Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site prometheus.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!prometheus!pmk
From: pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M Koloc)
Newsgroups: net.physics,net.space,net.research
Subject: Re: Star-Wars/Space Telescopes
Message-ID: <201@prometheus.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 17-Nov-85 06:21:07 EST
Article-I.D.: promethe.201
Posted: Sun Nov 17 06:21:07 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 19-Nov-85 03:25:35 EST
References: <384@ukc.UUCP>
Organization: Prometheus II Ltd., College Park, MD
Lines: 76
Xref: watmath net.physics:3593 net.space:4755 net.research:342

> I consider myself fairly well up-to-date with the current advances in
> the so-called "Star Wars" technology & research, but I realised something
> today which had never occurred to me before:
> 
> We all know how you can make a parabolic mirror by stretching a thin
> film of aluminised plastic over a ring of metal or some other such
> material, then using a vacuum pump to suck the film into the shape of
> a parabola, but has this actually been achieved in space (ie en vacuo)?
> Surely the principle demands that the pressure on the front surface is
> greater than the pressure from the back? So in a vacuum, the pressure
> would be equal from both sides, even with the vacuum pump, thus the
> sheet of plastic would not deform into the required shape. Does this
> then mean that the telescope would require a closed volume of gas in
> front of the mirror, supplying a pressure, but also re-introducing
> an absorbing medium for the light? This latter argument is certainly
> one that I have never heard propounded. Does anyone know of any
> experiments that have been carried out in a vacuum on this topic?
> 
> 			Grant C. Blair
> 

For ground based lasers blasting straight up out of the
atmosphere the attenuation is approximately equivalent to the
photon attenuation of one mile of air at sea level.  This will 
change drastically once a few dozen thermonuclear hits kick up 
some glowing dust clouds.  In any event a high speed of sound 
gases such as helium might work and their attenuation would be 
quite negligible when compared to the ground - space trip.  

Perhaps a better way would be to use an array of medium voltage 
small electron guns that would spray electrons like an ink jet 
printer except that the electrons would "coat" the plastic mirror 
with a variable density coating of charge.  A rigid screen grid 
could act as an attractive ground.  Leakage could be controlled 
with a very low pressure helium neon gas, for example.  The  
reaction time might be fast enough for such a system. 

> [Is anyone out there willing to sponsor me to do Stars Wars research? Please?]

The congress to date has been too gutless to pass the Senate version
of the budget bill.  Consequently the government is under a ECR
which really screws the lid down on SDI.  Also there is a need to
"grand stand" with spectacular "demos" to keep the democrats in
congress happy that something positive is happening in defensive
defense development.  That means the "IST" part of the program,
(Innovative Science and Technology) which is where the later 
development of a truly effective program will come from, has 
taken some pretty debilitating cuts.

Jim Ionson heads up IST and has to spend more time responding to 
twinkies than supporting the research of some really high risk 
but super high payoff concepts.  What's really interesting is that 
some of this research promises to have a much greater and more 
positive impact on the later commercial development of space and
other useful technologies. 

Consequently, the best source for Stars Wars research support is
Eugene Velikov, (no relation to Velikovsky) of the Academy of
Science, Moscow, a head of Kurchatov, and a mastermind of their
own advanced Star Wars effort at Krasnaya Pachra and other Russian
military labs, (so secure that even scientists from the "Eastern 
Allies" can not visit them).  Incidentally, Velikov has lobbied 
Senator Pell and others against our new fledgling program and 
has served on disarmament committees.  My own personal information 
is that the Russian program was in progress at least as far back
as 1976.  I suspect the Russians have made a monumental discovery
and are not willing to share it with us, and if I am correct as
to what is is, I don't blame them because in a few more years it
will give them a massive military edge.  I also think the concept 
of their program is considerably more aggressive (offensive) than 
ours.
+---------------------------------------------------------+--------+
| Paul M. Koloc, President: (301) 445-1075                | FUSION |
| Prometheus II, Ltd.; College Park, MD 20740-0222        |  this  |
| {umcp-cs | seismo}!prometheus!pmk; pmk@prometheus.UUCP  | decade |
+---------------------------------------------------------+--------+