A rocket booster the size of a coin may soon propel the smallest satellites floating in space.
A rocket booster the size of a coin may soon propel the smallest satellites floating in space. The small device, which was developed in the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, bears no resemblance to the satellite engines operating today, which include valves, pipes and heavy fuel tanks. Instead, the new device is a planar and compact square surface, similar to a computer chip, covered with about five hundred microscopic prongs that emit beams of ions in response to passing a current through them. This array creates a small blast of charged particles capable of propelling a shoebox-sized satellite forward.
"The device is so tiny that several devices can be inserted from it into the spacecraft," says lead researcher Paulo Lozano. The researcher adds and says that a small satellite that includes a number of such micro-thrusters will be able "not only to move towards the correct orbit for it, but it will be able to perform more complex movements such as turning and rolling."
Today, more than two dozen small satellites, called "CubeSats" orbit the Earth. Each of them is the size of a Hungarian cube, and weighs less than a kilogram and a half. Their small size causes them to be classified as "nano-satellites", in contrast to the usual bulky satellites controlled from Earth. These tiny satellites are cheap to manufacture and can be launched into space quite easily: since they are so lightweight, a rocket can carry several such satellites as payload without the need for additional fuel. However, these small satellites lack self-propulsion systems, and once they are in space they are usually left to orbit around the Earth in a tolerable manner. At the end of its mission, the satellite burned up upon entering the lower atmosphere.
The researcher points out that if the small satellites were placed in higher orbits in space, they would last longer and could create a mess in space as a result. As more and more satellites are launched from Earth in the future, their debris could become an expensive problem.
"These satellites may remain in space forever as debris," says the lead researcher. "And this debris could collide with other satellites and cause the Space Age to shut down as a result of a small number of collisions." Propulsion systems for small satellites could solve the problem of space debris: the satellites could move down to lower altitudes and burn up, or even function as space debris collectors while dragging other decommissioned satellites into the lower atmosphere. However, conventional propulsion systems are too large and bulky for nanosatellites, and do not leave enough space for the electronics and communication equipment.
In contrast, the new propulsion system adds very little weight to the overall weight of the satellite. The microchip consists of several layers of porous metal with the top layer consisting of five hundred metal spikes at regular intervals. The lower part of the chip consists of small reservoirs of liquid - "liquid plasma" - containing ions that move freely, and this liquid is the basis for the operation of the innovative device.
In order to explain how the propulsion system works, the researcher brings the model of a tree: a tree draws water from the ground through a sequence of pores that get smaller and smaller, first in the roots, then up towards the trunk, and finally through the leaves, where the sun's rays vaporize the water as a gas. The innovative drive system works in a similar way to this capillary action: each layer of metal includes smaller and smaller pores, which suck up the ionic liquid through the chip towards the metal tips.
The researchers mounted a gold-coated plate over the chip and then applied an electrical voltage to create an electric field between the plate and the prongs. In response to this action, beams of ions were ejected from the prongs creating a propulsive force. The researchers measured and discovered that an array of five hundred prongs creates a force of 50 micronewtons - a pushing force that on Earth could only move a small piece of paper. But in space, where there is no gravity at all, this small force could be enough to propel a satellite weighing one kilogram. The researchers also discovered that increasing the electrical voltage leads to an increase in thrust force - a promising result in terms of energy efficiency. "This means that by changing the voltage you have a high level of control," explains the chief researcher.
The researchers envision a small satellite with several micro-thrusters located on different sides. When the satellite needs to propel itself out of orbit, solar panels on top of it will temporarily activate the innovative propellers. In the future, the lead researcher predicts, these micro-thrusters could even be used to propel much larger satellites: flat plates that include several such thrust systems could propel the satellites in space, while changing their motion, similar to the rudder of a ship or plane or the fin of a fish. "Just as solar panels can be directed in the defined direction of the sun, so it will be possible to direct the propellers in any direction we want them to move towards," explains the researcher. "This mechanism provides you with a lot of flexibility," adds the researcher.
45 תגובות
Is it possible somehow to get these "micro thrusters"?
In case there was a larger satellite, larger chips were needed to push
And if so, maybe it's possible to do this with cars as well
what? The GMA are making a revolution and we're not in?
Well, I have to run now, despite the 40 degree heat. I have an experiment to perform.
Stalin - our father.
Russia - our teacher.
I wish we were orphans..
