Nuclear science and space

[phishphreek]

I was in my physics class (electricity and magentism) tonight and we were going over more of The Special and General Theory of Relativity. My professor said that nuclear propulsion and neclear science (in general) was banned in space. I can see why weapons would be banned... but why nuclear propulsion? If they can use it in submaries, then why not spacecraft?

I just thought about that on my way home from class and was just curious of peoples opinions. I'll ask him more about it on Wednesday.

[!mitationRust]

"In 1997 NASA launched the Cassini space probe carrying 72 pounds of plutonium that fortunately did not experience failure. If it had, hundreds of thousands of people around the world could have been contaminated."

I guess that they are afraid of somthing built for a good purpose such a propulsion, might accidently turn into a weapon, maybe like a dirty bomb.

I'd also like to here some views on this subject.

[phishphreek]

!mitationRust: Good point. Where did you get that "fact"? Do you have a source?

But, can't the same thing happen in the subs?

GORDON CLARK, Peace Action Against Cassini: It takes about a millionth of a gram of plutonium to actually cause cancer in a human being. And we’re again talking about 72 pounds of plutonium. So even if one pound of plutonium were to survive a re-entry crash, that is theoretically enough to spread a cancer dose of plutonium all over the planet.

JEFFREY KAYE: Protesters fear people will be subjected to dangerous amounts of radiation if Cassini crashes or disintegrates when it passes by Earth in 1999. It must fly by the Earth to gather gravitational momentum in a slingshot maneuver towards Saturn. NASA has used plutonium as a power source in 24 previous missions, including the Voyager and Galileo expeditions. Typically, NASA uses solar cells for power, but for long trips like this one, plutonium is used to power the spacecraft.

So, they are already using it... I wonder why my professor said that they can't use it!
I'm def. going to have to bring this up wednesday. False information is no good... especially in college!
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/scien...ini_10-15.html

[!mitationRust]

Yeah, it's about five paragrahs down. http://pub97.ezboard.com/fnuclearspa...picID=37.topic

Remeber when one of the biggest nuclear Russian subs went down in the artic waters, and the CIA built a custom made boat with a crane big enough to pick it up! The russians didn't know where it was. When we attempted to pick it up it cracked in half. I think that type of nuclear leak would be bad for people who eat fish and get gulf moister rainfall, but nuclear bits falling to earth from space, passing through layers of critical zones sounds pretty bad.

http://www.nuclearspace.com/use_in_space.htm

EDIT* more damaging evidence of nuclear power in space
http://spacelink.nasa.gov/NASA.Proje...Power.in.Space

I'm curious on what your professor is going to say.

You said that he said it "was banned " did he fail to mention that the banned was lifted?

[phishphreek]

You said that he said it "was banned " did he fail to mention that the banned was lifted?

He sure did. I'd send him an email but I don't have it. I'll bring in some of this info we're posting tonight and present it to him. He has said more than once that we can't use nuclear propulsion because of it being banned. That didn't make much sense to me.

[!mitationRust]

I could reply all day on educated discussions such as this. I founf something intresting.
Nuclear salt water rocket fission space drive high specific impulse

(NSWR)nuclear salt water rocket ........WOW!

The basic difficulty with space propulsion comes down to the problem of energy. There simply is not enough energy stored in NASA's best chemical fuels to generate much push (or more precisely, specific impulse, a quantity measured in seconds and given by ISP=vex/g , i.e., exhaust velocity divided by gravitational acceleration). The laws of physics dictate that if the specific impulse is low, the fuel consumed per second must be correspondingly very large to provide enough thrust (upward force) to boost a reasonable payload.

Project Orion, a product of the swords-into-plowshares theme of the late 1950s, proposed to propel a space vehicle by using a series of nuclear bombs exploded behind a thick steel plate to drive the space vehicle forward. Orion was rendered illegal and canceled because of the Test Ban Treaty of 1963.

Zubrin's nuclear salt water rocket (NSWR), on the other hand, requires only minor extrapolations from the mature technology of existing nuclear power systems and could probably be implemented for prototype testing in a very short time. Writing the environmental impact statement for such tests, however, might present an interesting problem, because Zubrin's scheme vents highly radioactive nuclear fission products directly into space. It is therefore appropriate mainly for deep space missions. It is, in a sense, complementary to the laser-sustained propulsion scheme which requires a ground-bases laser within shooting distance of the space vehicle.

Source:This link laggs a little http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw56.html

http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/galileo/mes...mess/RTGs.html

http://www.fas.org/nuke/space/index.html

[phishphreek]

!mitationRust:

Thanks again for your input. I've never paid space and nuclear science much mind. I just knew a couple of small things about nuclear science because my father used to work on a nuclear submarine in the US Navy.

Very interesting stuff. I'll be days reading all this stuff! There is tons out there on this.

[!mitationRust]

Originally posted here by phishphreek80
!mitationRust:

Thanks again for your input. I've never paid space and nuclear science much mind. I just knew a couple of small things about nuclear science because my father used to work on a nuclear submarine in the US Navy.

Very interesting stuff. I'll be days reading all this stuff! There is tons out there on this.

No problem , I always enjoy talking physics, especially with my cousin who is one of the few(8) or so students who have access to the nanotechnology/laser lab at Trinity college in TX. It would blow your mind, the amount of data that they send out from there to be stored from the test they do is unreal. He was talking about 6-8 Mac G5's for a cluster at another location. And the everything they work with nano wise has to be in a controled climate at freezing temperature to reduce vibration, and the list goes on and on of the hardcore physics being applied there. He said the lab has to be grounded, I said with what he said a inch thick copper wire leading directly from the lab to the ground. I find that stuff amazing. Here is some of the links to his school, he was a Ph.D. student in Physics at Rice, then moved on for more education at Trinity for grad school, I sent him a em@il today about our discussion, he is big on physics in space.

http://www.trinity.edu/physics/laser_lab/laserlab.htm

Hope you will update the thread come wednesday.