Mach Effect progress

[alexjrgreen]

Ron, I'm not trying to have an argument with you - I'm trying to broaden your perspective.

Columbus had a magnetic compass and a knowledge of the trade winds which allowed him to reliably sail both ways across the Atlantic. He also had a commercial sponsor with enough finance to fund repeat voyages.

[GIThruster]

That's fine. I'm perfectly aware. I still think sailing off into the darkness takes balls of solid brass.

But yeah, the Phoenicians and Vikings, several African sailors and some Polynesians navigated across some open ocean at times. Most often they restricted themselves to short hops where they were never more than a day from shore. Sailing straight out into open sea for a month when you don't know if there is anything there, is ballsy. I once got stuck 5 miles from my home for 6 hours while the winds were fickle. (Could have been worse--there was beer and swimming to be had.) Then just like a woman, its temperament played multiple personality, and a storm chased me home, dropping lighting bolts into the lake just behind my little racer.

And that was a one-cell storm. Nothing like a hurricane, or a coronal mass ejection.

[AcesHigh]

the only ones with balls were the sailors who believed in Colombo. Colombo did not have balls. He was simply a fool who said the ancient greeks were wrong and calculated wrongly the size of Earth, thus thinking Asia's eastern shores were closer to Europe across the Atlantic than America itself was in reality. He was so sure of that he was not afraid.

It´s called a leap of faith. If the guy has faith in that, he is not afraid. Sometimes the faith proves right, sometimes wrong.

[alexjrgreen]

In 1347, a ship visiting Markland (America) from the Viking settlement in Greenland lost its anchor and was blown as far as Straumfjord in Iceland.

The Icelandic Annals describe it like this in Old-Norse:

"Þa kom di skp af Grænlandi/minna at vexti enu sma Islandz fór. Þat kom i Straum/fjord inn yttra. Þat var akkeris laust þar voru a xvij menn ok hofðu farit till Marklandz enn siðan vorðit hingat hafreka."
[Islandske annaler til 1578, edited Christiania 1888, page 213 under year 1347 AD(Skalhóltann)]

"Then a vessel, small sized, came from Greenland to Iceland. It came to Straumfjord. It had lost it's anchor; they were 17 men and they had sailed to Markland but thereafter they were driven hither(i.e. Iceland)"
[Translation from Jansen Henrik M; A critical account of the written and archaeological sources' evidence concerning the Norse settlements in Greenland. (Meddelelser om Grönland 182:4), 1972, page 78]

When Columbus visited Iceland in 1477, only 130 years later and fifteen years before he rediscovered America, there would still have been people whose grandparents had told them the tale.

[ladajo]

Having spent a number of years at sea, weathered many a large storm, in all the oceans, I can say that in my opinion, there are many ocean explorers whom the sea ate, and we shall never know their names or feats.

Even today, with much better equipment, training, knowledge and support, the ocean still inexplicably eats people.
Once you really understand that the sea is a bitch, it takes balls to really go to sea.

All seafarers share the saga of the sea, and that saga for those who get to perpetuate it, will include how the sea tried to eat them on occasion. I have four or so occasions I think are worthy.

[GIThruster]

Once you really understand that the sea is a bitch, it takes balls to really go to sea.

All seafarers share the saga of the sea, and that saga for those who get to perpetuate it, will include how the sea tried to eat them on occasion. I have four or so occasions I think are worthy.

I have half a dozen times where the mountains have tried to eat me as well. Again, mostly concerning storms. People don't realize how mere inconvenience is turned into life threatening adventure when you're in the wilderness, or out on the deep. And people don't get that bopping a day at a time around the edges of the Atlantic the way the Vikings did, is NOTHING like sailing with no land in sight for 30 days. That is a LONG, LONG time to be at sea in a little wooden box. People don't get there are waves higher than those boxes were long. The waves that cancelled the SpaceX barge landing, were 30' and they were not unusual. The Nina and Pinta were only 50' long. I think the Santa Maria was 65'. How would you like to be at sea in such a craft with 30' waves, and that's not even a storm!

When I want a good scare, I watch The Perfect Storm. It's just like Hamlet--everyone dies.

[ladajo]

I would imagine that with reaction-less drives (like M.E.) we will face similar concepts with space travel. Probably on an order(s) of magnitude higher. I am guessing that in the early days, space is going to eat a number of explorers. Too bad we aren't out there yet. Soon though, one way or another, and those that take to space will also face environments where survival is decided by a single point of failure. These days we are skimming around the edge, and haven't really taken the Big Step into the unknown. Probably the closest thing to date has been the Apollo missions to and around the moon. They included some measure of; on your own, one mistake away from not being heard from again.

[choff]

I've heard tales of perfectly good ships sinking in calm waters because of methane pockets affecting buoyancy. A couple of years ago some local fisherman pulled up a huge block of frozen methane onto the deck.

[JoeP]

Yeah, the general expectation was that bold, bleeding edge explorers will have a high accident and fatality rate is reversed in current space travel exploits. Tolerance for disasters and death is now very low. While this helps with reliability and safety goals, it also makes everything more and more expensive, tentative, slow, and -- shall I say it -- meek. I think the space shuttle disasters put the nail in the coffin. All the emphasis since Apollo in manned missions has been getting into orbit for a while and working in and on a space station. And now, the USA at least, can't really do that anymore. Just watch 2001 -- this is what people in the 60s thought the near future might be like. They were not so far off with HAL (maybe 20-30 years too soon) but orbital cities, moon bases, and large interplanetary science vessels to the gas giants with existing propulsion tech was really a miss. Without a breakthrough propulsion system, and the will to use it, such as the MET discussed here, or, say, a kickass polywell based fusion drive, I doubt we will ever even get to Mars with any kind of commitment. I guess that was the point of GIs article. Good article BTW, I just read it.

