Engineers Propose Interstellar Spacecraft Fueled by Lasers

[Therumancer]

I love the name. If you are going to redefine human limitations what could be more appropriate than brazen defiance for the gods themselves? Up anchor and fate be damned!

Because you'd want a new technology to carry a name that inspires confidence.

As I said before, on some levels I'm not entirely convinced this isn't a very high end attempt at intellectual trolling. Especially seeing as there seems to have been less coverage than I would expect, even as a hypothetical thing, if it was actually for real.

A solar powered ship that spreads it's wings/panels near the sun, named after a fool who did that and died, sounds like a joke by a bunch of engineers, with eveeything phrased just seriously enough to make it sound like it could be real.

But then again, we do live in the same world where "Janus Mutal Funds" has advertised on TV and apparently done quite well for itself. Who better to trust with handling your hard earned money than a company named after a two faced god of lies. If that one becomes a major scandal in a few years for robbing people of billions it's going to be absolutly hilarious since it's not like the name didn't scream what was going to happen or anything. I thought that name/company had to be a joke too, until I realized it wasn't.... so Icarus... well, I suppose.

 

[TIMESWORDSMAN]

oooooohhh I got a feelin'! I got a good feelin'!
I got a feelin' this could be something my grandchildren will have to memorize in fourth grade history!

Y'know, sometimes its just an ordinary day, and then its SPACE YEAR 2012 BABY!

Thanks for keeping things in perspective Captcha:
Drink Milk

 

[TIMESWORDSMAN]

"Science is a troll.
It has been from the start."

Said the man sitting at the computer.

 

[ShindoL Shill]

"Science is a troll.
It has been from the start."

Said the man sitting at the computer.

Your point being?

 

[TIMESWORDSMAN]

"Science is a troll.
It has been from the start."

Said the man sitting at the computer.

Your point being?

Science rules.

 

[Bato]

Ok, so we've got space, antimatter and lasers. Maybe they should call that guy who is attaching lasers to sharks.

Add sharks into the equation and they will have officially created the most awesome thing ever.

It's just <url=http://www.smbc-comics.com/?db=comics&id=1797>what engineers do.
Who also wouldn't want to attach a laser powered anti-matter engine to a spaceship that is going so fast that reality warps around it?

 

[mad825]

Would someone please stop adding Greek myth/legends to their titles? It's not funny nor is it smart. Don't mean to moan but this is seriously getting old.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Does this mean we can have nice things after all?

 

[Somebloke]

Well, forgetting the positronium portion for a second and keeping things within the atmosphere:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_9ac-w4DW8

 

[Xian_Frost]

Why would you name it Icarus? That like asking for something to go terribly wrong!

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

I love the name. If you are going to redefine human limitations what could be more appropriate than brazen defiance for the gods themselves? Up anchor and fate be damned!

Because you'd want a new technology to carry a name that inspires confidence.

As I said before, on some levels I'm not entirely convinced this isn't a very high end attempt at intellectual trolling. Especially seeing as there seems to have been less coverage than I would expect, even as a hypothetical thing, if it was actually for real.

A solar powered ship that spreads it's wings/panels near the sun, named after a fool who did that and died, sounds like a joke by a bunch of engineers, with eveeything phrased just seriously enough to make it sound like it could be real.

But then again, we do live in the same world where "Janus Mutal Funds" has advertised on TV and apparently done quite well for itself. Who better to trust with handling your hard earned money than a company named after a two faced god of lies. If that one becomes a major scandal in a few years for robbing people of billions it's going to be absolutly hilarious since it's not like the name didn't scream what was going to happen or anything. I thought that name/company had to be a joke too, until I realized it wasn't.... so Icarus... well, I suppose.

One way to inspire confidence is balls-out audacity. I think calling an experimental spacecraft Icarus is about as confident as you can get. Whether that will inspire confidence in anyone beside me, I don't know. I understand calling it Icarus is tempting fate, that's why I like it. The story of Icarus is about man being punished for going beyond his limitations. Knowing that and calling it Icarus to me says 'fuck limitations' and 'come what may'. It's perfectly and appropriately audacious! You could call it Icarus' Revenge but that doesn't sound as good.

 

[PingoBlack]

Did everybody miss the important missing piece?
Quantum pair pops into existence then nearly immediately self annihilates. So ...
How the hell are they hoping to stop that and just pluck the positron away? Magic?

Nothing in your article or linked Discovery piece has any mention of the minor issue this poses. Namely, that you would just heat up some vacuum this way.

