Re: hyperspace (was: cloaking device rules)

FieldScott@aol.com writes:
@:) Mike writes:
@:) 
@:) > However, nuclear reactors are currently used in some spacecraft.	
@:) 
@:) Current spacecraft? Which ones?

  Only russian ones, I think, but I'll let Mike answer that.

@:) >  There is hope to allow future incorporation into propulsion
@:) >  systems, such as from the folks responsible for the Daedelus
@:) >  and Enzman starship designs.
@:) 
@:) How do they plan to incorporate this? The idea of controlled
@:) nuclear explosions sounds a bit dicey to me, and I can't imagine
@:) such a ship having a great deal of combat maneuverability!

  Yeah, that idea seems a little silly to me too.  Not that it
wouldn't work, just that it's silly.

@:) Nuclear power is great for generating large, sustained amounts of
@:) steam/electricity without the need for refueling.

  It's also good for heating up stuff that will then throw itself out
the back end of your rocket.  And while it's doing this, it is also
being enormously more efficient than the usual chemical reactions that
power everyday rockets.  Although I guess solar power is good enough,
you could also tack a reactor onto an ion engine and have a spacecraft
that could go more or less anywhere (if you had the time to wait for
it to get there) because of its incredible fuel economy.

@:) But unless you can use electricity to generate gravitic fields or
@:) some such, how do you translate this into thrust? Most sci-fi
@:) authors skip over this one and just say "the ship is powered by
@:) matter-antimatter engines" or some such.

  Well, matter-antimatter is a step up from nuclear power.  The only
plausible idea I've heard so far is very similar to the nuclear rocket
idea - you take a (very) small amount of antimatter and inject it into
a large amount of normal matter and the mixture gets very hot and
fires out of the back of your rocket again.

-joachim