large pointer that says "garbage science".

 

[The Thinker]

this drive disrupts the space time continuum at the front of the engine and stiffens it at the back of the engine essentially creating a warp drive. and no 5mm is not a measurement of length it would be a measurement of the amount of gravitational energy required to move an object 5 mm in a downward direction

[The Thinker]

this engine has a medium for acceleration the space inside the thruster demonstrates mass inertia and energy through disruption to the subspace barrier.

[mikegarrison]

Um ... yeah. OK. We'll wave to you as you fly by.

[Superfluous J]

In my experience things don't get "not used because they're not widely known" but instead are "not widely known because they're not used."

And they're not used because they don't work.

[HebaruSan]

The article linked in the OP is egregiously fraudulent pseudoscience. It may be beneficial to explain the red flags that mark it as such, to help build up our cognitive immune systems against buying into this kind of quackery in the future. First, if you google the name of the device in the diagram, you'll find a real technology:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetohydrodynamic_drive#Spacecraft_propulsion

"In such electromagnetic thrusters, the working fluid is most of the time ionized hydrazine, xenon or lithium."

It's just a plasma drive (similar to the widely used ion drive but different). And it doesn't work at all as described in the OP's article (more on that below). That's red flag number one: a technical description that can't be verified through other sources, and apparent attempted co-optation of a real name for something else.

Next, consider this from the article:

"Tesla performed an experiment in which he applied high-voltage high-frequency alternating current to a pair of parallel metal plates. He found that the ‘space’ between the plates became what he described as “solid-state” exhibiting the attributes of mass, inertia and momentum."

Several questions should come to our minds after reading this:

• When did Nikola Tesla perform this experiment?
• How do we know about this experiment? When/where were the results published?
• What was the experiment? What devices and materials and measurements were involved, in what configuration?
• What were the results of this experiment? Have they been replicated, and if so, by whom?
• Why did Nikola Tesla interpret the results to mean that he had discovered a "solid state" form of space?

None of these questions are answered; a credible source would address them. That's red flag number two: An unspecified "experiment" the supposed conclusions of which we're expected to accept without knowing anything about it.

But, you object, they did specify the experiment, it's that gray-and-yellow box thing in the diagram, isn't it? Well, no; the article is written to imply that was the experiment without actually stating it, by shifting from discussion of the alleged experiment and dubious physical speculation to the purported "drive" with no break or connective transition between the two topics. The description that follows of electric and magnetic fields sounds similar to the (real) plasma drive mentioned above, plus the baseless assertion that, "This propulsion force is not produced by ejecting any matter out of the box, instead, it is produced by a reaction against the ‘solid-state’ condition of space-time caused by the high-frequency electromagnetic pulsing of that area of space." As noted, no justification for this assertion is given; rather, it's tossed into a swirling rhetorical game of three-card monte in which the author tries to distract you with E&M (that he expects you not to follow) rather than inform. That's red flag number three.

You may wish to know that rule 2.2.g. from this forum's guidelines bans "Content with no proof of concept or factual basis (e.g. "free energy" machines)", of which this article is arguably an example.

[razark]

Does it sound too good to be true?  (It probably is, then.)

Does it sound like it operates on principles that came out of a Star Trek writer?  (It probably is, then.)

 

Do you have any information on this "device", beyond a website that states it's based on a document that doesn't exist?

Is there anything besides claims, a few formulas, and some big numbers?  Like a photograph of a test apparatus, or a video, or anything that could actually be called "evidence"? 

 

Why believe it, then?

[p1t1o]

20 hours ago, The Thinker said:

this drive disrupts the space time continuum at the front of the engine and stiffens it at the back of the engine essentially creating a warp drive. and no 5mm is not a measurement of length it would be a measurement of the amount of gravitational energy required to move an object 5 mm in a downward direction

mm is certainly a measurement of distance.

But yes - combined with a gravitational potential (and a given mass), it denotes an amount of energy.

However, it denotes quite a stunningly small amount of energy, if using an Earth-surface-normal 1G gravitational potential.

Lift a 1kg mass 5mm (in a 1G blahblah...). There is a fixed energy cost for this action, denoted by physical law.

Did the exertion feel like it could propel 1kg to Mars and back under any circumstances?

It would take a colossal stretching of physical law to convert this into interplanetary travel.

 

20 hours ago, The Thinker said:

this engine has a medium for acceleration the space inside the thruster demonstrates mass inertia and energy through disruption to the subspace barrier.

No, it assumes a medium for acceleration, and then assigns properties to this medium that could facilitate a propulsive device.

However, this is ignoring a large body of knowledge that does not support this hypothesis.

 

Whilst it is easier for those of us with experience to spot pseudoscience (and only because we have fallen for it many times before), it is still important to examine it sometimes, if only to dissuade the argument that even though there are the occasional surprising breakthroughs, this is not in-and-of-itself support of esoteric hypotheses.

Edited December 15, 2018 by p1t1o

[Nuke]

ever seen/read the hunt for red october.

[0111narwhalz]

Any drive requires a reaction mass. This is certain, from the law of conservation of momentum. If you're lucky enough to work in an atmosphere, you can use the atmosphere as your reaction mass, but in a vacuum you must bring it with you. While you can technically make reaction mass out of space, it amounts to making mass, and then transferring momentum to it. This process is very inefficient, and in any case it cannot exceed the efficiency of an ideal photon drive. You can bet quite a lot on a "reactionless drive" being bunk, poorly isolated, or bleeding mass somewhere—and if you're wrong, the resultant restructuring of 95% of our understanding of physics will obviate the money you lost anyway.