"Small satellites... each of them is the size of a Hungarian cube..." The satellites of the cube are 10x10x10 cm in size; A little bigger than a normal Hungarian cube.
If they haven't squealed yet, then they will squeal again. Aren't you excited to be so close to the revolution?
According to the article alone, it is not known if the reason for the satellite thrust is masking or recoil as a response to ion emission. Reason suggests that if the reason was masking, there would be many, many creaking swords in the world of physics. Since we don't know that this happened, I lean towards the second possibility.
Thanks, I'll get to them soon.
In my opinion, "masking" is a beautiful term ☼
And even if the picture is incomplete, it's hard to argue with the fact that Bifield-Brown delivers the goods.
jubilee
You can find in the original article:
http://physics.fullerton.edu/~jimw/general/inertia/index.htm
And also in the other articles derived from it.
If Meir here, he would be quite interested in the subject, I think.
In any case - in my opinion, the image of "masking" gravity on the one hand so that the other side is attracted to distant masses, cannot be complete.
Israel, which begins with the mitzvah...
Do you have a link to the formulas?
Thanks
Good night.
Just note the email below, part of the correspondence I had with Prof. Woodward, one of the originators of the idea.
The formulas do not appear, as is the infamous tradition of our sites.
Hello Dr. Woodward.
Thank you very much for your reply. I hope I am not taking too much of your time. I ordered the book from Amazon, but they don't have it on kindle, so I have to wait. Maybe you can help me by giving a value to the field function phi in the equation below, taken from your article "The origin of inertia"
(
Also, if you know anyone who can lecture me on the subject (inc paid tutor).
Thanks,
Israel.
In a message dated 12/7/2010 11:07:26 AM Pacific Standard Time, jwoodward@Exchange.FULLERTON.EDU writes:
Hello Mr. Shapira,
Dennis Sciama published a little book around 1959 titled The Physical Foundations of General Relativity Theory in which he spelled out his ideas about Mach's principle in some detail for a "popular" audience. It's a very nice book.
Best Regards,
JF Woodward
Oh well. Only the last one. There is no page here, only a pull
The basta bracket. Take time to think about new difficulties
Sha relative? The mass of the satellite is XNUMX kg. Its speed as a result of the push is quite low. So why relative?
This is a wonderful opportunity to introduce relativity (by the back door). Momentum is relative
WHATEVER
Still: Does the satellite's mass change its momentum?
Right. You scored a ball. He was not pushed but pulled.
You are fast ..
So an explanation: isn't the satellite pushed to one side by the micro thruster?
No alternative physics. The Bifield-Brown effect does not create a pushing force but creates a weakening of the force of attraction that exists between masses. We will look at the immediate environment of the body as a field of gravity. Since only one area of the body is coated with static electricity, the gravitational force exerted by the environment is unbalanced.
With all due respect to alternative physics, I believe that if any phenomenon contradicted the law of conservation of momentum, or any known law of physics, it would have been the headline of the day in "Hidan".
And also in Nature, and Science..
and FOX, and CNN..
And news, and Maariv..
The country, on guard..
Your logic works flawlessly. But the phenomenon described here does not relate to Newton's third law, at least not directly.
Still, I fail to see how the satellite could be pushed to one side, without a mass weighed by its momentum being pushed to the opposite side, unless the law of conservation of momentum is violated.
And since the only mass available is that of the pigeons, I assume they are the ones being chased.
And unless their speed is close to that of light, most of the propulsion energy will be wasted on them and not on pushing the satellite.
No?
Moshe, thank you.
Neither in the article nor in your words did I see that the ion beam does not cause static electricity to be generated. Therefore, I do not rule out the possibility that the thrust force created by this method is, in fact, caused by the Bifield-Brown effect and that the technology described in the article is nothing more than another method of creating an electrostatic field.
Israel, to you
I'm not Moshe Nachmani, right? I did see the PDF version on Google, it may even be me who distributed it (I converted it from DOC to PDF about two+ years ago...).
An ion engine does not need an "ion reservoir" inside it, if there is an external energy source (solar radiation) and particles in the space around it (and there is), it can pump them in, accelerate them and push them out and thus move forward.
I was confused by the text before. The Bifield-Brown effect can, apparently, only work with static electricity, that is, you create a potential gradient between the two ends, and... that's it, it moves without adding energy (but I haven't tested this configuration).
