Page 1 of 1

Most of $3 billion from a "space enthusiast" for s

Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 9:32 pm
by JoeStrout
According to this news story a space enthusiast has provided "most of the $3 billion needed to build the [space] hotel" to Spanish company Galactic Suite.

If somebody with that kind of money is that serious about space development, somebody should point out to him how a polywell reactor, as a rocket engine, could literally open up the whole solar system for development, like no other technology could do. Surely he (or she) would be happy to drop $5M to $10M — a pittance in comparison to this hotel effort — to give the polywell a fair chance?

The news article does not name this rich backer, however. So here's a challenge to the group: put on your detective hats and find out who that is. With that information, we can then talk about how and whether we could move forward in gaining their support for polywell research.

Re: Most of $3 billion from a "space enthusiast" f

Posted: Sat Aug 11, 2007 6:43 am
by MSimon
JoeStrout wrote:According to this news story a space enthusiast has provided "most of the $3 billion needed to build the [space] hotel" to Spanish company Galactic Suite.

If somebody with that kind of money is that serious about space development, somebody should point out to him how a polywell reactor, as a rocket engine, could literally open up the whole solar system for development, like no other technology could do. Surely he (or she) would be happy to drop $5M to $10M — a pittance in comparison to this hotel effort — to give the polywell a fair chance?

The news article does not name this rich backer, however. So here's a challenge to the group: put on your detective hats and find out who that is. With that information, we can then talk about how and whether we could move forward in gaining their support for polywell research.
It would be good to mention the prospects for cheap space transportation the Polywell could provide.

Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 9:09 am
by Zixinus
I think the rocket engine specification or even power alpha of the reactor would make the rocket engineers wet their pants in joy.

Re: Most of $3 billion from a "space enthusiast" f

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 11:58 pm
by ANTIcarrot
JoeStrout wrote:If somebody with that kind of money is that serious about space development, somebody should point out to him how a polywell reactor, as a rocket engine, could literally open up the whole solar system for development, like no other technology could do.
Except that there are two minor problems with that statement:

1) It's probably not true; since solar-sail, solar-ion, fission ion, nuclear pulse, fission thermal, mass drivers, and simple chemical rockets can also do the job. Even assuming that it has the highest Isp that might not be the prize taker, because many other considerations would also be a factor.

2) It completely ignores the problem of getting into orbit. That's going to be chemical based for a very long time. As I understand it, polywell is not going to solve that any time soon. Without a first step, any kind of second step is worthless.

Re: Most of $3 billion from a "space enthusiast" f

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:15 am
by JoeStrout
ANTIcarrot wrote:
JoeStrout wrote:If somebody with that kind of money is that serious about space development, somebody should point out to him how a polywell reactor, as a rocket engine, could literally open up the whole solar system for development, like no other technology could do.
Except that there are two minor problems with that statement:

1) It's probably not true; since solar-sail, solar-ion, fission ion, nuclear pulse, fission thermal, mass drivers, and simple chemical rockets can also do the job.
No, not by orders of magnitude. According to Jim Benson: "to the Moon in hours, to Mars in days, anywhere in the solar system in weeks." Nothing else even comes close.
ANTIcarrot wrote:Even assuming that it has the highest Isp that might not be the prize taker, because many other considerations would also be a factor.
Right, there's always a trade-off between thrust and Isp. A polywell engine, IIRC, can beat existing technology by a factor of 1000 for either one (take your pick, but not both at once, but of course you can also balance it anywhere in between).
ANTIcarrot wrote:2) It completely ignores the problem of getting into orbit. That's going to be chemical based for a very long time. As I understand it, polywell is not going to solve that any time soon.
Why do you say that? I'd expect a polywell rocket to get you into orbit very handily — you'd use the high-thrust, low-Isp configuration for that. Should beat chemical rockets by (again) orders of magnitude, and be completely reusable to boot.

Maybe we should continue this in the Implications forum...

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 7:44 am
by Nanos
I've not found out anything yet, the few people I've spoken to about it reckon its a hoax, in that the wealthy backer does not really exist.

Much like how Estate Agents tell you there is someone else interested in buying the house your looking at to buy to egg you on to spending your money sooner rather than later.

Re: Most of $3 billion from a "space enthusiast" f

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 10:37 am
by ANTIcarrot
JoeStrout wrote:Maybe we should continue this in the Implications forum...
This has gone beyond funding hasn't it? As you wish, reply posted here.