-
Kahlypso posted an update 9 years ago
In this article :
“Mach Effects for In Space Propulsion: Interstellar Mission, Heidi Fearn, Space Studies Inst itute in Mojave, California”
https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-invests-in-22-visionary-exploration-concepts
The Giza Forum (Legacy)
Closed Archive of The Old Forum
Ok, so reading the article I came across this “Hopefully, they will all go on to do what NIAC does best – change the possible.” I don’t know why but it bothers me.
Our local middle school had a program where the kids worked on projects to grow food on mars. Big plans for the moon, mars and asteroids, yet so few spaceships to get there. And how much material can be hauled a few spaceships at a time.
What they do best – change the possible” our intent makes the possible happen, we cause the change. They are using esoteric knowledge, programmed reality.
Oops.. Didnt finish posting. :=)
Look at these guys – Mach Effects for In Space Propulsion: Interstellar Mission, Heidi Fearn, Space Studies Inst itute in Mojave, California
http://ssi.org/
” Mach Effect Thruster (MET) propulsion is based on peer-reviewed, technically credible physics.”
and……
“The MET device is not a rocket, it does not expel fuel mass, and does not suffer from the velocity restriction of rockets. Freedom from the need to expel propellant means very high velocities might be achievable simply by providing electrical power and adequate heat rejection for the drive system.”
Wasnt someone somewhere talking about heat dissipation in Diamonds… hang on….
“A mission to Planet 9 is possible in the near future using RTG power and thruster arrays.” (THEIR words not mine… ‘is possible’…)
Ahhh- further reading on the MET device..; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodward_effect
Wikipedia – both the MET device and planet 9 are hypothetical. Something tells me they know so much more and want to get off earth at the earliest opportunity.