Hey guys

Hey guys,

Voyager One firing it's thrusters back up made me do a little research into it's active/disabled systems. They disabled many of the Voyager systems to save power/energy.

Fun Fact: The camera system on the Voyagers may still be functional, just disabled.

So I started to think, is there any way we can recharge the energy storage?

Good News! : There 'might' be a way!

So, who has some knowledge in RHU/Isotopic generator systems?
This is a question of hypothetics, so I am entertaining more advanced technology than we may currently have... but it is technology that is within our grasp.

In theory, I postulate that it should be possible to put energy BACK into the RHU's that are available on the Voyagers. Putting energy back into the RTG may be off the table, due to the way in which it was designed, but the RHU's... Those, those are a little more receptive to this idea.

What if we shoot a laser at the RHU's ?
All we have to do, is put enough energy in the RHU shell insulators, to reverse the reaction and force energy back into the reactive isotope contained within the RHU's.

So, the challenges:

#1 How do we hit the RHU with a laser, but avoid hitting anything else? (A problem of target tracking at exceptional distances, but not a problem for a directed laser, in general. If Boeing can hit a car hood from 30,000 feet in the air, maybe extrapolating that outside of atmosphere is feasible? )

#2 Is it possible to heat/provide energy to the RHU insulator shell, at a high enough rate to put energy back into the isotope, without destroying the RHU? (Someone with nuclear or heavy physics/chemistry knowledge may be able to do the math on this. I personally have not, but it should come down to tolerance levels, specific heat, and reaction activation energy needs. Do we stay under tolerance in the conditions necessary to force this reaction?) If not... Do we stay under tolerance to achieve a similar goal, under any conditions?

Attached: rhu.gif (570x724, 110K)

Other urls found in this thread:

popsci.com/researchers-japan-fired-worlds-most-powerful-laser
youtube.com/watch?v=HbuF_t3ld3A
ekkehard-friebe.de/Essen-L.htm
youtube.com/watch?v=noaGNuQCW8A
youtu.be/0ZQ50ZXwPyw?t=20
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1561_celestial_phenomenon_over_Nuremberg
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

I understand this type of discussion isn't the norm for Jow Forums

But the reason I decided ask here, is I respect the knowledge pool available on this board.
Don't be modest, I know there are some legitimate geniuses here. You post from time to time.

there is no way you can fire a laser that far away with sufficient accuracy and energy


space isn't complete vacuum

There are no "reactive isotopes" in these. They're radioactive isotopes. They're there to prevent the spacecraft from freezing by giving off heat from radioactive decay, and don't produce any electricity. There is no way to reverse the decay process, you would need to fuse the atoms back together.

Yes, I am referring to forcing fusion with a laser providing the catalytic energy.

I personally can not, which is why I opened my idea statement with the fact that it may not yet be possible.
However, sufficient energy lasers have been produced and utilized in laboratory settings, at this time. (I believe Japan currently holds the record for laser max energy, and it was beyond sufficient for this task.)

>Yes, I am referring to forcing fusion with a laser providing the catalytic energy.
Oh, completely impossible then. The energy necessary to cause fusion using lasers in the optimal isotope of the optimal element suspended in a carefully engineered vessel are very high, at least dozens of kilowatts at the target.
Assuming you could focus and aim a beam so precisely that you hit just the RHU, that the RHU was exposed to the outside of the craft (it probably isn't, since in that case you'd just be wasting heat to space by radiative transfer) and that there was no dissipation or distortion of the beam in the interplanetary medium, you'd just blow the whole thing up in a fiery mess probably before any kind of fusion even began to occur.

If the RHU was the limiting factor to the lifetime of the spacecraft (it isn't) you'd be better off just heating the whole thing with the laser to the required operating temperature.

What kind of cellphone is this?

A far better idea.

Thank you.

This is why I came here.

Also another thing which actually could actually extend the lifetime would be to use laser cooling on the radiator of the RTG, increasing the temperature difference and generating more electricity.

I never thought about offsetting losses from the RTG. That sounds feasible.

Good point again, chap. I hope you work at JPL. If you don't, and you'd like to, I'd recommend a life change.