And so what about Columbus -- the use of that as a travel example example is valid, whether or not some others island hopped their way beforehand. No point derailing the thread on that IMO. (Edit: BTW, Ladajo, I'm not saying you are doing any derailing, I just quoted you since you sparked that thought in my head about the dangers of space exploration.)

I would imagine that with reaction-less drives (like M.E.) we will face similar concepts with space travel. Probably on an order(s) of magnitude higher. I am guessing that in the early days, space is going to eat a number of explorers. Too bad we aren't out there yet. Soon though, one way or another, and those that take to space will also face environments where survival is decided by a single point of failure. These days we are skimming around the edge, and haven't really taken the Big Step into the unknown. Probably the closest thing to date has been the Apollo missions to and around the moon. They included some measure of; on your own, one mistake away from not being heard from again.

[ladajo]

That was the effect I was looking for. Thanks.

It is all about the single point of failure while in the big unknown.
This is the reason I have enjoyed some of my past work, not in the thrill junky sense, but in the pushing out the envelope of the human experience sense. Being on the hairy edge, means you are pushing out the perceived normal boundaries. It is at the heart of good science in my opinion as well. The physical and intellectual aspects of envelope expansion in either or both domains has always been interesting and fun for me. I think of this as a core component of true human spirit.

It is why I truly appreciate M.E., Polywell, SABRE and other cutting edge work that steps into the unknown where others have not stepped before.

[GIThruster]

Thanks for the several nice compliments I've received over the two posts, in public and in private.

I'm curious no one has said a thing about the art work. It's not mine, but I just think it is great stuff. Did it seem over the top for either article? I'd like to stay with stuff this grabbing if it doesn't put anyone off.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/space-su ... -ron-stahl

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/mach-eff ... -ron-stahl

[AcesHigh]

to tell the truth, I am not sure why we are discussing history even though it´s an interesting argument.

Is that part about discovering the Americas THAT important regarding the necessity for researching Mach Effect Thrusters?

[ladajo]

I think the centering principle is an observation that there is currently a lack of cultural imperative to push the envelope.
In a sense, we have become complacent that someone else is going to solve our problems for us, or at least give us sufficient band-aids for free to keep us happy enough.

[GIThruster]

. . .I am not sure why we are discussing history. . .

I can tell you my reasoning if you like. My training, skills, talents lie in philosophy of technology, and I think the best way to view revolutions in science and technology is through the window of history.

When we look at any true paradigm shift and recognize it for what it is, we are shocked. People simply do not realize what it is like to live through such a radical change in perspective, and that inability to sympathize, often creates what Iadajo is noting--this lack of imperative, which is really based upon our lack of apprehension of what is knocking at the door.

Mach Effect physics, if it is what is presents itself to be; is a radical leap forward in our mastery of the universe, such as we have not seen since the time of Maxwell. I think I've written about this here before and it is the subject I'm hoping to post in Li late next week if I can get the time to do it, but the point is to understand what mastery over gravinertial forces would be like. It's as radical and world changing as mastery over electromagnetism, and if we fail to appreciate this, we're left stumbling around in disbelief at the consequences each time they peek out from under cover and we get a glimpse. The stuff seems magical. The role of the philosopher faced with this, is to show the man behind the curtain, to reveal how and why we suddenly have what appears are god-like powers.

If you had told anyone 150 years ago in Maxwell's time, about cell phones, they would have thought you either mad, or a magician. The same is going to be true of those who master gravinertial forces. It is going to seem like magic, even to the engineers who think they know how the world works.

So yea or nay on the art work so far?

[birchoff]

. . .I am not sure why we are discussing history. . .

I can tell you my reasoning if you like. My training, skills, talents lie in philosophy of technology, and I think the best way to view revolutions in science and technology is through the window of history.

When we look at any true paradigm shift and recognize it for what it is, we are shocked. People simply do not realize what it is like to live through such a radical change in perspective, and that inability to sympathize, often creates what Iadajo is noting--this lack of imperative, which is really based upon our lack of apprehension of what is knocking at the door.

Mach Effect physics, if it is what is presents itself to be; is a radical leap forward in our mastery of the universe, such as we have not seen since the time of Maxwell. I think I've written about this here before and it is the subject I'm hoping to post in Li late next week if I can get the time to do it, but the point is to understand what mastery over gravinertial forces would be like. It's as radical and world changing as mastery over electromagnetism, and if we fail to appreciate this, we're left stumbling around in disbelief at the consequences each time they peek out from under cover and we get a glimpse. The stuff seems magical. The role of the philosopher faced with this, is to show the man behind the curtain, to reveal how and why we suddenly have what appears are god-like powers.

If you had told anyone 150 years ago in Maxwell's time, about cell phones, they would have thought you either mad, or a magician. The same is going to be true of those who master gravinertial forces. It is going to seem like magic, even to the engineers who think they know how the world works.

So yea or nay on the art work so far?

The artwork is ok. But then again I read alot of science fiction so its par for the course as far as I am concerned.

As for living through radical changes. I would have to agree with your perspective. That said, I feel like what everyone is really waiting on is a sign that the technology is viable. From where I stand if MET's got to a TRL level where they could be deployed for station keeping of satellites. You would see a dramatic sea change in belief.

Anyway, any particular milestones we should be looking forward to this year?