[KSK]

I have a whole slew of designs right here. I call them Rogozin thrusters and each and every one of them is guaranteed to get you closer to Mars than that radiometric device.

[DDE]

On 12/15/2018 at 1:12 AM, HebaruSan said:

How do we know about this experiment? When/where were the results published?

Which is especially important because Tesla operated in considerable secrecy - unsurprising, seeing as how both his employers and his competitors worked were ruthless buggers.

For more modern myths, the equivalent explanation is “secret KGB lab”.

1 hour ago, KSK said:

I have a whole slew of designs right here. I call them Rogozin thrusters and each and every one of them is guaranteed to get you closer to Mars than that radiometric device.

Don’t forget that, before Rogozin was in the picture, somebody equipped the Yubileiny satellite with a Dean drive.

8 hours ago, Nuke said:

ever seen/read the hunt for red october.

The Japanese did test a catterpilar drive, and it was horrendously inefficient.

And here I thought the thread would be about the combustion tap-off cycle...

[Nuke]

6 hours ago, DDE said:

The Japanese did test a catterpilar drive, and it was horrendously inefficient.

And here I thought the thread would be about the combustion tap-off cycle...

the idea wasn't that it was efficient but quiet and useful for stealth modes. and having a nuclear reactor onboard certainly eliminates your needs to worry about efficient energy usage. though id love to see some acoustic data to see if tom clancy was onto something.

Edited December 16, 2018 by Nuke

[wumpus]

6 hours ago, DDE said:

And here I thought the thread would be about the combustion tap-off cycle...

Electromagnetic drives are potentially useful for satellite stationkeeping (just push against Earth's magnetic field).  Presumably if you made them sufficiently powerful, you could even escape Earth's orbit (not too likely, and don't expect solar panels or RTGs to supply enough energy).  Don't expect them to work on the way to Mars, or even for Mars capture/orbit/station-keeping as Mars (and I think, Venus) doesn't have the necessary magnetic field (Jupiter would work well, but you couldn't use solar panels to power your electric drive).

[Green Baron]

Electromagnetic drives accelerate a reaction mass and through this method they produce thrust. They don't "push against Earth's magnetic field", though such a thing would theoretically fantastically be imaginable (it probably was the force they measured on poorly insulated plugs when testing the cannae thing), it is incredibly inefficient. Use as a propulsion device is improbable.

Edited December 16, 2018 by Green Baron

[DDE]

26 minutes ago, Nuke said:

the idea wasn't that it was efficient but quiet and useful for stealth modes. and having a nuclear reactor onboard certainly eliminates your needs to worry about efficient energy usage. though id love to see some acoustic data to see if tom clancy was onto something.

Efficiency pretty much equals stealth: the high power expenditure means a large thermal signature (which is something aerial anti-submarine platforms look for), and the nuclear reactor is a very noisy device - because of the turbines and the coolant pumps. The designs I've heard of that use natural coolant circulation can only manage to do so at low power levels - i.e. conventional silent running.

28 minutes ago, wumpus said:

Electromagnetic drives are potentially useful for satellite stationkeeping (just push against Earth's magnetic field).  Presumably if you made them sufficiently powerful, you could even escape Earth's orbit (not too likely, and don't expect solar panels or RTGs to supply enough energy).  Don't expect them to work on the way to Mars, or even for Mars capture/orbit/station-keeping as Mars (and I think, Venus) doesn't have the necessary magnetic field (Jupiter would work well, but you couldn't use solar panels to power your electric drive).

 

1 minute ago, Green Baron said:

Electromagnetic drives accelerate a reaction mass and through this method they produce thrust. They don't "push against Earth's magnetic field", though such a thing would theoretically fantastically be imaginable (it probably was the force they measured on poorly insulated plugs when testing the cannae thing), it is incredibly inefficient. Use as a propulsion device is improbable.

Let me play peacekkeeper here.

Spoiler

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrodynamic_tether

Quasi-reactionless propulsion.

[Green Baron]

There is perfect peace here :-)

The tether is simple energy conversion, like in an electric motor. Nothing to see there. Its feasibility as a propulsion is discussed, proposals go in the direction "deorbit stuff". You can't fly anywhere with that because you need a strong magnetic field around.

Edit: the guys who write wikipedia articles may be less knowledgeable than ourselves ;-)

Editedit: I overread: the tether is not a reactionless drive, as little as an electric engine is. It uses the earth's magnetic field and a connected energy source.

Edited December 16, 2018 by Green Baron

[DDE]

32 minutes ago, Green Baron said:

Editedit: I overread: the tether is not a reactionless drive, as little as an electric engine is. It uses the earth's magnetic field

Long as you don't need a fuel tank, the customers are happy.

33 minutes ago, Green Baron said:

and a connected energy source

Only when braking. You can accelerate if the satellite provides the power, but, since thrust is miniscule and gets weaker as you move to higher orbits... not a good plan.

[Green Baron]

 

1 minute ago, DDE said:

Only when braking. You can accelerate if the satellite provides the power, but, since thrust is miniscule and gets weaker as you move to higher orbits... not a good plan.

Other way round, you need an energy sauce to boost the orbit (theoretically). Practically a little unfeasible ...

Or you run it as a generator, trading orbital energy. Elevator going down ;-)