Re: Na + H2O2 (50%) -> H2?

From: Dan Bloomquist (EXTRApublic20_at_lakeweb.com)
Date: 07/26/04 

Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 14:39:15 GMT

David Harper wrote:
> Dan Bloomquist <EXTRApublic20@lakeweb.com> wrote in message news:<4103F281.8090806@lakeweb.com>...
>
> Fine, further discussion of hydrogen as a fuel won't get us anywhere.
> However, I can't let the following comments slide.

Would you agree we should not put our hopes for energy solutions into
hydrogen?

>>David Harper wrote:
>>
>>>So you're stating that super/hypersonic flight was a "known physics"
>>>in 1950? Maybe you should re-read the above quote:
>>>
>>>"The U.S. rocket program hit a wall in the late 1940's due to a lack
>>>of understanding of supersonic physics."
>>
>>You seem to be hanging your hopes for hydrogen on this journalist's
>>words.
>
> If you'd read the article, you'd realize he wasn't a journalist, but a
> *professor* in physics.

I did not see the name of an author at the beginning or end of the
article. So, I don't know why I should accept the quote blindly.

>
> Here is the timeline supersonic science:
>
>>http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4219/Chapter3.html
>>
>>Notice that the fine tuning of Mach's work was done in the 30s. Now date
>>Mach...
>
>
> This is another outlandish statement. If Mach's work had been "fine
> tuned" in the 30's, the following would not have happened (by the way,
> this is from the source *YOU* cited):
>
> "The general aeronautics community was suddenly awakened to the
> realities of the unknown flight regime in November 1941, when Lockheed
> test pilot Ralph Virden could not pull the new, high-performance P-38
> out of a high-speed dive, and crashed."
>
> After this incident:
> "Indeed, it was time for real airplanes to be used to probe the
> mysteries of the unknown transonic gap. It was time for the high-speed
> research airplane to become a reality."
>
> (again, from your own source)
>
> Mach did some groundbreaking work, but showing shock waves on a bullet
> isn't all the info NASA needed on HYPERsonic flow to go to the moon.
>
> From *YOUR OWN* article:
>
> "John Stack nicely summarized the situation in 1938:
>
> The development of the knowledge of compressible-flow phenomena,
> particularly as related to aeronautical applications, has been
> attended by considerable difficulty. The complicated nature of the
> phenomena has resulted in little theoretical progress, and, in
> general, recourse to experiment has been necessary. Until recently the
> most important experimental results have been obtained in connection
> with the science of ballistics, but this information has been of
> little value in aeronautical problems because the range of speeds for
> which most ballistic experiments have been made extends from the speed
> of sound upward; whereas the important region in aeronautics at the
> present time extends from the speed of sound downward."
>
> Also (from your own article):
>
> "In order to learn about the aerodynamics of transonic flight, the
> only recourse appeared to be a real airplane that would fly in that
> regime."
>
>
>>If you are going to make this claim, please cite the unknown physics of
>>going to the moon in 1950.
>
>
> See above. I think your article just did for me.

The Bell X-1 broke the 'sound barrier' in 1947 and it wasn't an
accident. It was not done with an unknown science.

So, back to the point. In 1950 it was understood that a rocket could get
a man to the moon. It was understood that there was no physical
limitation to stand in the way. They knew perfectly well it was only a
mater of developing the technology.

Hydrogen has physical limitations. It is not a matter of developing some
technology to make it a viable energy vector.

>
> Dave

Best, Dan. 

-- 
http://lakeweb.net
http://ReserveAnalyst.com
No EXTRA stuff for email.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Na + H2O2 (50%) -> H2?
    ... > realities of the unknown flight regime in November 1941, ... > little value in aeronautical problems because the range of speeds for ... whereas the important region in aeronautics at the ... >>If you are going to make this claim, please cite the unknown physics of ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: Na + H2O2 (50%) -> H2?
    ... > realities of the unknown flight regime in November 1941, ... > little value in aeronautical problems because the range of speeds for ... whereas the important region in aeronautics at the ... >>If you are going to make this claim, please cite the unknown physics of ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Re: Na + H2O2 (50%) -> H2?
    ... > realities of the unknown flight regime in November 1941, ... it was time for real airplanes to be used to probe the ... > little value in aeronautical problems because the range of speeds for ... whereas the important region in aeronautics at the ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: Na + H2O2 (50%) -> H2?
    ... > realities of the unknown flight regime in November 1941, ... it was time for real airplanes to be used to probe the ... > little value in aeronautical problems because the range of speeds for ... whereas the important region in aeronautics at the ...
    (sci.electronics.repair)
  • Re: Na + H2O2 (50%) -> H2?
    ... > realities of the unknown flight regime in November 1941, ... it was time for real airplanes to be used to probe the ... > little value in aeronautical problems because the range of speeds for ... whereas the important region in aeronautics at the ...
    (sci.energy)