"The Starflight Handbook," Eugene Mallove, Gregory Matloff.
Unless you invent new physics, there are two fundamental physical limits to going anywhere interestiing in a useful length of time:
1) Energy. The most efficient source of energy (total output/shipping mass) we have is a fission reactor. Chemical prpoulsion is a bad joke. If you want high energy density you pay for it in radiation shielding mass. A fission reactor is no way near enough energy in total to go anywhere interesting in a useful interval. External energy like solar cells crap out by Mars' orbit - sunshine varies as 1/r^2.
2) Reaction mass. Momentum is conserved. If you want to go this-a-way you have to toss something out that-a-way. Note that p=mv and E=(mv^2)/2. For a given amount of energy you want to eject the most massive lump at the lowest velocity - which doesn't get you anywhere fast. All on-board propulsion is therefore crapola in the Big Picture. If you want to travel you must do it inefficiently vs. energy input. That is what the rulebook says, and nobody has a different rulebook.
The only practical external propulsion is bouncing off a planetary gravity well - which all deep space NASA probes have exploited to the max. Pretty much the best you can do is the Voyagers, whcih obviously isn't very good compared to the size of the problem. We are stuck in the mud good and hard.
This is why Uncle Al proposes a modest calculated variation of an existing series of experiments to see if the rulebook can be finessed,
the last best hope. If you know some physics and can handle Acrobat *.pfd,
the short form. Somebody should look.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.htm
(Do something naughty to physics)
----------------
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm
Your Friendly Neighborhood Administrator
