Community > Forum > Technology & Science > Physics of Unitel's concept?

Physics of Unitel's concept?

Posted by: Ekkehard Augustin - Wed Nov 17, 2004 10:14 am
Post new topic Reply to topic
 [ 23 posts ] 
Physics of Unitel's concept? 
Author Message
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post Physics of Unitel's concept?   Posted on: Wed Nov 17, 2004 10:14 am
What are the physics behind Unitel's concept reported by an article under www.xprizenews.org today?

I read the short explanation but I find it too short. Regardless of the concept being realistic or working I would be interested in more and better explanations understandable for laymans.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)

EDIT: I read their homepage too but I'm missing links to my own knowledges of quantum physics


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 2:44 pm
Posts: 227
Location: Alexander, North Carolina, Planet Earth, the Milky Way Galaxy
Post    Posted on: Wed Nov 17, 2004 2:02 pm
Ekkehard, two sites might provide some explanation (albeit vague):

American Antigravity http://www.americanantigravity.com/unitelnw.shtml

Unitel's own (somewhat lacking) website: http://www.unitel-aerospace.com

They offer a book on the propulsion system... I saw a review that summed up the book as "telling" rather than "explaining" what the drive is all about.

I hope this is a serious technology but have seen no proof as of yet.

--Ralph

_________________
--Ralph Roberts
CEO, Creativity, Inc.
author of THE HUNDRED ACRE SPACESHIP
http://1vid.com


Back to top
Profile WWW
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 2:44 pm
Posts: 227
Location: Alexander, North Carolina, Planet Earth, the Milky Way Galaxy
Post    Posted on: Wed Nov 17, 2004 10:01 pm
On the other hand, at least they have not announced regular service to Pluto as did a former X Prize contestant.

--Ralph :P

_________________
--Ralph Roberts
CEO, Creativity, Inc.
author of THE HUNDRED ACRE SPACESHIP
http://1vid.com


Back to top
Profile WWW
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2003 9:22 pm
Posts: 843
Location: New York, NY
Post    Posted on: Thu Nov 18, 2004 2:32 am
hey, be fair, BRNA didn't do that until they'd already been kicked out. they still have time.

_________________
Cornell 2010- Applied and Engineering Physics

Software Developer

Also, check out my fractals


Back to top
Profile
Launch Director
Launch Director
avatar
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 7:51 am
Posts: 19
Post    Posted on: Thu Nov 18, 2004 7:18 am
Hmmmmm, not to sure about his one.
The info provided sounds just enough to be plausable, but completely lacking in any real detail. Their book reviewed on the antigrav site has reviews, but no listing of who the reviewers are.
One demonstration of a subscale proto would be nice, and give much credability. One noted scientist saying it could work might help too.
Its been awhile since I looked at FTL, but off memory its all but impossible for a push solution, as energy going out the back provides diminishing returns. IMHO the only way to go FTL is by a tractor configuration.
Did anyone check out the power source? Some sort of antimatter powerplant, with a hull made of unobtainium.
Sounds alot like the split cycle to me.
They may very well be legit, but my gut says not.


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Thu Nov 18, 2004 8:36 am
There is a term I don't understand - what is a "tractor configuration"?



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 8:59 am
Posts: 578
Location: Zurich
Post    Posted on: Thu Nov 18, 2004 9:52 am
Ekkehard Augustin wrote:
what is a "tractor configuration"?

Big wheels at the back, small wheels at the front and plow behind.

DKH

(has about an equal chance of FTL as any other configuration).

_________________
Per aspera ad astra


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Thu Nov 18, 2004 10:09 am
Oh, yes :lol: - a tractor, german translation "Trecker", used in agriculture...

But as I understand OSD he is of the opinion that a "tractor configuration" could be a way to go faster than light - he seems to be speaking of something other than a tractor unless he's joking what I didn't recognize...



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 8:47 am
Posts: 521
Location: Science Park, Cambridge, UK
Post    Posted on: Thu Nov 18, 2004 12:16 pm
Tractor configuration - being towed, rather than pushed.

There was a paper in the JBIS (Journal of the British Interplanetary Society) a few years ago that described a physically possible mechanism for very high speed spaceflight that in effect created a gravitational bubble in front of the craft, which in effect towed the craft along. I beleive that by altering the properties fo the space time by the extreme gravity, FTL was possible. This sounds similar to Unitels proposal.

However, the power source required was enormous - alongs the lines of the suns output (or was that a galaxy's output).

There was another paper in the same month about interstellar propulsion but I cannot remember exactly how that one worked - I may have mixed the two up in the description above.

James


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Thu Nov 18, 2004 12:35 pm
Hello, JamesHughes,

that tends to remember me to Alcubierre - because of the gravitational bubble and altering the properties of the space time.

Good explanation - sufficient for me to understand OSD.

