This man is living his best mad scientist life...making ionic engines in his garage. Or testing the atmospheric pressure of tomato paste.... And I'm sitting here wondering where my life diverged from this possibility....
Can we look into the science of the helical light speed engine in simplified terms, whether it’s workable or not lol. That’s should be an interesting experiment.
The ion rockets we currently have use less than 200 milligrams of xenon gas a minute. Since an object in motion stays in motion, you'd only need more gas to fight the gravity wells of passing objects, keeping yourself on course. Otherwise, you spend a few days building up to your top speed and coast along. Then you'd need an equal amount of gas to slow down. If you watch "The Expanse," this is why the show uses the phrase "flip and burn," as stopping your spacecraft is just as important as getting it into motion. So you'd spend a few days burning the engine and ramping up the speed (I believe we can currently get up to 90,000 meters a second with ion engines), then halfway through the trip, flip your craft so the rockets face your target, burn the engine again, and spend a few days slowing back down. I highly recommend The Expanse for a scientifically accurate portrayal of space travel with lots of fun sci-fi action.
The only speed limit any rocket has is the speed of light. The limitations are mostly acceleration and efficiency. Chemical rockets are very powerful, which is why they're used for missions with time constraints, and to launch heavy payloads from the ground. However, while one pound of chemical fuel can push with a pound of force for about 9 minutes, a pound of gas in an ion engine pushing with a pound of force can burn for over an hour. The drawback is that ion engines are much, much less powerful, so we won't be using them for big rockets anytime soon. They are still fantastic for long-range, long-duration flights, though, because low thrust + a lot of time = a lot of speed. Given sufficient fuel and time, you can go as fast as you want with any engine.
Only place I’ve ever heard ‘ion thrusters’ pi’s in Thunderbirds are Go which was cool Now I see his and am super happy they’re a real concept in physics
@Saitama I did. He only did it with the positive electrode. It rips electrons off gas atoms. Then it repels and creates thrust. Would it work on the negative end? Would it “give” electrons and generate the same thrust?
Not really about power, in space you need to carry your own propellant. Because it's limited, it's preferable to get as much "go" out of your propellant as you can, and that's what ion thrusters do by accelerating their propellant to high speeds using electric fields.
You'll already be getting thrust from ejecting the gasses out (like that of a nozzle), but if you want to make the most out of your stored propellant, you'd want ion propulsion on top of that ejection thrust. In essence both at the same time.
Yes. Since the force on the spacecraft is equal and opposite to the force on the exhaust, anything you do to imbue the gas with more backwards acceleration will increase the forwards acceleration on the spacecraft.
Question: IF we wanted to create an engine/drive for a spacecraft, would the following theory work? Mimic how the earth creates its own magnetic field and travels/falls through space. Ex, Bob Lazar described a small reactor in what he thought to be the engine level of the craft he worked on, he also said that the "fuel" was element 115. My theory is this... Fision is what starts to take place, then as the material collapses on itsself, you begin to push the spent 115 into a terrific spin (much like the metal in the earth's core that spins), This will create a magnetic field around the craft aka a bubble that pushes antimatter away from the front of the craft, and therfore "falling" in which ever direction the craft leans, UP or down is simply flipping either the drive itsself or the core within the reactor and making the bubble bounce up or down. What do you think? I'm pretty sure much arter people than me, figured this out long ago. But it's just something I thought about, and you're a smart guy, so I thought I would ask.
Would you like a list of everything wrong with that? Just for starters, magnetism has exactly nothing to do with the Earth’s motion through space. Element 115 has a half-life of less than a second and has only ever been observed in the lab. And where the heck are you expecting to get antimatter from?
@@eroraf8637 idk, I just went to public school. I just had an idea or a theory, and you want to come in a tear it down. It's all good. That's why I started it with "Question" and "IF", because idk. But you go ahead and be an ass. Enjoy your day. I can admit my ignorance. If your going to go at someone, make sure you understand if it's a question or a statement. Clearly, I was asking a question.
