|
|
Post by bigbombr on May 4, 2017 18:27:58 GMT
Electrons have mass. Therefore, they have inertia. Superconductors can carry massive currents without losing much power due to electrical resistance.
I was wondering, if you have a coil of superconductor, could you use the inertia of the current as a reaction wheel? Would it even be noticeable? A major advantage would be the decreased number of moving components.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pttg on May 4, 2017 18:29:38 GMT
The magnetic field would rapidly become immense. So immense that it'd be hard to shield the nearby components from the field. At that point, why not just drop it down and use a couple watts to power electric actuators?
|
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on May 4, 2017 18:36:53 GMT
The magnetic field would rapidly become immense. So immense that it'd be hard to shield the nearby components from the field. At that point, why not just drop it down and use a couple watts to power electric actuators? Because the voltage (and therefore power) might be fairly low? resistance = U/I => I = U/resistance , so if the resistance is nearly nothing, even a low voltage will give you a strong current. A good point about the magnetic field tough. Now I wonder if the electrical current from a magnetic nozzle generates sufficient rotational momentum to be taken into consideration (use RCS when starting and stopping the nozzle to cancel out the rotation). |
|
|
|
Post by n2maniac on May 6, 2017 2:55:50 GMT
Just use the superconductor for an electric motor at that point. A 10T field strength is a factor of 5-10 better than what magnets will do and much better than what typical electric motor windings can do.
|
|
|
|
Post by n2maniac on May 13, 2017 19:14:37 GMT
Just use the superconductor for an electric motor at that point. A 10T field strength is a factor of 5-10 better than what magnets will do and much better than what typical electric motor windings can do. Wait a minute, steel gear systems only beat modern electric motors by a factor of 2-4 in torque density, this would actually beat a geared system? Someone else able to sanity check me on this? |
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on May 28, 2017 19:19:41 GMT
How would it even rotate? The electrons might have inertia yes, but they won't transfer it in a superconductor. There is no resistance, two gears can't transfer inertia if they had zero friction.
You can't produce momentum out of nothing.
|
|
|
|
Post by n2maniac on May 28, 2017 20:25:01 GMT
How would it even rotate? The electrons might have inertia yes, but they won't transfer it in a superconductor. There is no resistance, two gears can't transfer inertia if they had zero friction. You can't produce momentum out of nothing. No, the concept is technically valid (though forces are going to be underwhelming). Whatever drives the electrons would have to exert a force on them (typically by applied voltage, which ramps up the current on the superconductor that acts as an inductor). Similar to a flywheel: it is the motor's torque interaction with the flywheel the produces the net torque on the turrent for rotation (causing the flywheel to rotate the other way). |
|
|
|
Post by Hicks on Jun 17, 2017 11:34:03 GMT
So, uhh, just gona place this here:
Step 1: mass distorts space-time
Step 2: mass moving near the speed of light distorts space-time more than that same mass at rest.
Step 3: electrons have mass.
Step 4: the more current applied the more electrons move.
Step 5: superconductors have negligible resistance to electric current.
Step 6: through either direct motion of electrons between atoms within the superconductor or by inducing a torque in a plasma magnetically coupled to the superconductor, control the ammount of distortion in space-time.
Step 7: that's a warp drive.
Step 8: boldly go.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Jun 17, 2017 11:39:48 GMT
So, uhh, just gona place this here: Step 1: mass distorts space-time Step 2: mass moving near the speed of light distorts space-time more than that same mass at rest. Step 3: electrons have mass. Step 4: the more current applied the more electrons move. Step 5: superconductors have negligible resistance to electric current. Step 6: through either direct motion of electrons between atoms within the superconductor or by inducing a torque in a plasma magnetically coupled to the superconductor, control the ammount of distortion in space-time. Step 7: that's a warp drive. Step 8: boldly go. Doesn't that make Faster than light reaction wheels possible? |
|
|
|
Post by Hicks on Jun 17, 2017 11:46:39 GMT
No. A volume of Space-time can be moved faster than light, but within that volume nothing is actually moving at superluminal velocities. Warp drives distort the space around the vessel instead of moving the vessel through space; they don't accellerate you, they move space around you. If you stop distorting space by turning off the drive, you still have all your momentum you origionally started with.
There is a secondary application where if you can control the distortio of space-time you basically have a gravity drive. Vessels would be built like sky-scrapers and fall toward their destinations under where their foundations would be.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Jun 17, 2017 11:48:07 GMT
You know, the universe expands at the speed faster than light.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Jun 17, 2017 11:50:05 GMT
No. A volume of Space-time can be moved faster than light, but within that volume nothing is actually moving at superluminal velocities. Warp drives distort the space around the vessel instead of moving the vessel through space. I mean from an outsider perspective. Nothing with mass or none of it can get superluminal. The speed of light is the fastest something can move in space time, the exception is space time itself. |
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Jun 17, 2017 11:51:46 GMT
You know, the universe expands at the speed faster than light. Only space time expands at FTL. Nothing else. |
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Jun 17, 2017 12:00:05 GMT
You know, the universe expands at the speed faster than light. Only space time expands at FTL. Nothing else. We're moving space-time itself, too. What do you expect? |
|