Thank you very much.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Poliitcal Economist)


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 2:44 pm
Posts: 227
Location: Alexander, North Carolina, Planet Earth, the Milky Way Galaxy
Post    Posted on: Thu Nov 18, 2004 12:47 pm
TerraMrs wrote:
hey, be fair, BRNA didn't do that until they'd already been kicked out. they still have time.


:D Well, I for one have not given up on BRNA and the very next time I have business on Pluto I'll certainly look into their rates and flight schedules. I only hope it's a meal flight.

--Ralph

_________________
--Ralph Roberts
CEO, Creativity, Inc.
author of THE HUNDRED ACRE SPACESHIP
http://1vid.com


Back to top
Profile WWW
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 2:44 pm
Posts: 227
Location: Alexander, North Carolina, Planet Earth, the Milky Way Galaxy
Post    Posted on: Thu Nov 18, 2004 12:53 pm
Ekkehard Augustin wrote:
Oh, yes :lol: - a tractor, german translation "Trecker", used in agriculture...

But as I understand OSD he is of the opinion that a "tractor configuration" could be a way to go faster than light - he seems to be speaking of something other than a tractor unless he's joking what I didn't recognize...



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


The concept of things like "tractor" beams have been around since the 1920s in science fiction (i.e. Doc Smith's Skylark and Lensman series),, usually being force beams that pull rather than push. Turning fictional concepts into working FTL drives takes more than a trecker, ja? (good word, Ekkehard, I grew up on a farm driving a trecker, but we called it a John Deere :lol: ).

But, more seriously, it does bother me when someone tells me something works rather than SHOWS me it works. This is a very basic and important difference that we writers learn early (if we expect to be read widely, show, don't tell). In the case of Unitel, they say they are ready to build it, then SHOW the world a working scaled (oops, bad choice of word :roll: ) prototype. Do that and investors will flock to your door. Otherwise, no one will believe such fanciful claims as you've shown to date.

To put it in terms both Ekkehard and I understand, if you have a trecker, prove it. Let's do some some ploughing, like to Mars and back.

--Ralph

_________________
--Ralph Roberts
CEO, Creativity, Inc.
author of THE HUNDRED ACRE SPACESHIP
http://1vid.com


Last edited by author on Thu Nov 18, 2004 1:02 pm, edited 2 times in total.



Back to top
Profile WWW
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Thu Nov 18, 2004 12:59 pm
Hello, author,

yes - I know the company John Deere is a producer of treckers and the like and it is noted at the stock exchange.

I know fictional tractor beams from Star Trek and had problems to sees similarities to Unitel's concept which are removed now.

A grandcousin of mine is farmer too near Cuxhaven...



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


Back to top
Profile
Launch Director
Launch Director
avatar
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 7:51 am
Posts: 19
Post    Posted on: Fri Nov 19, 2004 5:29 am
Sorry for the confusion guys.
When I said tractor I ment like a propeller on a cessna, as opposed to a pusher like on a long EZ or Starship.
Like I said I havent looked at this stuff for quite a while, but I do remember thinking about some various options.
Mainly that your never going FTL by pushing stuff out the back, basically physics forbids it. Anything going out the back is going to be red shifted, so your always going to hit deminishing returns. If you had some sort of attractive force pulling you along, its energy is blue shifted, which means that the energy isnt being dissapated in the same way.
Whats apparent is the for FTL its a revolution in power supply which is needed, not nessecarily a revolution in drive design. Energy can be substituted for mass, which menas that if you focus enough energy in one point you can effectively bend space in the same way that a planet or a black hole does.


Back to top
Profile
Spaceflight Trainee
Spaceflight Trainee
avatar
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 1:07 am
Posts: 29
Post    Posted on: Fri Nov 19, 2004 7:01 am
Unitel is full of bull. Buy their book for $19.95 if you believe otherwise.

Color supercondivity (conductivity of the strong force) is only postulated to be found in places where pressure is super high, ie in the core of a neutron star. Note that in this case the use of the term 'color' refers to a quantum property, not the three visible primary colors to the human eye (red, blue, and green) which supposedly are used to create a light packet which will propel Unitel's ship.

Not to mention that an extraordinarily long wavelength would be needed to allow the ship to ride in its crest...assuming that you could get the ship to somehow act as a 'MOSS' - which have only really be observered on a reasonably large scale at temperatures close to 0 degrees K.

Not to mention that while quantum physics specifies the existance of a monopole one has not yet been found.

Not to mention that coating an entire ship with fragile blue diamond would be very difficult, and the diamond / niobium / composite coating would crack under temperature differentials, flexing, etc.

Anyway, Unitel doesn't claim to use a tractor mechanism to go FTL, but rather to change their spaceship into a giant charged particle and 'tunnel' across space.

I smell a scam. But hey, if the publicity hook-up to the X-prize worked to generate $$ for Feeney, why not Unitel?


Back to top
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ] 
 

Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests


© 2014 The International Space Fellowship, developed by Gabitasoft Interactive. All Rights Reserved.  Privacy Policy | Terms of Use