krpalmer: (Default)
[personal profile] krpalmer
I started reading the August issue of Scientific American today, and got to an article about a NASA program that funds “research that would be ‘huge if true.’” The article focused on some scientists who had been given a grant to investigate “the Mach effect,” playing with inertia to create a push in one direction, with the intimation enough research and development could turn this into a full-blown spaceship drive. A part of me does want to be cautious about gee-whizzery, and going back to the article I did note cautions from other scientists. At the same time, though, I was thinking of a contraption plugged heavily in Astounding Science Fiction around when its editor was getting a reputation for promoting pathological science, which was supposed to turn rotational motion into a steady linear push but seemed in the end to only work when it was sitting on a tabletop. The thought of an “I told you so!” or two wasn’t encouraging in this case. As I thought about that, though, I started thinking that “inertia” being involved reminded me of E.E. “Doc” Smith’s Lensman novels, where the “inertialess drive” neatly sidestepped all the complications of relativity, limiting your super-streamlined starship’s top velocity only by friction with the interstellar media. For all the looking back at science fiction, though, I could contemplate the NASA program is looking forward right when we’re all looking back to Apollo 11.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

August 2025

S M T W T F S
     1 2
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Aug. 8th, 2025 04:37 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios