Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 29

Thread: [Gameplay] MES as non-reactionless "ballistic jump" FTL

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Juliano View Post
    Yes, your first post included a link, so it had to be moderated. Back now...
    Thank you,
    I just have to post link with moderation then.

    Quote Originally Posted by rayx View Post
    I have to think more about your idea. At the moment it feels like you want to replace a handwavey, super optimistic extrapolation of current science and technology by a completely new idea. Or are you suggesting a kind of 4th wall breaking thing, like "you would have travelled like that but in multiplayer we can't skip forwards so we'll put you right here directly"?
    Technically the current way is MORE handwavey and 4th wall breaking than what I'm suggesting (see my answer to Necrontyr).

    I would describe it more as "You will travel like that, but the warp-drive change how the trajectory of your ship only is calculated in a way that can be predicted to reach your destination faster, but only if you used the right amount of propellant"
    ex: If the equation that calculate your movement said {X' = X*t}, warp-space would transform that part into {X' = X*t/2 & Y'=Y*t-100} ".
    Said equation-transform is obviously made up but hopefully less destructive than ignoring a part of the equation F=M*A) like the current-MES do. Ideally you would also balance-it to fake the wear & tear of the travel.

    My main doubt is wether or not exist an equation-transform that can preserve/emulate the delta-V cost of the real maneuvers and modify T like we want it to.


    Quote Originally Posted by NovusNecrontyr View Post
    The "Reactionless drive" is something that is baffling everyone, but it works.
    [...]
    It doesn't, and that's worth another making topic.
    The web is full of Tabloid that voluntarily misinterpret actual peer-reviewed reports so they can make people dream and link to their page about the "nearly working future engine".
    For example : deliberately misinterpreting NASA article explaining why the EM-drive give false-positive result, yet why despite not producing any measurable thrust the way it doesn't is unexplainable.
    You might as well argue that Tesla already "nearly invented" magneto-gravitic levitation powered by energy stored in the magnetosphere by its tower.

    On the topic of "Producing thrust magically",
    No, this isn't "Delta-V management" and it is violating the laws of conservation of energy as you gain more speed than the mass expelled/turned into energy should allow.
    Delta-V is a concept entirely dependent on MASS, THRUST...but also the laws that say : 1 MW of energy can't allow you to accelerate a block of metal in a way that would allow you to retrieve 2MW if you caught it in a magnetic track. Meaning that it would give you INFINITE ENERGY if the game had the features to demonstrate it.

    Anyway I am getting out of topic.
    The game will need magic anyways, one that give you the best illusion of flying a realistic spaceship.

    The current-MES break the fundamental F=M*A equation & the Delta-V at the core of all rocket-science. You might as well ditch MTS and propellant.
    My suggested-MES aim to preserve both, and still achieve instantaneous travel (Singleplayer & multiplayer alike for coherence).

    The question is whether or not it is possible, and can it be achieved (in game logic) the way I hope to.

  2. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Buenos Aires
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by Kegereneku View Post
    Thank you,
    On the topic of "Producing thrust magically",
    No, this isn't "Delta-V management" and it is violating the laws of conservation of energy as you gain more speed than the mass expelled/turned into energy should allow.
    Delta-V is a concept entirely dependent on MASS, THRUST...but also the laws that say : 1 MW of energy can't allow you to accelerate a block of metal in a way that would allow you to retrieve 2MW if you caught it in a magnetic track. Meaning that it would give you INFINITE ENERGY if the game had the features to demonstrate it.
    This got me thinking. Does the MES violate the laws of conservation of energy? Let's see if we can find out:

    * We know that the LENR produces a little less than 0.6 MW. Let's round it up to 0.6 MW
    * We know that the MES at full throttle produces a little bit more than 1g. Let's round it up to 10 m/s^2

    Now suppose we set the MES at full throttle for 1 hour. During that time the LENR should produce about:

