Excellent article, Chris, thank you for the work you put into these.
I think the main thing I take away from this is how terrible using combustion fuel as a propellant for space travel is. However, I am not aware of an alternative. The EM Drive didn't seem to come to anything; the nuclear-controlled explosion option that was proposed back in the Orion project during the 60s seems suicidal (unless some advances in nukes are currently secretly available). Freeman Dyson walked away because of his casualty estimates.
Two other options come to mind: Vacuum Space, large body lifters and the old Beanstalk. Modern metamaterials are such that both of these could be achieved.
Then you have the reactionless drives that are typical in UAP and Science fiction, the antigravity, inertia-cancelling systems, wonderful to imagine, but is there any reality to the science of these?
Dyson didn’t walk away from Project Orion because of casualties estimate (it was one or two individuals shortened life expectancy globally by their estimation). Additionally, Dyson categorically stated that there was no new technology needed to build an Orion, it was only an engineering problem. The death of Project Orion was the signing of the international space treaty that prohibits nuclear devices in space, of which the U.S. is a signatory. Source is the Project Orion book written by George Dyson, Freeman Dyson’s son.
Helion looks most promising prospect for next scale power generation atm. Large investment from Microsoft suggests unity achieved before the end of decade.
Excellent article, Chris, thank you for the work you put into these.
I think the main thing I take away from this is how terrible using combustion fuel as a propellant for space travel is. However, I am not aware of an alternative. The EM Drive didn't seem to come to anything; the nuclear-controlled explosion option that was proposed back in the Orion project during the 60s seems suicidal (unless some advances in nukes are currently secretly available). Freeman Dyson walked away because of his casualty estimates.
Two other options come to mind: Vacuum Space, large body lifters and the old Beanstalk. Modern metamaterials are such that both of these could be achieved.
Then you have the reactionless drives that are typical in UAP and Science fiction, the antigravity, inertia-cancelling systems, wonderful to imagine, but is there any reality to the science of these?
Interested to hear thoughts on these?
Best Regards
Andy
Dyson didn’t walk away from Project Orion because of casualties estimate (it was one or two individuals shortened life expectancy globally by their estimation). Additionally, Dyson categorically stated that there was no new technology needed to build an Orion, it was only an engineering problem. The death of Project Orion was the signing of the international space treaty that prohibits nuclear devices in space, of which the U.S. is a signatory. Source is the Project Orion book written by George Dyson, Freeman Dyson’s son.
Helion looks most promising prospect for next scale power generation atm. Large investment from Microsoft suggests unity achieved before the end of decade.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlNfP3iywvI