Is there Electric Propulsion?

[DARK0717]

If rockets use combustible fuel to generate lift, then is it possible to go all out electricity powered propulsion (to space) granted we have limitless energy.

[swansont]

Yes.

A light source could be used, since photons have momentum. It’s exceedingly weak (F = P/c, where P is power) but is possible.

[DARK0717]

10 hours ago, swansont said:

Yes.

A light source could be used, since photons have momentum. It’s exceedingly weak (F = P/c, where P is power) but is possible.

well, something that is practical to use, im not saying propellers, is there a way for electrons to burst out "whatever the rocket goes out of is called" to generate lift that can be used to get out of escape velocity and also be used to space.

 

My idea for this is a an engine in that looks similar to an ion thruster. Instead of using protons which then shoot out of the thruster, maybe negatively charged electrons that come out of the wal of the thruster literally bang into a plate thats positively charged. It will result in the electrons slamming the thruster, so granted we have limitless energy, I think my idea could be possible.

Edited April 8, 2019 by DARK0717

[Intrigued]

You seem to be talking about ion thrusters. Unfortunately these will not work in the atmosphere, so could not achieve your goal of "powered propulsion to space".

[swansont]

You need a reaction mass for your setup — the "exhaust" in your diagram has to be something with momentum. 

[Strange]

6 hours ago, DARK0717 said:

My idea for this is a an engine in that looks similar to an ion thruster. Instead of using protons which then shoot out of the thruster, maybe negatively charged electrons that come out of the wal of the thruster literally bang into a plate thats positively charged. It will result in the electrons slamming the thruster, so granted we have limitless energy, I think my idea could be possible.

The electrons won't provide any thrust. That would like being inside a truck (with the brakes off) and throwing bricks against the end wall in the hope it would move the truck. It won't, obviously.

You need to eject the electrons (or something) as the exhaust in order to generate thrust. Electrons have very little mass, so won't give much thrust (unless you can accelerate them to very high velocities).

[DARK0717]

45 minutes ago, Strange said:

The electrons won't provide any thrust. That would like being inside a truck (with the brakes off) and throwing bricks against the end wall in the hope it would move the truck. It won't, obviously.

You need to eject the electrons (or something) as the exhaust in order to generate thrust. Electrons have very little mass, so won't give much thrust (unless you can accelerate them to very high velocities).

I see, since electrons are particles, maybe they could be accelerated (on my diagram) to very high velocities , maybe a particle accelerator. Would that be possible?

45 minutes ago, Strange said:

The electrons won't provide any thrust. That would like being inside a truck (with the brakes off) and throwing bricks against the end wall in the hope it would move the truck. It won't, obviously.

You need to eject the electrons (or something) as the exhaust in order to generate thrust. Electrons have very little mass, so won't give much thrust (unless you can accelerate them to very high velocities).

I know it wont, and i know exactly what you mean, that is why the negative electrons based on my diagram is released into a space in the thruster and not directly spraying to the positively charged area. That should make the negative electrons independed on their own which will make it not drag the thruster iteslf. Because of this, I think the containment field can be removed.

Edited April 8, 2019 by DARK0717

[swansont]

37 minutes ago, DARK0717 said:

I see, since electrons are particles, maybe they could be accelerated (on my diagram) to very high velocities , maybe a particle accelerator. Would that be possible?

If you eject them, yes. That's the idea behind the ion drive. If they move as in your diagram, it won't provide thrust.

 

[studiot]

33 minutes ago, DARK0717 said:

I see, since electrons are particles, maybe they could be accelerated (on my diagram) to very high velocities , maybe a particle accelerator. Would that be possible?

I know it wont, and i know exactly what you mean, that is why the negative electrons based on my diagram is released into a space in the thruster and not directly spraying to the positively charged area. That should make the negative electrons independed on their own which will make it not drag the thruster iteslf. Because of this, I think the containment field can be removed. 

 

You have four problems to consider with this proposal.

 

Firstly charge.

For every electron you expel your rocket gains a unit positive charge.
The greater these charges add up to the harder it becomes to expel another electron, which take more energy.
So your drive gets less and less efficient, the more you use it.

Secondly what would the effect (fate) of a hugely positively charged rocket be when it arrives at its destination?
Flash destruction?

Thirdly, as already mentioned, an electron is approximately 1800 times less massive than a proton or neutron.
So say you rocket was made of carbon and had a mass of 100kg, how many electrons would you need to expel to drive it?

Finally in order to accelerate the electrons you would need a source of energy in the rocket so the drive would not be a free lunch scenario.
 

 

[Strange]

40 minutes ago, DARK0717 said:

I know it wont, and i know exactly what you mean, that is why the negative electrons based on my diagram is released into a space in the thruster and not directly spraying to the positively charged area.

That is not what your diagram shows. You would need to make the positively-charged area have a negative charge to repel the electrons.

I' also not sure what your source of electrons is supposed to be...

[swansont]

37 minutes ago, studiot said:

 Firstly charge.

For every electron you expel your rocket gains a unit positive charge.
The greater these charges add up to the harder it becomes to expel another electron, which take more energy.
So your drive gets less and less efficient, the more you use it.

This is why one needs a twin-ion engine. For use on a fighter craft, perhaps.

 

[DARK0717]

On 4/8/2019 at 7:27 PM, Strange said:

That is not what your diagram shows. You would need to make the positively-charged area have a negative charge to repel the electrons.

I' also not sure what your source of electrons is supposed to be...

The point is the thruster, not the system. I said "granted we have limitless energy". I simply want to know if pure electric propulsion from ground to space is possible.

[swansont]

1 hour ago, DARK0717 said:

The point is the thruster, not the system. I said "granted we have limitless energy". I simply want to know if pure electric propulsion from ground to space is possible.

Possible, yes. In principle, at least. Not as you have drawn it, though.

[DARK0717]

3 minutes ago, swansont said:

Possible, yes. In principle, at least. Not as you have drawn it, though.

I see. I just thought that making electrons float in a space to make it independent off of the body then making it slam to the body (obviously to the direction of where body wants to go) make it move.

 

body = the thruster itself or the whole ship

Edited April 14, 2019 by DARK0717

[swansont]

2 hours ago, DARK0717 said:

I see. I just thought that making electrons float in a space to make it independent off of the body then making it slam to the body (obviously to the direction of where body wants to go) make it move.

 

body = the thruster itself or the whole ship

Whatever is making them slam feels an impulse in the opposite direction.

[DARK0717]

10 hours ago, swansont said:

Whatever is making them slam feels an impulse in the opposite direction.

which is naturally more attracted to which? negative attracts positive or vice versa?

[swansont]

6 hours ago, DARK0717 said:

which is naturally more attracted to which? negative attracts positive or vice versa?

The attraction is equal. Newton’s 3rd law.

[DARK0717]

On 4/15/2019 at 8:37 PM, swansont said:

The attraction is equal. Newton’s 3rd law.

I see, thanks