Unfortunately, element 115 (Moscovium) does not naturally occur and is so radioactive it would decay into element 113 (Nihonium, just as radioactive) and element 2 (Helium) pretty much immediately after creation. A massive particle accelerator and huge amounts of energy would be needed to create even a few atoms of it and any significant amount would instantly turn into superheated, very radioactive plasma. Also, space is a vacuum that does not contain much of any kind of matter, especially no antimatter. Earths orbit does also not have anything to do with either magnetism, antimatter or element 115.
@@janniswess2813 and you know this, how? I ask, because, we still don't know what dark matter really is and the affects it has on the known elements and physics as we know it. Have you conducted experiments in space? Have you been there? Because if you have, that would be very interesting. You THINK you know, but you truly don't. We as a human race are so arrogant in our assumptions. We think the science and especially physics that we "know" is all there is, however just about every year or so we discover how wrong or right we are. I understand why you would refute my theory, but I think I will be proven correct in the very near future. Or, I am just a public school knucklehead with a crazy theory I put out there so folks like you can tell me how wrong I am. Either way, I'm good with it.
I think they like xenon for ion thrusters because it likes to ionize and is rather heavy for a gas atom. xenon is also an amazing psychoactive drug with similar effects to nitrous oxide but far more potent, chemically it is totally safe for the brain, it's just a by-chance effect that it fits in a particular anesthetic receptor. It is very expensive on the consumer level but I doubt its price is much of a concern in NASA projects when they are considering ion thrusters.
If you can put that model with the scale planes in a vacuum and achieve propulsion that would be more than enough for me to be convinced of propulsion in space.
That's correct, ion thrusters do have "fuel." Xenon is not very common, but it has a high molecular weight, is non-reactive and has a high vapourisation temperature so it's easier to store as a liquid.
They use noble gases to prevent any side reactions and Xenon is used because of it's low ionization energy which allows you to actually propel the gas with electricity.
If water touches a surface of water; the surface is wet. But water is always touching a surface of other h2o particles, so is water wet is my question? Please respond
Nobody crams more knowledge that you'll actually take with you in a couple of minutes than this guy. So in space you would basically have to put a bubble with air in it around the electrode, and then the electrode would push the air which pushes the bubble which is attached to the spacecraft? Awesomesauce.
Space Rocket's ion thrusters rely on another ion source than the atmospheric air, usually xenon. The ammount of thrust they produce makes them useless in an atmosphere though, as they are right now...
We should make an ion engine powered spacecraft that's solar powered. It could have two large solar panels on the sides so it's head on silhouette looks like and H. It'll have twin ion engines (TIE) and to forward facing guns. We can call it the TIE fighter.
This could be used for 1g constant acceleration and allow a spacecraft to approach the speed of light, traveling the edge of the known universe in 50 years (its pilot would age backwards).
You can't lol. It takes an infinite amount of energy to reach the speed of light, so you'd need an infinite amount of fuel which is an infinite amount of mass. Therefore it can't happen.
Ion engines produce an incredibly weak thrust. However they're very efficient. You might be able to sustain 0.00000001G for years. But humanity is a long way from sustained 1G, or even 0.1G . The rocket equation is an ugly MFer. Hopefully we won't have to wait 300 years for our Epstein to be born. And time dilation doesn't make you age backwards. It makes time run slower compared to people traveling slower than you. But time always moves forward, never backward.
Наука
![DRAGON BALL: Sparking! ZERO - Fused Warriors Trailer [BUDOKAI TENKAICHI Series]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/84p4Lvyfyes/mqdefault.jpg)
This man is living his best mad scientist life...making ionic engines in his garage. Or testing the atmospheric pressure of tomato paste.... And I'm sitting here wondering where my life diverged from this possibility....
It's never too late, you could go start making hobby RUclips videos in your spare time and gain a following.
Hang in there buddy, one day you'll find a meaning for your life !
Waaay better than Bill Nigh the Science Guy
It was great when I first saw this - in a kids encyclopedia in about 1968! Several people built them for science fairs in elementary school.
@@jwonz2054 life is not about getting followers. It's about following your dreams.
And as you do, you may get a following.
Can we look into the science of the helical light speed engine in simplified terms, whether it’s workable or not lol. That’s should be an interesting experiment.
What! Lol
This is a certified moment
Same
No you are
Certified * * moment
i disagree
@@zephy_r oh, is that so? How can the current moment be uncertified?
My questions:
How fast can we go with a thruster like this?
