XPost: sci.electronics.design, sci.physics   
   From: invlaid@invalid.com   
      
   On 11/13/2016 9:53 AM, Robert Clark wrote:   
   > In sci.physics Robert Clark  wrote:   
   >>> On 11/3/2016 9:00 AM, Robert Clark wrote:   
   >>>>> Yes, that's a good example. Electric, battery-powered airplanes and   
   >>>>> helicopters already exist.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Toys.   
   >>>>   
      
   >>>>> However, the key point is according to the   
   >>>>> mathematics you can get even better power-to-thrust ratio with ionic   
   >>>>> propulsion using ionizing wires at the nanoscale than helicopters   
   >>>>> achieve.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> what math ? got  a url ?   
   >>>>   
      
   >>> As important as is the fact that you would no longer need heavy   
   >>> transformers   
   >>> to produce tens of thousands of volts, even more important is the high   
   >>> thrust-to-power ratio you can get by only using low voltages.   
   >>   
   >> How many times must you be told you do NOT need heavy transformers to   
   >> produce high voltages?   
   >>   
   >> Camera flash units produce tens of thousands of volts.   
   >>   
      
   >>   
   >> A typical small aircraft engine produces about 140 kW, so at 500 V your   
   >> current is a bit under 300 A.   
   >>   
   >> A typical small helicopter engine is about twice that size, so double   
   >> the current for a helicopter.   
      
   >> That means the conductors from the power supply must be huge and you   
   >> have to have hundreds, if not thousands, of emmitters to get the   
   >> individual currents down to levels that won't vaporize them.   
   >>   
   >> Even if you mangaged to pull all that off, you now have a huge RFI   
   >> generator destroying all radio communication over a wide ares which   
   >> the FCC would never allow to be operated.   
   >>   
   >>   
      
   > Camera flash units work by using electrical capacitors. So while they   
   > are able to provide a large amount of power for their weight, they do   
   > this by discharging all their stored energy in only a fraction of a   
   > second. This is why despite intense research into "supercapacitors" they   
   > still have not been able to replace chemical batteries for sustained,   
   > continuous power production.   
      
   off topic, try googling "switching power supplies"   
      
   >   
   > In regards, to the current carried by the nanowires, you would likely   
   > need millions to billions of them to get the required thrust for a large   
   > craft. This is because the thrust is lower for lower voltage. Having   
   > such a large number of nanowires is a very well-known phenomenon in   
   > production VLSI electronic devices though.   
      
   just use copper cables, much cheaper   
      
   >   
   > About the RFI, it may be because the voltage now required is only in the   
   > hundreds of volts range rather than tens of thousands of volts, the RFI   
   > is also significantly reduced. This is also something that needs to be   
   > tested   
   >   
      
   no, easy to calculate, but you have to get the math right, and you seem   
   to be missing a couple zeros in your required power.   
      
      
   >   
   >  Bob Clark   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)