    ELENR=P*t=0.6MW * 3600=2100 MJ

    That's 2160 Mega Joules or 2,160,000,000,000 Joules

    During that time, the total Delta-V:

    v0 - v3600 = a * t = 10 m/s^2 * 3600 s = 36000 m/s

    Now we plug in the kinetic energy:

    Ek=1/2 * m * v2

    If we suppose that ALL the LENR power goes to the MES and the MES converts energy to thrust with 100% eficiency then:

    ELENR = Ek = 2160 MJ

    We know Ek, and v. So what's the mass that the Flying Fox needs to have so we don't violate the conservation of energy? In other words if Ek > ELENR then we have a problem.

    m = 2*E / v2 = 2*(2160 * 10^6 J) / (36000 m/s)^2 = 3.33 kg

    (note that 1 J = 1Kg * 1m/s so the units square up nicely to kg)

    It seems that if the FF has a mass greater than 3.33 kg then yes, the MES is violating the laws of conservation of energy.

    Unless I made a mistake above, I think that either the FF need a more powerfull LENR or the MES should generate less thrust. Or the MES works by other mysterious set of equations?

  3. #13
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,119
    Based on information I read from NASA Eagleworks--I'd have to find the source--if the resonant cavity is superconducted the thrust is FAR greater than it otherwise would be. Dr. White, from Eagleworks, seems to be predicting ~1300 newtons per 100 kilowatts. I used something similar to these values in the first iteration of our current MES drive and reduced the required power allowing for some advancement in tech. Really though, yes, the LENR should be producing more power based on these numbers (or a second LENR should be installed)....

    The EM Drive at least appears to violate the laws on conservation of energy, and yet in multiple tests it is producing thrust, seemingly from nothing, in total vacuums. And, computer code is now modeling predicted output. What I really wish is that someone would put it on a satellite and launch it into space for testing (easier said than done, I know). Then we'd know for sure it actually works. It wouldn't be the first time we'd be using a technology that we didn't fully understand

    I made a best guess for the first iteration based on what information I could find
    __________________
    "There is no spoon..."

  4. #14
    Socaire,
    I can' formulate it but I would say you have a mistake in that mathematic simply break if you don't have an opposite reaction.
    The closest you have to preserve energy conversion would be to consider it like a photonic-drive, which isn't reactionless (as photon are expelled) and ask for 300MW per joules at 100% efficiency. No need to say that a solar sail would work better.

    You'll find better explications here :
    http://www.projectrho.com/public_htm...r_Requirements


    Michael Juliano,
    I question where you got this data because the way their reports read, they don't know if any measured thrust during all experiments is real, because (1) there is no theoretical basis compatible with current physics to estimate what we should be looking for (2) we can't differentiate whatever is happening from the fluctuation of pouring >700 W into a metal frame, especially since it is at the limit of accuracy of the sensors, (3) The experimental setup are controversial, removing parts of the device seemed to make no difference and "produce thrust" when it shouldn't.

    In short it doesn't merit to be treated as a prototype or even a concept since its theoretical basis is contested.

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/ou...ce-drive-word/
    http://www.projectrho.com/public_htm...hp#id--EmDrive


    Back to Rogue System, I understand its use as a placeholder and the need for a facilitator for gameplay, making REAL system work first is also a priority. But, for later, as magical-drive go this one will really detract from managing fuel and economic transfer.

    ps : an acronym idea for the DarkDrive, "Dangerous And RecKless Drive"

  5. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Buenos Aires
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Juliano View Post
    What I really wish is that someone would put it on a satellite and launch it into space for testing (easier said than done, I know). Then we'd know for sure it actually works. It wouldn't be the first time we'd be using a technology that we didn't fully understand
    I guess it's hard to justify a budget for a project when success depends on breaking the conservation of momentum and conservation of energy laws.

