Comments

Time: you haven't made any spelling mistakes, not to mention grammer mistakes, in this forum? Your statement: "BSTUR1 your something else" Don't you know the difference between your (possessive) and you're (contraction of you are?) Let me explain, in this case you should be using you're, as in "BSTUR1 you are something else". No wonder you don't recognize or care about his other mistakes... If he has 3 engineering degrees, then how come he did not know that "infrared" was not listed correctly in his abstract until I pointed it out? Tell me that. You want to talk about the topic... let me start with some other problems that he needs to overcome: like expecting Nlight to create the 80% efficient laser for his beaming technology, the abstract was from 5 years ago, and he says it was being developed- where is it (there is no link to the newspaper article)? Even if they do develop the 80% efficient laser, turning that device into a system that can pump megawatts of energy through it for extended periods of time would take much further R&D. Expecting an engineer to turn the beam off when a plane would be flying through it? A plane may cross the beam in 2-10 seconds, and there is going to be a warning that requires human intervention to shut the beam off? What do you do with the mega amounts of electricity for those 2-10 seconds, you can't just turn a switch off, count to 10, and turn it on again. If it were even possible, of course it would have to be an automated system, he should not even have mentioned engineer interaction. A human in that loop would be a big mistake. He thinks that 4 positioning lasers from the ground station and 4 Halls Effect thrusters are going to be good enough to position the satellite absolutely motionless in comparison with the uplink and downlink sites? It will probably need a system akin to that which stabilizes and aims the Hubble. Including double or triple redundancy of the systems, gyroscopes and thrusters. Doesn't even mention the enormity of developing the software to run the systems, or will it run "Windows XP For Space"? (watch out for the Blue Screen of Death-ray...). And do you aim the whole satellite with a fixed mirror as he states, or would the mirror be on a gimbal system? Probably the latter to allow for fine tuning in the aiming of the beam... in 2004 he had expected to get that satellite flying within a few years... when the satellite should be the last phase of the project, after creating the beaming and the monochromic solar cell technologies and extensive testing on the ground, mountain tops, and probably from high altitude ballons, long before ever launching any prototype satellite. Both technologies are going to take probably a decade to develop and perfect before you would build a parabolic reflector that can work in space and with the energy beam spectrum that gets developed. If it was that "easy" to make the beaming and solar cell technologies in his required 80% efficiencies, they would already exist.

Sorry timemachine, I did read it and couldn't understand what inferred spectrum or inferred light energy meant. Didn't you realize that it was incorrect? Or did you think that there was something actually called "inferred energy" in the spectrum? Your presentations have to be perfect if you are trying to convince people to invest billions of dollars to develop your ideas. Or where you going to invest in it??? If you don't correctly identify the part of the electro-magnetic spectrum that you are planning to use to create your power transferance beam, how could anyone believe that you could do it? His website and abstract had childish mistakes, like he had copied and pasted paragraphs from other sources and then ran spell check (that's probably what turned infrared into inferred). I figured that he was some high school kid who saw the episode of Star Trek where they bounced a phaser of a star's coronashere to destroy their enemy and turned the idea upside down, to reflect beamed energy off of a satellite and back. I'm just a literalist who knows a lot about a lot of things and plays the devil's advocate at times. I'm no more of a jerk than you are, get over yourself. It was only my idea to point out his screwups. RIB2 was on here hawking his "ideas" and his website, that opens him up to scrutiny. I scrutinized, get over it. If he can't handle criticism and rejection than he shouldn't be trying to peddle his ideas in a public forum.

I thought this was a public forum to exchange ideas and questions? Timemachine did you read the abstract? If you want to find out more about his idea read his abstract it pretty much spells it out. Just pointing out mistakes and asking questions. These are questions that anyone reading his abstract should be asking. And he should be able to answer. What is inferred spectrum or inferred light energy? It is mentioned a few times in the abstract. I don't find that term even in wikipedia. Yet his theories of turning energy into light beams and back again seem to rest on it. If he means infrared spectrum and infrared light energy, well that means something in the electromagnetic spectrum. Anybody who has studied the electromagnetic spectrum knows infrared which is on the opposite side of the visible light spectrum from ultraviolet. As I said I can't find a definition for inferred spectrum or inferred light energy.... And it is another idea, not really a better idea than the spaced based solar. If you want to find out more about spaced based power generation watch the Discovery Project Earth show "Orbital Power Plant". I really do wish RIB2 the best and hope he finds the many answers to all of the questions that face his ideas. Because if he can create his vision, he will have brought a few fantastic breakthroughs to the world of science. The energy to light beam laser technology, the monochromatic PV Solar cell beam receiving technology, and the beam focusing, aiming, and reflecting technology. Those will be monumental scientific advances, because those technologies do not currently exist. I just think that he is overestimating the efficiencies that can be created in his systems and underestimating the difficulties in development, and the cost, for a viable system, let alone what the total cost for R&D will eventually be.

I apologize but that's what I see, I mean the graphics are nice and he's taken some ideas that I've seen elsewhere and placed some nice twists on them (pretty much by placing the ideas in space and on Mars) although there's nothing wrong with that. Patents Pending (or granted) doesn't mean that an idea is able to be brought to reality in a cost effective manner. But that's why I said to dream on. Any designer/inventor has to have thousands of dreams before some, if any, come to fruition. So yes, keep dreaming! But from my very limited point of view, they are grandiose schemes that would work well in science fiction novels. But in our current reality, not so well. Take the 9 summary points of action to "make this happen" rather simplistic without any gauge of the enormity of most of those tasks. Then # 9. (a copy of #1) should probably read "Find a cost effective way to turn light waves back into electricity." Which isn't mentioned... I guess #5 would be the not so trivial part of developing a system that can accurately focus and aim the uplink beam to the reflector satelite and position the reflector to aim the beam back to the receiver wherever that reciever is. As well as being able to keep the footprint of the beam very focused so much of the energy does not miss the satellite and then again miss the receiver on its' return trip. I mean the footprint of a laser beam spreads out the further away the "target" is and this energy beam technology hasn't even been created yet. Although there was that experiment in the Pacific between a couple of islands which is a very primative start. There will be enourmous amounts of R & D to figure out this component. RIB2 is stating that this system could be in place of traditional power transmission lines from remote areas with micro-generating systems. To replace power transmission lines, this might work as a line of sight system within our atmosphere, I mean that is basically how communications microwave towers work (although they receive, amplify and retransmit their microwaves - instead of reflecting). With the sending, reflecting, and receiving units located on solid ground as opposed to bouncing beams off of a satelite floating in space. If money was no object, yes this would be conceivable with several decades of developement, but RIB2 is saying that the cost of this system would compete with power transmission lines for hundreds of remote micro-generating operations... Or do you think those problems are trivial, Timemachine? I completely understand, all too well, every detail that is on the "Shine Innovation" website and I hope that he continues to dream and design.

rib2, after looking over more of your site I just see that you are a dreamer and regurgitator of the ideas of others. Well except for that reflecting energy beams schtick, I haven't seen that yet. Probably because the turning of small amounts of waste energy into power beams idea isn't all that feasable. Your designs and ideas are not grounded in the reality of physics and engineering. But hey, dream on unfettered by reality, you might get lucky.