This theory has more holes in it than most I have ever seen so far. Keep in mind that if you could laser vacuum to create positrons and keep them, we would be doing so in CERN. But I hear its much harder than that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimater#Artificial_production

 

[Shiftygiant]

Why do I get the feeling that somewhere in BIS a scientist is face palming and going 'Why does Owen keep going on about those damn lasers.'

 

[littlewisp]

Did everybody miss the important missing piece?
Quantum pair pops into existence then nearly immediately self annihilates. So ...
How the hell are they hoping to stop that and just pluck the positron away? Magic?

Nothing in your article or linked Discovery piece has any mention of the minor issue this poses. Namely, that you would just heat up some vacuum this way.

This theory has more holes in it than most I have ever seen so far. Keep in mind that if you could laser vacuum to create positrons and keep them, we would be doing so in CERN. But I hear its much harder than that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimater#Artificial_production

I think most of us just don't know any better. But hey! That's why I troll through comments to find people disgusted with our ignorance who endeavor to enlighten us. *goes to link*

 

[McMullen]

snip

You seem to get awfully worked up over names. I don't think what a thing is called has much influence over how well the physics behind it works. It seems weird to me how much you're focusing on that. Your language conveys a picture of a person sitting at his keyboard shaking with rage at their choice of name.

OT: Very cool; the weight of fuel is a seriously annoying problem in space travel. Even if this doesn't work, I think it's definitely a step in the right direction.

 

[Pinkamena]

Did everybody miss the important missing piece?
Quantum pair pops into existence then nearly immediately self annihilates. So ...
How the hell are they hoping to stop that and just pluck the positron away? Magic?

Nothing in your article or linked Discovery piece has any mention of the minor issue this poses. Namely, that you would just heat up some vacuum this way.

This theory has more holes in it than most I have ever seen so far. Keep in mind that if you could laser vacuum to create positrons and keep them, we would be doing so in CERN. But I hear its much harder than that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimater#Artificial_production

Artificially produced positrons can be accumulated into beams (Link [http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071024090816.htm]), and although splitting electron-positron pairs is challenging, it is possible (according to the wikipedia article on particle-antiparticle pairs). I am by no means knowledgeable in this field, but I imagine it could be done by creating the pairs in a two-dimensional plane, and the applying a magnetic field perpendicular to this plane, making the positrons and electrons split up to each side of the plane. Then it's just a matter of using magnetic lenses to focus them. Actually confining them is of course a real problem, but it is already being done in CERN where they study anti-hydrogen.

 

[ActionDan]

But isn't Anti-Matter explosively reactive with everything that isn't Anti-Matter? How in hells name are they going to store something so twitchy?

 

[Pinkamena]

But isn't Anti-Matter explosively reactive with everything that isn't Anti-Matter? How in hells name are they going to store something so twitchy?

If the antiparticles have electric charge, they can be confined with magnetic and electromagnetic traps, called a Penning trap. It's kind of difficult though, but it's a technology that's being continuously developed. Anti-hydrogen can be confined as well. Recently, CERN's Antihydrogen Laser Physics Apparatus trapped 309 antihydrogen atoms for 1000 seconds.

 

[Agayek]

When I read "Powered by lasers", the James Bond theme started to play in my head.

Good thing weight means almost nothing in space, you need a ton of power to try an generate a means of FTL travel. While this system sounds innovative, it doesn't sound like it would generate enough power, unless it was a massive system.

Weight means a hell of a lot in space, to be perfectly honest. The more something weighs, the more force is required to get it to move. The more force is needed, the more energy is required. The more energy is required, the more fuel is needed to generate said energy. Which means more weight, which means more fuel, etc etc.

Keeping spacecraft relatively lightweight is one of the more important aspects of their design. We're not going to have good space travel until we completely (or close enough as to not matter) stop using fossil fuels in them, primarily because the weight:energy ratio of fossil fuels simply isn't good enough.

 

[Pinkamena]

When I read "Powered by lasers", the James Bond theme started to play in my head.

Good thing weight means almost nothing in space, you need a ton of power to try an generate a means of FTL travel. While this system sounds innovative, it doesn't sound like it would generate enough power, unless it was a massive system.

Weight means a hell of a lot in space, to be perfectly honest. The more something weighs, the more force is required to get it to move. The more force is needed, the more energy is required. The more energy is required, the more fuel is needed to generate said energy. Which means more weight, which means more fuel, etc etc.

Keeping spacecraft relatively lightweight is one of the more important aspects of their design. We're not going to have good space travel until we completely (or close enough as to not matter) stop using fossil fuels in them, primarily because the weight:energy ratio of fossil fuels simply isn't good enough.

Rockets doesn't use fossil fuel, but usually hydrogen and oxygen. Your point still stands, though. The energy released from chemical reactions is much too low for practical space exploration.