>lmao let's just throw some laser beams at recharge that shit up fampai ###yolo!!
user you will need something bigger than the kind of laser used by the mary sue main characters in japanese mecha cartoons.

OP Here:

popsci.com/researchers-japan-fired-worlds-most-powerful-laser

youtube.com/watch?v=HbuF_t3ld3A

Will one of those work?

Let me get my checkbook.

Go to sci/math with this shit

So this is my current model, based on the discussion.

Is this weird? Will the idea have further issues?

Attached: themodel.png (860x583, 30K)

It's like we're really doing your thesis for you

17 Light Hours To Voyager

They are some of the fastest velocity objects we have ever constructed.

Does anyone have any better ideas for giving them a little more "Bee Sting" in their Muhammad Ali?

Thesis?

This is what I'm doing instead of videogames. Lol, school.

I'm a dropout. School kept getting in the way of my education.

Ill give you the benefit of doubt and believe it

Seems possible, doubt anyone would be interested.
Good job either way, it's a cool idea.

My pursuits are somewhat varied, but my greatest fascination is the mystery of 'currently' unexplained macro-scale phenomena we witness in the observable universe.

I can't do much in terms of resources, but luckily I have a near perfect copy of the greatest tool any genius ever had at their disposal.

if you want to have your mind fucked look up essen's criticism of special relativity
ekkehard-friebe.de/Essen-L.htm

> firing it is thrusters

Fuck, are you useless

>ekkehard-friebe.de/Essen-L.htm
>The instrument was turned through a right angle so that, if one of the arms was initially parallel to earth's motion, it became at right angles to this direction. It was expected that there would be a movement of the fringes, from which the velocity of the earth could be calculated, but no change at all was observed.

Ok, that was with much less precise equipment than modern labs.

Have we done this again??? Recently???

That finding sounds suspicious, though I'm not done reading. You got me. I don't usually read criticism of Relativity, given how nicely it explains so much... But any good scientist doesn't believe statements, they believe data.

If the data exists, you have my ear, my eyes, and my attention.

>asking questions for sci on g, the board for shilling with cherry-picked benchmarks

Attached: 1497497476444.png (485x443, 32K)

As OP, I understand your reply.

Most understand my wording as a layman explanation for what actually occurred. I know that my explanation isn't a perfect fit, but for the sake of saving my time typing for thinking, I took the abbreviated route, while incorrect, would be properly interpreted by most.

(I believe there is a paper about math code, which illustrates similar ideology? Pretty sure that was an MIT publication regarding the fact that a message can be modified or scrambled, but still have a finite number of expected outputs, such that, any interpreter expecting those outputs, could interpret the actual message correctly.)

I'll be happy to point you in the direction of the concept I am referring to, if you like.

I am certain I got my point across to most, if you are my free radical outlier, I apologize for the inconvenience. I wasn't expecting you.

OP here,

I thought Jow Forums was the board for DIY with wood screws and how to properly cook pork shoulders using a stove made from an Antec 900 case with SLI overclocked GTX 480's inside.

Am I incorrect? Or is this the right place?

experimentally relativity seems to hold up just fine, but it's hard to find an explanation to how the universe knows which body is actually accelerating in the twin paradox. that made me see how much of a complex subject relativity actually is to have a complete understanding of the subject. apparently special relativity is not enough to explain it away and you need to invoke general relativity
youtube.com/watch?v=noaGNuQCW8A
my point is not that relativity is wrong, but more of a "this shit's hard to wrap my head around"

Issue of spatial density overlooked. Assumption bases on uniform manifold gradient trailings ignore case special nonbaryionic
Pending incorporation, only theory present within framework concept.

I thought that science's current idea is that "Higgs Fields" are independent of relativity, thus allowing for a differentiation of the two bodies, that dictates the difference between the body that is technically accelerating versus the body that is not?

AKA, from an absolute space reference, the value of effect from a local Higg's Field for each object is unique, allowing for an identification of either, with a specific absolute for their position relative to the Higg's Fields?

