The pdf says: the total energy of the 192 beams is 1.8MJ.
I'm guessing this is the output power carried by the light. Anyone know how much energy went into producing the laser beams?
It's not the power out there. It's the transport that is, well, tricky. You basically have two options:
- low orbit for the energy station. This means you r station zooms by at mach 25. Aiming your death ray/energy beam is a little tricky then.
- geostationary orbit. Your energy station is an absurd 36000 km away. Good luck focussing and aiming then.
Oh, wait, there's also the fact that nobody has ever, ever transmitted reasonable amount (like, within 10 orders of magnitude of this endeavour) of power to a receiver.
I am sure it is also a real piece of cake to boost that 1 million tons of equipment into orbit needed for the job. Especially when the US does not have a normal space-faring capability anymore.
No, just opportunities. No mad dreams at all. Where can I invest? Surely this is not a scam??
OMG. Not again. Every some x weeks this topic pops up again. Like energy beams. Like launching satellites with lasers. Like 150$ laptops. Like energy devices with magnets. Like hydrogen as a source of energy. Why does anyone put money in these things???
Where would you put your transmitter? If it is in low earth orbit, it would help efficiency, but aiming at a target moving at Mach 24 seems hard. If you are at geo-stationary orbit, aiming is easier but aiming is REALLY hard not to mention beam focussing. Have you heard opposition to GSM cell phone 'radiation'? Here's something that those people will also not be happy about. There is a good reason why we don't have wireless power, you know.
I was sooooo hoping that I would never see this type of article again. Because everybody comes up with the same impossible answers: use microwave beams to beam energy to earth, or better still: use mirrors to beam light to earth.
microwave beams: bad idea. how large do these people think the receiver will be? How tight can you focus a beam? how about missing your (receiving) target? (sorry for vaporising your city....) etc etc.
light beams:bad idea. how large do these people think the receiver will be? How tight can you focus a beam? how about missing your (receiving) target? (sorry for vaporising your city....) etc etc.
Slashdot Mirror
The pdf says: the total energy of the 192 beams is 1.8MJ. I'm guessing this is the output power carried by the light. Anyone know how much energy went into producing the laser beams?
It's not the power out there. It's the transport that is, well, tricky. You basically have two options: - low orbit for the energy station. This means you r station zooms by at mach 25. Aiming your death ray/energy beam is a little tricky then. - geostationary orbit. Your energy station is an absurd 36000 km away. Good luck focussing and aiming then. Oh, wait, there's also the fact that nobody has ever, ever transmitted reasonable amount (like, within 10 orders of magnitude of this endeavour) of power to a receiver. I am sure it is also a real piece of cake to boost that 1 million tons of equipment into orbit needed for the job. Especially when the US does not have a normal space-faring capability anymore. No, just opportunities. No mad dreams at all. Where can I invest? Surely this is not a scam??
OMG. Not again. Every some x weeks this topic pops up again. Like energy beams. Like launching satellites with lasers. Like 150$ laptops. Like energy devices with magnets. Like hydrogen as a source of energy. Why does anyone put money in these things???
Where would you put your transmitter? If it is in low earth orbit, it would help efficiency, but aiming at a target moving at Mach 24 seems hard. If you are at geo-stationary orbit, aiming is easier but aiming is REALLY hard not to mention beam focussing.
Have you heard opposition to GSM cell phone 'radiation'? Here's something that those people will also not be happy about.
There is a good reason why we don't have wireless power, you know.
I was sooooo hoping that I would never see this type of article again. Because everybody comes up with the same impossible answers: use microwave beams to beam energy to earth, or better still: use mirrors to beam light to earth. microwave beams: bad idea. how large do these people think the receiver will be? How tight can you focus a beam? how about missing your (receiving) target? (sorry for vaporising your city....) etc etc. light beams:bad idea. how large do these people think the receiver will be? How tight can you focus a beam? how about missing your (receiving) target? (sorry for vaporising your city....) etc etc.