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    361
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Juliano View Post
    What I really wish is that someone would put it on a satellite and launch it into space for testing (easier said than done, I know). Then we'd know for sure it actually works.
    Hey, if you can build one small enough to fit in a cubesat, it's actually within reach for Normal People to get something up in LEO. Just don't tell them it's got propulsion

    Many CubeSats are used to demonstrate spacecraft technologies that are targeted for use in small satellites or that present questionable feasibility and are unlikely to justify the cost of a larger satellite. Scientific experiments with questionable underlying theory may also find themselves aboard CubeSats as their low cost could justify riskier experiments.
    Volunteer Rogue System Wiki Moderator
    Come visit the Rogue System Discord Server!

  7. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Buenos Aires
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Juliano View Post
    What I really wish is that someone would put it on a satellite and launch it into space for testing (easier said than done, I know). Then we'd know for sure it actually works. It wouldn't be the first time we'd be using a technology that we didn't fully understand
    Look that you might get your wish after all:

    http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...-reactionless/

    "On August 17, Cannae announced plans to launch its thruster on a 6U cubesat. Each unit is a 10-centimeter cube, so a 6U satellite is the size of a small shoebox. Approximately one quarter of this will be taken up by the drive. Fetta intends the satellite to stay on station for at least six months, rather than the six weeks that would be typical for a satellite this size at a altitude of 150 miles. The longer it stays in orbit, the more the satellite will show that it must be producing thrust without propellant."

  8. #18
    I don't think this cubesat initiative will answer the problem.

    The problem is that no scientific test have been able to distinguish any "force" it is supposed to generate from random fluctuation due to other constraint.
    Despite what we could think, this won't disappear in space, we might still be unable to distinguish it's supposedly "reaction-less thrust" from newer imperfection of the experimental build like -say- the sun, or the energy boiling off away some materials and generating "thrust" in the physically-correct but not wanted way.

    Problem worsened as it would be miniaturized into a cube sat, we can't put the most precise sensors/equipments that would prevent errors.


    Ps: aside, I just reworded my Original post about the "Ballistic Jump" FTL, I hope it explain better the goals and the method suggested.

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    361
    Quote Originally Posted by Kegereneku View Post
    The problem is that no scientific test have been able to distinguish any "force" it is supposed to generate from random fluctuation due to other constraint.
    Despite what we could think, this won't disappear in space, we might still be unable to distinguish it's supposedly "reaction-less thrust" from newer imperfection of the experimental build like -say- the sun, or the energy boiling off away some materials and generating "thrust" in the physically-correct but not wanted way.
    True, but all that said, external effects that could be to blame such as convection are orders of magnitude larger than the minor perturbations/drag you'd experience in LEO (which, knowing the cubesat mass and dimensions, are accountable even then)

    ... and you do not have to rely on sensors on the satellite. Orbital mechanics in LEO are well understood. Any small consistent output from the prototype would become apparent over time with (externally) measurable differences in keplerian elements.
    Volunteer Rogue System Wiki Moderator
    Come visit the Rogue System Discord Server!

  10. #20
    We can have consistent drift just because of the irregular gravity of the potatoid we live on (our Earth isn't a perfect sphere), also not forgetting the magnetic field interacting with magnetized metal (in a way we already know), plus I wouldn't be surprised if the experiment produced so little (pseudo)thrust that even the irregularity in the gravity of the moon would have to be taken into account to notice it.

    To me if the experimental setup on the ground didn't produced enough thrust to detect, the solution isn't to make it even smaller ! It would have been to make it bigger, more powerful or link several side to side.

Similar Threads

  1. Server join - Errors "Data Transfer Timeout" and "Password Invalid"
    By Christopher Elliott in forum rFactor 2 General Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-05-2016, 12:27 PM
  2. "Join Time Out" and "Connection Lost" issues
    By epik1 in forum rFactor 1 Technical Support
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-21-2015, 02:50 PM
  3. Fanatec CSW V2 - BMW GT2 "Spec A" VS BMW GT2 "Spec B" VS Porsche 918 RSR
    By Spinelli in forum Hardware Building/Buying/Usage Advice
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-20-2015, 09:20 AM
  4. "rFactor has stopped working" error message at random when racing
    By sloch in forum rFactor 1 Technical Support
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-01-2013, 08:50 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •