[Aeronaut]

The Japanese research story that Brian linked to above doesn’t seem to think that impact is going to be a show-stopper. Tethers.com uses a hybrid approach similar to launching and recovering small planes from a blimp. And unless they use a rigid tether, I don’t understand how their tether could restore the momentum transferred to the payload.

[Aeronaut]

Most of that went over my head, James. Am I correct in understanding that the ion heating effect you described could possibly apply to the describing and predicting the plasma temperature/ energy level at any point during the axial phase?

[Aeronaut]

That could shield the tether, but how would the drive wheels get their traction?

[Aeronaut]

Sounds like somebody needs to invent a vacuum cleaner 😆

[Aeronaut]

Good backgrounder, dated 10/2008.

The model I remember posits a 69,000 mile tether with a very small counterweight. The appeal to me is that it can use this as a thrustless ballistic launch system – a headstart for ion thrusters- thus relieving the ship’s designers and operators from the delta-vee constraints of escaping Earth’s gravity for round trip vessels.

We’re going to need to move this branch of the thread to its own, new thread, btw.

[Aeronaut]

Listing costs and control issues make listing an IPO a living hell. Think of it as asking a LOT of people that you don’t really have to, for permission to do something that they don’t think is possible. Plus the entire paranoia mindset that these people might be shopping your idea behind your back. Far more productive to spend that time building your brand.

The net result is that the sales psychology is reversed, as Google did with their IPO, and you can shave 100s of thousands off the listing costs, while setting the terms wherever you damn well please, since it’s a privately held company that is not required to list, if its core competency is in selling info-products and services.

If an elevator really does cost that much, this can be a good place for a properly planned and executed IPO. But post-elevator, with millions of FFs in service, is the real place to cash in. Until then, the money is a tool which reflects my organization’s ability to remove the word fiction from the label science fiction in a timeframe which defies most peoples’ imaginations.

And makes it look deceptively simple, of course.

[Aeronaut]

Less cost, mo’ betta! I’ve seen guesstimates ranging from $10G to $50G, but I’d like to stress that I’ve never seen anything detailing how those numbers were arrived at. My guess is that the anchoring vessel would be around 130,000 tons displacement, and would take the lion’s share of the budget and possibly the lead time. If anybody’s seen any relevant numbers, I’d greatly appreciate a link to them.

The design I’ve seen proposed allows for around 30 tons per car, which could allow for a 5MW climbing motor, depending on the cooling system’s ability to handle the transition from sea level atmosphere to zero vacuum and gravity in the span of around 30 minutes. I’d hate to see the cooling system eat up the freight mass budget.

[Aeronaut]

I’m of the understanding that raising ~$50G is the most important challenge to solve. I’ve rephrased it to raising $50G without Wall Street or government funding, btw.
I just wish it would work around 40 degrees either side of the equator so I could put one over Lake Michigan.

[Aeronaut]

I intend to fully integrate the law of unintended consequences. But much as I would love to reach a full consensus, I’m not fool enough to believe that I will ever see one, or that in practice it’s really a good thing. That puts the leverage in the late adopters’ hands- the current power structure which we have to reach many working agreements with along the way. Thankfully there will be an adoption gradient of at least 10 years, no matter how fast FF’s can be made, sold, and installed, which will help all parties see that the trend is irreversible.

Now, I want you to pay very close attention, Brian. Aneutronic Fusion is only the power source for the future that I see unfolding. By pre-selling a million of them, my organization can develop and deploy at least one space elevator. That convergence zone is the sweet spot that I’m aiming at.

If you want to make sense, like you often did last year, please feel free to do so. Otherwise, I move that we cap this thread.

[Aeronaut]

Must we frame ourselves relative to everybody competing for government funding? We had a phrase in my radar days: “On track, all information good”, which seems to sum this year up fairly well.

The context of the saying is tracking a radar blip down the line describing where its been and where we can expect it to be in the near future as long as both moving platforms maintain their present courses and speeds.

And we offer detailed theory and test results, along with a results-oriented timetable.

[Aeronaut]

“And finally, “altruism” is also a form of self-interest, in which the self now identifies with the whole. Not for everyone. Takes a certain type of person to pull that off. “

And be profitable and above reproach from accusatory laws that haven’t been thunk of yet. For instance, just last year we (the general public) learned from Dopenhagen that burning fossil fuels was a crime of the very worst kind and degree. :bug:

Yes, Brian, you’re absolutely right about the small size of the sample of the population that 1) Sees opportunities that he or she is looking at, 2) Leads the herd in mobilizing resources such as capital, training, regulation, manufacturing, sales, service, regulation, and publicity (for a warmup- the list is far, far more extensive) 3) Sees the need for and begins mobilizing overwhelming political support, thus joining the ruling class.

Rezwan has a very solid point about seeing if the other guy’s been wronged in the name of expediency. He probably has, and it won’t be resolved fast enough for my liking without the risk of using arms- unless I can show all sides more profit in not fighting.

[Aeronaut]

psupine wrote: Is there any reason why the sides of the anode have to be parallel? I understand that the cathodes in the cage have to be parallel to the anode surface, but what would happen if the whole thing was kind of conical? One thing is that it would allow more surface area and more internal plumbing volume but still let the business end stay on a tight radius? Or would the conical shape do something nasty to the plasma run down?

The patent allows for all sorts of shapes or profiles, and there are supposedly some advantages to a narrowing taper towards the tip.

[Aeronaut]

I don’t know of any 3D models of any FF design. But if we can develop a single cap production model similar to the UN University machines, the cap, ground plane, switch, and anode can almost be bolted together with little in the way of flange design. At least until we need a cooling system. I’ll sketch one up when we’ve worked up some rough ideas of the plumbing’s dimensions.

[Aeronaut]

The general consensus seems to be that a FF-powered plasma torch will reduce materials to their constituent atoms, which would then need to be sorted out.

[Aeronaut]

vansig wrote: so profounder is probably a business development company or small business investment company, and that gets them their accredited status. i imagine, then, that they must obey a set of regulations that protects their account holders

Probably. Some kind of high risk portfolio where the individual investors are clearly warned up front that the science may or may not prove out, but if it does, the upside could be a market beater.

I’m not entirely sure how all of this works, due to hedge funds betting heavily on junk bonds, and angel investors bankrolling companies with nothing more than an idea.

[Author]

Posts