Opinion NASA develop lower power rocket engine to move objects at 99% speed of light

PEB

Sunflower in support of Ukraine
@Steel
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
30,732
Reaction score
19,882
file.jpg


The 'Helical Engine' works by exploiting the way mass can change at relativistic speeds. (CREDIT: NASA)



When it comes to space, there's a problem with our human drive to go all the places and see all the things. A big problem. It's, well, space. It's way too big. Even travelling at the maximum speed the Universe allows, it would take us years to reach our nearest neighbouring star.

But another human drive is finding solutions to big problems. And that's what NASA engineer David Burns has been doing in his spare time. He's produced an engine concept that, he says, could theoretically accelerate to 99 percent of the speed of light - all without using propellant.

He's posted it to the NASA Technical Reports Server under the heading "Helical Engine", and, on paper, it works by exploiting the way mass can change at relativistic speeds - those close to the speed of light in a vacuum. It has not yet been reviewed by an expert.

But while this concept is fascinating, it's definitely not going to break physics anytime soon.

As a thought experiment to explain his concept, Burns describes a box with a weight inside, threaded on a line, with a spring at each end bouncing the weight back and forth. In a vacuum - such as space - the effect of this would be to wiggle the entire box, with the weight seeming to stand still, like a gif stabilized around the weight.

According to the principle of the conservation of momentum - in which the momentum of a system remains constant in the absence of any external forces - this should be not completely possible.

But! There's a special relativity loophole. Hooray for special relativity! According to special relativity, objects gain mass as they approach light speed. So, if you replace the weight with ions and the box with a loop, you can theoretically have the ions moving faster at one end of the loop, and slower at the other.
.
But Burns' drive isn't a single closed loop. It's helical, like a stretched out spring - hence "helical engine".



"The engine accelerates ions confined in a loop to moderate relativistic speeds, and then varies their velocity to make slight changes to their mass. The engine then moves ions back and forth along the direction of travel to produce thrust," he wrote in his abstract.

"The engine has no moving parts other than ions traveling in a vacuum line, trapped inside electric and magnetic fields."

It sounds really nifty, right? And it is - in theory. But it's not without significant practical problems.

According to New Scientist, the helical chamber would have to be pretty large. Around 200 metres (656 feet) long and 12 metres (40 feet) in diameter, to be precise.

https://www.thebrighterside.news/amp/new-helical-engine-could-reach-99-the-speed-of-light



 
Last edited:
Seems like 'conceptualizes' rather than 'develop' (sic) would be closer to the truth in the thread title.
I don't see this with the bleakness you have in that we are already using ion drives in space. We are moving towards new propulsion methods that could be the end result. This may not be decades away.
 
Seems like 'conceptualizes' rather than 'develop' (sic) would be closer to the truth in the thread title.

Yeah, i read the title and immediately thought, "I don't believe you"

I don't see this with the bleakness you have in that we are already using ion drives in space. We are moving towards new propulsion methods that could be the end result. This may not be decades away.

I'd say informed skepticism.

99% of stuff in Michio Kaku books would be realized before this.
 
The future of propulsion involves bending space, its the only propulsion that makes sense in such s big universe.
 
At that speed, wouldn’t impact from some tiny space particle fuck up the ship really badly? Could you even reasonably hope to steer the thing away from some rock in its path before hitting it and exploding?

If your craft can creat its own gravitational field it should be able to displace the matter that it navigates “through”.

Did I mention that today is 4/20?


<EdgyBrah>
 
If your craft can creat its own gravitational field it should be able to displace the matter that it navigates “through”.

They didn’t mention a gravity field in the article. Is that a separate thing entirely?
 
I like turtles.
 
I dont understand how any of that reduces the energy cost of travel, so is the point that it could use some sort of nuclear reaction to power the drive, rather than fossil fuel?
 
It's too difficult for us to develop technology to go "back" to the moon, how could we shoot a physical anything out into the universe? There would have to be dozens of calculations...
 
Back
Top