How much gas is needed to get going?
The ion rockets we currently have use less than 200 milligrams of xenon gas a minute. Since an object in motion stays in motion, you'd only need more gas to fight the gravity wells of passing objects, keeping yourself on course. Otherwise, you spend a few days building up to your top speed and coast along. Then you'd need an equal amount of gas to slow down. If you watch "The Expanse," this is why the show uses the phrase "flip and burn," as stopping your spacecraft is just as important as getting it into motion. So you'd spend a few days burning the engine and ramping up the speed (I believe we can currently get up to 90,000 meters a second with ion engines), then halfway through the trip, flip your craft so the rockets face your target, burn the engine again, and spend a few days slowing back down.
I highly recommend The Expanse for a scientifically accurate portrayal of space travel with lots of fun sci-fi action.
Nah man, just 1 kg gas per hour to run at half of lightspeed
@@rhov-anion Yeah lol but still they're the cleanest propulsors we know
The only speed limit any rocket has is the speed of light. The limitations are mostly acceleration and efficiency. Chemical rockets are very powerful, which is why they're used for missions with time constraints, and to launch heavy payloads from the ground. However, while one pound of chemical fuel can push with a pound of force for about 9 minutes, a pound of gas in an ion engine pushing with a pound of force can burn for over an hour. The drawback is that ion engines are much, much less powerful, so we won't be using them for big rockets anytime soon. They are still fantastic for long-range, long-duration flights, though, because low thrust + a lot of time = a lot of speed. Given sufficient fuel and time, you can go as fast as you want with any engine.
@@embite1027 Let's say
Ion thrusters are just not sufficient for us (for now)
Ah so this is why in KSP we need to bring our own Xenon gas tanks with the ion engine, I would have never known this without your video
I always had this doubt on how vehicles move in space! Thanks a lot for this experiment and explanation
What do the ionised gas particles push in space tho?
The “TIE” in TIE Fighter (Star Wars) stands for Twin Ion Engine.
Imagine if they stuck to the physics, they'd be some SLOW moving vehicles.
@@escapedcops08 If they stuck to the physics, we would have no lightsabers, which are arguably the coolest toy ever invented. XD
Amazing as always, thank you for these videos
Hey, make a video on the plane which works using ionic thrust. It has no moving parts and works using ionic wind. Keep making great videos 👍
Your experiments are cool bro!!
First time learning this. Thanks
dhanyavad sir. apke video se mujhe fayda hua.🙏
Wishing you are my science teahcer, keep up the good work!
Highly informative
Omg why i have never thought about it 🤦🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️👏👏👏👏thanks man its a nice topic .
Bro I’m trying to watch shrek
Omg! That is actually genius!^^
Where do you get your cool stuff like previous videos?
Finally, Star Wars in real life
Looks cool
Luv it, awesome! . . I love Science man, thanx for the explanation of your findings Bro . . 😎
Lol I was thinking about that from almost a decade thanks man
I always wondered this
Only place I’ve ever heard ‘ion thrusters’ pi’s in Thunderbirds are Go which was cool
Now I see his and am super happy they’re a real concept in physics
The only guy who can make shorts that are not shorts, but still shorts
Dude just explained advanced space travel
Very very very interesting...
Turns out all you need to navigate space is electricity and lots of Taco Bell.
This video it's not short but it's good
Hi! I just want to know what is the power source. I mean in the video of the plains, the thing that has the wound, thanks.
I would like to make a invention with this guy -!! Could be the next best thing
Would it work on the negative electrode? Or does it only work on the positive end?
@Saitama on the positive end it rips electrons off the gas. On the negative end, would it give electrons?
@Saitama I did. He only did it with the positive electrode. It rips electrons off gas atoms. Then it repels and creates thrust. Would it work on the negative end? Would it “give” electrons and generate the same thrust?
In a enclosed area the wind would just hit one side and provide the single direction thrust box.
So what is the difference between ejecting gas out of a nozzle and ion thrust what is the power difference
Not really about power, in space you need to carry your own propellant. Because it's limited, it's preferable to get as much "go" out of your propellant as you can, and that's what ion thrusters do by accelerating their propellant to high speeds using electric fields.
You'll already be getting thrust from ejecting the gasses out (like that of a nozzle), but if you want to make the most out of your stored propellant, you'd want ion propulsion on top of that ejection thrust. In essence both at the same time.
Ion thrusters are far less effective than conventional rockets. Thus, the TIE Fighter (Twin Ion Engine) will remain only in Hollywood movies.
The power difference is over 9000
In space there are almost no so if you have a thruster then u can move it
That's what i know about space i guess
Saving for future science fair idea
Very interesting
Greatest inventors where either in a farm working with no degree, or a future nerd in a garage. Always.
Somebody give this guy a trophy
OMG.... if you stuck in the middle you become the Interstellar meme
that is siiick
Wow these is so epic.
Keep it up
Have you tried a tradition jet in the vacuum?
Half the fual is atmospheric oxygen...
Bread 👍
More bread 🍞👍
Bread 👍
Is the total thrust gonna be bigger than directly pushing the air on the space craft out?
Yes. Since the force on the spacecraft is equal and opposite to the force on the exhaust, anything you do to imbue the gas with more backwards acceleration will increase the forwards acceleration on the spacecraft.
I wonder if that could be used in an automotive exhaust system to improve flow?
Nice 👍
Question: IF we wanted to create an engine/drive for a spacecraft, would the following theory work?
Mimic how the earth creates its own magnetic field and travels/falls through space.
Ex, Bob Lazar described a small reactor in what he thought to be the engine level of the craft he worked on, he also said that the "fuel" was element 115.
My theory is this... Fision is what starts to take place, then as the material collapses on itsself, you begin to push the spent 115 into a terrific spin (much like the metal in the earth's core that spins), This will create a magnetic field around the craft aka a bubble that pushes antimatter away from the front of the craft, and therfore "falling" in which ever direction the craft leans, UP or down is simply flipping either the drive itsself or the core within the reactor and making the bubble bounce up or down.
What do you think? I'm pretty sure much arter people than me, figured this out long ago. But it's just something I thought about, and you're a smart guy, so I thought I would ask.
Would you like a list of everything wrong with that? Just for starters, magnetism has exactly nothing to do with the Earth’s motion through space. Element 115 has a half-life of less than a second and has only ever been observed in the lab. And where the heck are you expecting to get antimatter from?
@@eroraf8637 idk, I just went to public school. I just had an idea or a theory, and you want to come in a tear it down. It's all good. That's why I started it with "Question" and "IF", because idk. But you go ahead and be an ass. Enjoy your day.
I can admit my ignorance. If your going to go at someone, make sure you understand if it's a question or a statement. Clearly, I was asking a question.
Unfortunately, element 115 (Moscovium) does not naturally occur and is so radioactive it would decay into element 113 (Nihonium, just as radioactive) and element 2 (Helium) pretty much immediately after creation. A massive particle accelerator and huge amounts of energy would be needed to create even a few atoms of it and any significant amount would instantly turn into superheated, very radioactive plasma. Also, space is a vacuum that does not contain much of any kind of matter, especially no antimatter. Earths orbit does also not have anything to do with either magnetism, antimatter or element 115.
@@janniswess2813 and you know this, how?
I ask, because, we still don't know what dark matter really is and the affects it has on the known elements and physics as we know it. Have you conducted experiments in space? Have you been there? Because if you have, that would be very interesting.
You THINK you know, but you truly don't. We as a human race are so arrogant in our assumptions. We think the science and especially physics that we "know" is all there is, however just about every year or so we discover how wrong or right we are. I understand why you would refute my theory, but I think I will be proven correct in the very near future. Or, I am just a public school knucklehead with a crazy theory I put out there so folks like you can tell me how wrong I am. Either way, I'm good with it.
@@timharl3642 why dont you prove your theory by yourself
ION THRUSTERS LETS GOOOOOOO
How much force can it create?
Bro this so cool 🤪😍
Bro you are the only person who can practically explain plasma repulsor
Do it
Are you telling me that "Outlaw Star" was onto something???
I hope we can ride on a spacecraft on the upcoming years. “Mass effect games”
My boi always big brain time
How did you doit I want to try what do I do to make it spin like you did it was creating cool color electric
awesomeeeeee
Going to need a layman's version from scratch
That’s all I gotta do…bring my own gas. Thanks man, I’ve been wanting to do this! 😯
Let us know when you’re close to making warp speed happen. 😉
You said air craft without air it’ll just be a craft in space
Could you make a mini rc plane with this?
No. Although ion thrusters are very efficient, they have very low thrust-to-weight ratios.
I think they like xenon for ion thrusters because it likes to ionize and is rather heavy for a gas atom. xenon is also an amazing psychoactive drug with similar effects to nitrous oxide but far more potent, chemically it is totally safe for the brain, it's just a by-chance effect that it fits in a particular anesthetic receptor. It is very expensive on the consumer level but I doubt its price is much of a concern in NASA projects when they are considering ion thrusters.
are ion thrusters in space more efficient than regular thrusters they use today?
This is how we could get to other solar systems.
If you can put that model with the scale planes in a vacuum and achieve propulsion that would be more than enough for me to be convinced of propulsion in space.
My man might have a opportunity to go work at nasa, but he instead chose to do scientific and fun videos for us
👨🏻🔬🥸
Being this man would be fun, i would sell away all my organs to do this
Why arent u my science teacher yet?
dope
Is this a reupload
He love vacuum
I thought it was one of those videos where they say "no, it isn't possible," but apparently there is a solution this time
What does the ionised gas push off in space tho?
So does an Ion thruster have "fuel" in the form of gas(presumably a very common and compressible gas?)?
That's correct, ion thrusters do have "fuel." Xenon is not very common, but it has a high molecular weight, is non-reactive and has a high vapourisation temperature so it's easier to store as a liquid.
They use noble gases to prevent any side reactions and Xenon is used because of it's low ionization energy which allows you to actually propel the gas with electricity.
If water touches a surface of water; the surface is wet. But water is always touching a surface of other h2o particles, so is water wet is my question?
Please respond
Cute little No Mans Sky ships
👏
Congratulations!!! You discovered impulse drive
Thanks I understood (smile in pain)
add a remote controled device to discharge air into the vacuum chamber
Nobody crams more knowledge that you'll actually take with you in a couple of minutes than this guy. So in space you would basically have to put a bubble with air in it around the electrode, and then the electrode would push the air which pushes the bubble which is attached to the spacecraft? Awesomesauce.
no, the air has to leave the bubble
Are those little jets the same model as a ship from No Man's Sky? They look really familiar.
“You need to bring the gas with you”
And here I thought ionic thrusters were the thing that solved this problem.
All you need to do is understand the power of the spiral.
Do a collab with NileRed.
Space Rocket's ion thrusters rely on another ion source than the atmospheric air, usually xenon. The ammount of thrust they produce makes them useless in an atmosphere though, as they are right now...
You really like your vaccum Chamber XD
Who said science was not cool!
Pause your screen at 0:08 and blow on your screen when you unpause it
Why weren't you the Science Teacher in my school?
Is it economical to use an ion thruster? I'm guessing not
I wonder how much energy it generates than hydrogen to travel
Years of NASA research and multi-billion dollars under two minutes.
The only true competition to Elon musk
is that an IUD
We should make an ion engine powered spacecraft that's solar powered. It could have two large solar panels on the sides so it's head on silhouette looks like and H. It'll have twin ion engines (TIE) and to forward facing guns. We can call it the TIE fighter.
This could be used for 1g constant acceleration and allow a spacecraft to approach the speed of light, traveling the edge of the known universe in 50 years (its pilot would age backwards).
No...? That's not how that works
@@prich0382 then how?
You can't lol. It takes an infinite amount of energy to reach the speed of light, so you'd need an infinite amount of fuel which is an infinite amount of mass. Therefore it can't happen.
@@prich0382 wrong, I didn't say at speed of light, I said *approaching*, research 1g warp drives, it's not science fiction.
Ion engines produce an incredibly weak thrust. However they're very efficient. You might be able to sustain
0.00000001G for years. But humanity is a long way from sustained 1G, or even 0.1G .
The rocket equation is an ugly
MFer. Hopefully we won't have to wait 300 years for our Epstein to be born.
And time dilation doesn't make you age backwards. It makes time run slower compared to people traveling slower than you. But time always moves forward, never backward.
Every guy that I have watched every science guy that is all sound similar
Wow