There is another amazing engine called an inertial engine, see a clip (from the movie The Race To Zero Point):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIt661hfr9c
Apparently contradicting Newton's third law...
(Wait, who actually said it was a "law"?)
I peeked, I peeked. It is not written there that there is any contradiction to the law of conservation of momentum.
Also look at the link of one of the people behind the idea:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodward_effect
and pay attention to:
One typical criticism is the claim that the Woodward Effect violates Conservation of Momentum and thus is a form of Perpetual Motion Machine.
Please take a look at the links provided by Eyal. We will continue tomorrow, if you like
Right. That's how I see it. And how do you see it, Mr. Teacher? Do you think that the satellite can accelerate in one direction without the same mass in its momentum accelerating in the other direction?
Israel, your insistence deserves special mention.
It is not the pigeons that push.
If I understand correctly, you look at this device as if it were a jet engine and the ions, which are particles of matter, leave it in one direction and create thrust in the opposite direction. How long, in your opinion, will the ion reservoir in this type of engine last?
jubilee
If the ion velocities are not relative, most of the propulsion energy will be wasted on pushing the ions and not on pushing the satellite. An obligatory consequence of the conservation of momentum, where the small driven mass takes most of the energy.
If, on the other hand, the speed of the ions approaches that of light, it simply increases and more energy is found on the satellite's surface.
Israel, thank you for the correction. And yet, there is no connection
jubilee
Relative speeds = speeds close to the speed of light.
please.
Eyal,
Thanks for the great referrals
Israel! It has nothing to do with the "relative speed of the ions". Static electricity will also achieve the same effect.
Moshe, thank you very much for the explanation! (You are not Moshe Nachmani, the author of the article, right?)
Regarding the book you mentioned, as I imagined it is available for download as a PDF file if you search on Google:
lost science gerry vassilatos pdf
(just for general information)
The Bifield-Brown effect is indeed "not strong" for structures 30-40 cm in size (I know, I built one), but certainly much stronger than the ridiculous numbers talked about in the article (micronewtons). It's important to note that according to the documentary The Race To Zero Point (highly recommended!) there is such an engine in the Tzahamkan deserts from a long time ago. By the way, the technology reached maturity in 1948, twenty years before NASA's dangerous and terrible (and huge!!!) rockets to space and the moon.
To Eyal and everyone else, the engine they are talking about is an ion engine, not the Bifield-Brown effect. There is a big difference between the two, the Bifield-Brown effect does not depend on polarization (the direction of the electric field) unlike an ion engine that "injects" electrons into the air/space, and can also work with static electricity (without wasting charge!).
Those who want detailed information about this effect - I highly recommend searching for the book via e-mail or torrent
Lost Science / Gerry Vassilatos (and of course there is always the option of ordering the book online, very expensive and very rare, probably not printed anymore)
But isn't the principle of the Lifter the same as the propellers that are discussed in the article?
Eyal, the effect is called the Bifeld-Brown effect and it is probably too weak and wasteful of energy to have practical uses.
An interesting article from the Air Force Press
http://www.iaf.org.il/637-20024-HE/IAF.aspx
Sagi, even from the link you provided (the corresponding page in Hebrew) it seems that this is exactly the same phenomenon...
"If the claims of some researchers in the field are true, this is a propulsion method that has enormous potential, and is expected to replace the conventional lifting mechanisms and rocket propulsion in the space programs.... The experiment was conducted under controlled conditions at a high level, including a very high vacuum.... (!!!) Small models weighing a few grams to dozens of grams have already been successfully "lifted" using this effect, by dozens of people around the world. Such models are often called "Lifters". There are many tutorials on the Internet on how to reproduce the phenomenon in home construction"
http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%A4%D7%A7%D7%98_%D7%91%D7%99%D7%A4%D7%9C%D7%93-%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%95%D7%9F
The ions must have relative velocities, otherwise most of the propulsion energy will be wasted on the ions and not on the satellite.
It should be noted that I would not want to be behind such an engine when it is activated..
It has nothing to do with what is described in the clip, what is described there is an effect that needs to be in an area of air that can be ionized.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biefeld-Brown_effect
"But in space, there is no gravity at all..."
Indeed, there is gravity in space, and a lot of it. You probably intended to say: "But in space, where the friction is extremely small..."
I think it works according to this principle, caution extremely high voltage - danger of electric shock !!
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/lftbld.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uF8otSSPgdA
NICE!