ydoaPs Posted December 14, 2004 Posted December 14, 2004 would it be possible to have a giant particle accelerator in orbit around the sun? find a nice, big space(like between some of the farther planets) and have some strategically placed asteroids with powerful magnets orbit the sun. well, could it work?
[Tycho?] Posted December 14, 2004 Posted December 14, 2004 1) Yes it would work 2) Do you realize the distances you are talking about here? If we had the technology to make such a device, I doubt the experiments we would be carrying out with such a device would be all that useful. I'm not sure what you're talking about with "strategically placed asteroids with powerful magnets orbit the sun." Put magnets on asteroids? For what purpose? I really dont get it.
JaKiri Posted December 14, 2004 Posted December 14, 2004 It wouldn't work, because the engineering constraints are so enormous. It's a small step from this to a dyson sphere, you know.
5614 Posted December 14, 2004 Posted December 14, 2004 what would the advantage of a super-giant accelerator as opposed to the ones we have at the moment? i mean, assuming you are talking about particle acclerators, dont they go fast enough at the moment? also the could build one in a desert or something and it'd be a lot cheaper than launching one into space!
JaKiri Posted December 14, 2004 Posted December 14, 2004 The larger radius you have, the less powerful the magnetic field has to be to have the same speed, and, similarly, the faster you can go with the same magnetic field. The particle accelerators we're using at the moment don't produce anywhere near the energy for the collisions we'd like to investigate, hence the building of things such as the LHC at Cern.
[Tycho?] Posted December 14, 2004 Posted December 14, 2004 It wouldn't work' date=' because the engineering constraints are so enormous. It's a small step from this to a dyson sphere, you know.[/quote'] I was going to point that out as well, but he never specifically states that it would be a ring around the sun. He just says it would be in orbit somewhere where there was a lot of room. I am inclined to agree that thats what he meant, but its possible he didn't meant that.
JaKiri Posted December 14, 2004 Posted December 14, 2004 Building something large enough to warrant the kind of engineering we'd need would have to use dyson-tech anyway, even if it wasn't around the sun.
Sayonara Posted December 14, 2004 Posted December 14, 2004 Building a Dyson Sphere is actually pretty easy (assuming you have the raw resources, lots of time, and lots of ships/robots/slaves).
JaKiri Posted December 14, 2004 Posted December 14, 2004 Building a Dyson Sphere is actually pretty easy (assuming you have the raw resources, lots of time, and lots of ships/robots/slaves). It depends how thick you want the sphere to be.
Sayonara Posted December 15, 2004 Posted December 15, 2004 Well, there is that. But given that you have probably already smelted anything local that was big enough to puncture it, you can always add more complexity when the superstructure is in place, and it's getting that erected in a stable fashion that's the only really physicsy problem (apart from the giant numbers and such).
YT2095 Posted December 15, 2004 Posted December 15, 2004 the only other potential problem I can see, would be that of Particles being emited from the sun coliding at a 90 degree angle with the particle(s) you`re accelerating. a bit like firing a gun or driving a truck with a severe cross wind. Either that or I`m misunderstanding the purpose of this idea?
Sayonara Posted December 15, 2004 Posted December 15, 2004 There's the whole 'tension' issue. I was putting that under "make a stable superstructure". Let's put every problem under that heading, then there's only one thing stopping us building one right now for a laugh.
JaKiri Posted December 15, 2004 Posted December 15, 2004 Yeah, you'd have to do it in a shielded area, otherwise the solar wind will wreak havoc. I don't think yourdad considered that.
JaKiri Posted December 15, 2004 Posted December 15, 2004 there's only one thing stopping us building one right now for a laugh. Damn communists.
flyboy Posted June 14, 2005 Posted June 14, 2005 ']1) Yes it would work 2) Do you realize the distances you are talking about here? If we had the technology to make such a device' date=' I doubt the experiments we would be carrying out with such a device would be all that useful. I'm not sure what you're talking about with "strategically placed asteroids with powerful magnets orbit the sun." Put magnets on asteroids? For what purpose? I really dont get it.[/quote'] actually we do hav the technology to do this,the blockhead gov just doesnt want to spend the money on it anyway its called a MASS DRIVER which is basically like a huge tunnel in space lined with electromagnets then when a spacraft goes in the electromagnets go on in a seqeunce launching the ship out the other end at unimaginable speeds
Edward Posted June 14, 2005 Posted June 14, 2005 It's a small step from this to a dyson sphere, you know. Really? I think he is just talking about a ring around the sun not a sphere? a sphere would probily be much more challenging,
mmalluck Posted June 15, 2005 Posted June 15, 2005 its called a MASS DRIVER which is basically like a huge tunnel in space lined with electromagnetsthen when a spacraft goes in the electromagnets go on in a seqeunce launching the ship out the other end at unimaginable speeds I imagine that tunnel-o-magnets would have a pretty wicked recoil. That's not something you'd like to have to deal with. An Ion engin, which has been developed, can also be considered a mass driver and is simpler to boot. You send electrons wizzing off the back of your engine at speeds close to the speed of light. The electron flies off one way, your ship flys off the other. Sure it might take you forever to get up to any considerable speed, but the top speed of such an engine can be measured as fractions of c. No other propulson that physically exist can claim that.
flyboy Posted June 16, 2005 Posted June 16, 2005 thats what a mass driver is! it is supposed to shoot the ship out the back end with virtually no recoil ion engines need fuel but a mass driver would only need electricity from the sun, and it would get u there faster
mmalluck Posted June 17, 2005 Posted June 17, 2005 There's no way the system, as you describe, will not have some form of recoil. For every action there is an opposite and equal action acting on the system. The tunnel-o'-magnets flings the ship forward, conversely, the ship flings the tunnel-o'-magnets backwards. The tunnel may way many times more than the ship, so the speed of tunnel's travel will be smaller, but never the less it will still occur. The only way around the recoil issue would be to fling a mass equal to the ship in the opposite direction. Seems kinda wasteful. There's also the problem of once you've been launched, how do you manuver?, and more importantly, how do you slow back down? Since the launch apparatus is not part of your ship, you'll need to be 'caught' by another set magnets and astroids. I wouldn't want to be the first guy fired out of this thing only to find out there's nothing waiting to catch you on the other side.
flyboy Posted June 17, 2005 Posted June 17, 2005 just search on google for this and then u will understand
ydoaPs Posted June 17, 2005 Author Posted June 17, 2005 dude, [imath]\sum{\mathbb{F}}=0[/imath] ideally, but there's friction and such. you push something, it pushes back. no need to google.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now