If this interpretation is disproven or a misinterpration of Higg's Fields, please explain it to me. I'd like your take on it. You seem to have a good grasp of it. (Not sarcasm)
youtu.be/0ZQ50ZXwPyw?t=20

I would like to know.

I mean, I kind of thought that, since I was 5 years old.

Oh, interesting, I didn't know that. Honestly I've no idea

What the fuck are you smoking? Putting enough energy into to reheat the RHUs to an appreciable amount would probably melt them. The temperature of the outside of the RTG would need to be hotter than the inside. Hot junction is supposed to be around 1200 K. That's hotter than the melting point of aluminum.

Ain't no way in hell you can heat up just the RTG. Even getting laser power over that huge distance would require a HUGE lens. Look up what the diffraction limit is.

I mean, I know just enough about lasers to ask a dumb question here.
Is it even possible to align the photons so well that they all travel in the direction with enough tolerance to actually hit the target?

Fuckhead ... You confused "its" with "it's", that's what I meant. Did I get MY point across to YOU this time??

The problem with this physics stuff is that there is no intermediate level material to understand all this.
It's either one page pop level shit that explains the concepts at a very superficial and incorrect level or college courses that require me to do math for hours and hours.

My apologies.

That error was not in my post box when I originally posted it.

I haven't done the math, but I'm willing to bet that the lens required for a laser of that accuracy would be about the diameter of our planet.

The model shows direct laser to component. The model is not implying the laser target is the RHU.

Either way, we shoot a laser with the "going to melt/blow everything up" energy...

And we target an area of space that is NEAR the Voyager, but not the Voyager itself.

We do the math on energy transfer deficiency, and it's resultant necessary distance.

After that, the "necessary distance" will be the distance the laser can be fired close to the Voyager, but with only enough energy from the laser, dispersing to destroy an RHU shield, without damaging it directly.

If the actual intensity is an issue, then we do it in such a way that we make sure the other parts do not exceed fault tolerance.

Given that the vacuum of space is a terrible medium/natural insulator for heat transfer, in theory, you could keep increasing the energy on your target RHU shell, while pulsing it, to not exceed the energy buildup in the other components.

AKA A method to destroy ONE RHU shield.

Then we could shoot the laser directly onto the isotope. Given that RHU's actually feed into thermocouplers, and aren't directly wired to the components, I can guarantee you that this will work. The ultimate goal with an RHU heatup, is to put energy into that thermocoupler system.

Is there still a reason the idea is flawed?

Give it back Jamal

Why would we even want to spend so much effort reviving it? It's ancient 70's tech floating in deep space. It's already completed it's mission and then some. Let it die.

There's a number of probes much nearer to Earth that would be much more practical to revive. In some cases they were just abandoned. The equipment to communicate with them was just thrown away. And some amateurs found the documentation and took control of it.

>And some amateurs found the documentation and took control of it.
you can't talk with a deep space probe without huge antennas, so no

They did it when it orbitted near Earth, not really deep space.

link? unless you're talking about the ones who got the probe officially handed off to them by nasa and got lent a radiotelescope to talk to it

RHUs get their power through radioactive decay. You can't reverse this with thermal input.

Yeah, we got that already.

Sorry you missed it. Thanks for your answer though.

Name a few of these unexplained phenomena

That Jow Forums is dead, my dude. This is probably one of the fucking dumbest non-video games interest boards on the site nowadays.

Boote Void,
Dark Matter,
Dark Energy,
Particle-Wave Duality,
Multi-Verse Level Classification vs Observable Universe,
Relational Affects With Respect To Light, Gravity, and Fundamental Observations,
"M" Theory and the functionality of layered dimension scaling, relative to the branes of fundamental aspects in the observable universe,
The possibility that the 1561 Nuremberg event, was Earth passing through a deteriorated Dyson construct. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1561_celestial_phenomenon_over_Nuremberg
The shapes and behavior described are similar to what I would expect of a large technological construct. Grids would/should break up into rods/crosses, etc... That may even be a possible link to our interstellar rock last year. It was dark red. The Nuremberg 1561 event also had dark red/black/blood red rods,
Fast Radio Burst Sources,
Things like that.