[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
C-5
consumption. This means that after building the first Oscillatory Chamber there will be no need
to fight with gravity.
It is worth mentioning at this point that, theoretically, antigravitational propulsion systems
should also be self-rechargeable - if they do not dissipate their mass. Practically, however, they
would need to dispose of their energy in order to land (see subsection C5), and also - if their
antigravitational interactions were to be produced by a substance (not by a device), the need
to circulate this substance through the environment (see subsection C2) would eliminate the
chance for a self-rechargeable operation.
C4. The field of the antigravitational spacecraft would absorb huge amounts of energy
In accordance with the Energy Conservation Principle, every change in the energetic
state of a particular object will require a supply of energy at least equal to the difference of the
energies represented by this object before and after the change. (Note that a low efficiency of
some processes of change may cause an additional loss of energy which will increase this
consumption.) Applying the above Principle to the gravity phenomenon, the field/energy
relationship for gravity fields can be defined. This relationship states that: decreasing to a
particular value the gravitational field surrounding a considered object will require the
expenditure of at least the same amount of energy as the amount required to lift this object to
a height where the gravity field drops to the same value.
The knowledge of this field/energy relationship allows for the determining of the smallest
amount of energy needed by the antigravitational spacecraft to fly. In order to calculate this
amount we need to find out how much energy would be consumed with the lifting of a particular
spaceship to the height where the Earth's gravitational pull acting on it would decrease to zero,
and then multiply this energy by the value of the vehicle's acceleration. In the book by Dr E.
Wolff, "Spacecraft Technology" (Spartan Books, 1962) tables of gravitational acceleration for
heights up to 700 km are published. These tables inform us that at a height of h=700 km the
gravitational acceleration, from its value of go=9.8067 m/s2 existing at sea level, drops down to
the value of g700=7.957 m/s2. Applying the well known equation on potential energy: E=m·g·h we
may find the amount of energy required for decreasing the gravity by the increment dg=go-g700.
This energy related to one kilogram of mass is equal to E700=1.727 KWh. Therefore for the
complete elimination of the gravitational attraction of this one kilogram of mass, we must spend
not less than E=(g/(go-g700))·E700=9.156 KWh of energy. If we assume that the antigravitational
spacecraft should weight about 20 tonnes and that it should produce a negative field equal to
-5go, the energy accumulated in this field will amount to over 1 GWh. This means that the energy
stored in the spacecraft's field will be at least the equivalent of half an hour of energy
consumption by a country such as New Zealand.
Of course the above value of 1 GWh represents only that energy required to provide the
stationary spacecraft with its initial antigravitational field equal to -5go. When the craft begins its
acceleration, and also during its flights involving friction, a further energy supply would be
necessary which for high speeds could overcome this initial value many times.
It is amazing how difficult it is to make people aware of the consequences of the Energy
Conservation Principle. They need to have a puncture and to pump a car tyre manually to
realize that a change in a pressure field requires expenditure of energy. The first electricity bill
after purchasing a "super-refrigerator" will make someone realize for the first time that a change
in the temperature field involves the consumption of energy. When one reads in newspapers
that a whole city was plunged into darkness because in a research institute a new
electromagnet was tested, it becomes evident to him/her that a change in a magnetic field also
requires the provision of energy. But all this is still insufficient to convince antigravity adherents
that producing such a field also requires a corresponding energy supply. Therefore many of
C-6
them still believe that antigravity would be something like a "miraculous paint" which is sufficient
to spread on a spacecraft's surface to enable it to take off all by itself. Surely such opinions
remind us of the medieval alchemists' attempts at producing the "philosopher's stone" to change
sand into gold.
C5. For the purpose of landing, the energy of the antigravitational field must be disposed
of
The huge amounts of energy concentrated in the field of an antigravitational spacecraft
would cause a big problem during landing. As long as this vehicle is surrounded by such a field
it would behave like an ideally elastic ball, which there is no way of stopping because it would
bounce back off everything. Therefore to stop its infinite ricochets it would be necessary to
remove its antigravitational field. But to achieve this, all its energy must be withdrawn. Energy
is not a bag of rubbish which may be thrown overboard when it is no longer necessary. It must
be converted into something (assuming that antigravity would allow for any conversion). And
here is the problem. If the energy is converted into heat, it would cause the evaporation of the
spacecraft. If it is converted into electricity, the spacecraft would be destroyed by the attraction
and electromotive forces of the opposite charges (there is no way to produce only identical
electric charges - e.g. only the negative or only the positive ones). The radiating of all this
energy would take too long because radiation has a low efficiency, whereas its storing would
require sufficiently capacious accumulators (the Oscillatory Chamber described in chapter F of
this monograph would provide the required capacitance, however, when this device is built,
magnetic propulsion will become a reality and there will be no further need for antigravity).
Let us assume that the crew of an antigravitational spacecraft somehow would manage
to get rid of unwanted energy and have successfully landed. Then at the moment of taking off
there would arise the problem of its recovery. On Earth this energy can be provided by our
electricity stations, but where can such huge amounts be found on an inhospitable planet?
C6. The strong field would repel everything from the antigravitational spacecraft
The concentration of a huge amount of energy in the field of the antigravitational
spacecraft would introduce a number of drastic consequences for the environment. Because
the force of repulsion caused by this field would be inversely dependent on the square of
distance from the craft (compare Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation), all objects in the
vicinity would be affected by actions whose power we can not even imagine. Therefore every
appearance of the field of such a spacecraft would cause:
(a) The rejection and removal of all objects from its vicinity.
(b) The repulsion of air and the formation of a huge vacuum bubble around its surface.
(c) The impossibility of crew or visitors entering the deck, because every approach to the
spacecraft would require overcoming a huge repulsion force, able to "flatten" a stubborn
cosmonaut.
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]