Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations waross on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Solar Sails - may not work

Status
Not open for further replies.

GregLocock

Automotive
Apr 10, 2001
23,129
2
38
Orbiting a small yellow star
Ripped off New Scientist, I agree with the objection, the sails need to be black, not mirrors.

The World's No.1 Science & Technology News Service



Solar sailing 'breaks laws of physics'


12:38 04 July 03

Exclusive from New Scientist Print Edition. Subscribe and get 4 free issues.

The next generation of spacecraft propulsion systems could be dead in the water before they are even launched. A physicist is claiming that solar sailing - the idea of using sunlight to blow spacecraft across the solar system - is at odds with the laws of thermal physics.

Both NASA and the European Space Agency are developing solar sails and, although never tested, the concept is quite simple. A solar sail is essentially a giant mirror that reflects photons of sunlight back in the direction they came from.

Although photons do not have mass, they are considered to have momentum, so according to the law of conservation of momentum, the photon loses some of its energy to the sail as it bounces off, giving the sail a shove in the opposite direction.


Can it really sail away?
But Thomas Gold from Cornell University in New York says the proponents of solar sailing have forgotten about thermodynamics, the branch of physics governing heat transfer.


Perfect mirrors


Solar sails are designed to be perfect mirrors, meaning that they reflect all the photons that strike them. Gold argues that when photons are reflected by a perfect mirror, they do not suffer a drop in temperature.

That brings in a thermodynamic law called the Carnot rule, which basically states that you never get something for nothing: if there is no temperature change when the photons are reflected, it is impossible to extract any free energy from them to push the sail along.

"Carnot's rule says there must be a degradation of energy in any machine that turns out free energy," Gold says. "A mirror does not have any degradation."

This does not mean sunlight cannot exert a force - comet tails point away from the Sun, and are often cited as evidence in favour of solar sails. But Gold says this is because a comet tail is not a perfect mirror: it absorbs some of the light. In this scenario Carnot's rule says some energy can be extracted, so long as the object absorbing the light remains cooler than the radiation itself.


Heating up


A solar sail that absorbed photons would heat up within seconds, Gold argues. The claim has been greeted with scepticism. "There may be limits on how much solar radiation can be turned into work, but I do not think these are thermodynamic limits," says Jeffrey Lewins, a thermodynamics expert at the University of Cambridge.

But Gold insists that thermodynamics does have to be taken into account. "It's no good saying, 'I cannot turn heat into free energy, but I can if I turn the heat into radiation first'," he says. "That's obviously nonsense."

Steven Soter, an astronomer at the Hayden Planetarium in New York, is open to Gold's idea. He says applying conservation of momentum to photons could be a mistake. "Light is very different from matter, and one may wonder if the momentum rules are also different."

There may also be evidence to support Gold's theory, in the form of a quirky device called a Crookes radiometer. It consists of four paddles attached to the arms of a rotor, inside a vacuum jar. Each paddle is silvered on one side and coated with a black absorber on the other.

When placed in sunlight, the rotor spins. If the theory of solar sailing is right, the rotor should spin with the reflecting silver surfaces moving away from the light. But it actually spins the other way, just as Gold predicts.

The dispute could be settled in September, when the Pasadena-based Planetary Society hopes to launch Cosmos 1, the world's first solar sail. The 100-kilogram craft will be sent into orbit around the Earth, before unfurling a set of reflecting blades in an attempt to boost its altitude. Louis Friedman, the project's director, is undaunted by Gold's criticism. "Solar sailing is possible," he insists.





Cheers

Greg Locock
 
I'm guessing he is wrong as it would imply some very basic notions we have are wrong(Occam's razor). Reading his paper he isn't very rigorous in his analysis. He also makes no references or citations other than to Carnot.


I'm betting the problem here is he's treating the incoming sunlight as heat. This is wrong, I think because the sunlight is all headed in the same(general) direction. It does not contain the same amount of entropy that normal "heat" energy does. It is ordered radiation, not the random movements of molecules.

The effect used to explain Crookes' radiometer that he scoffs at has been observed in systems of comlpetely different types, as well as in Crookes' radiometer. As well, a radiometer capable of observing the radiation pressure effects has been constucted on multiple occasions and shown Maxwell to be correct.


IIRC the momentum of light arises from the Poynting vector anyhow and predates the p = E/c.
 
My take was that if you have an unmovable wall, then a tennis ball exerts the expected force, and rebounds with equal velocity, hence energy.

However, if the wall can move then it absorbs energy and the ball rebounds with less KE than before.

Now, a mirror offers no mechanism by which a photon can reduce its energy, therefore the photon cannot give energy to the mirror.

It's not Carnot, it is conservation of energy that is the basis of the argument.

Cheers

Greg Locock
 
They could be by redshifting. The photon would actually be absorbed then emitted I guess, by the electron sea in the metal. Once abosrbed the sail is moving ever so slightly as compared to its previous rest frame. Thye emitted photon would be reshifted relative to it(the previous frame of the sail).

Keep in mind that by absorbtion or reflection, the momentum exchange per photon is incredibly small.

I doubt they have a perfect mirror either.

I'd trust him more if he'd done a relativistic dynamics analysis in his paper and cited these explained away differences in the Crookes' radiometer.

What he implies inhis paper would have implications far beyond reflections of mirrors
 
I absolutely agree with BennyMic about the need to consider this from the relativistic viewpoint. The photons will definately undergo a redshift as they "bounce off".

It occurs to me that a black surface would still emit photons due to Black Body radiation. Like the greenhouse phenomenon they would be much longer in wavelength than those absorbed. There is no need even for the same number of photons to be emitted as absorbed. A black solar sail would just end up hotter, but it would definately not produce more thrust.

The Crookes radiometer phenomenon is just a red herring. In perfect vacuum the silver side does push the black side. A non perfect vacuum produces a phenomenon known as thermal transpiration, where expanding air causes a vortex around the black side edge - apparently producing thrust.

Check out:

This is the danger of trying to reason out a relativistic phenomenon using Newtonian physics - it just don't work! ::)

Mart.
 
It is solar radiation "pressure" that is the motive force.

Photons have velocity of c, and enough of them exchanging kinetic energy can move the sail.

Peter V
 
True, but the photons undergo a redshift as the mirror sail is caused to accelerate. "Red" photons have less energy than "blue" ones, so the photon energy is imparted to the sail. This is Plancks law:
Photon_Energy=Planck_Constant*Photon_Frequency

The red shift will be very small, but then the force that accelerates the mirror is very small.

You could visualise this as a piston being pushed by a train of pressure waves (i.e. sinusoidal about pressure higher than atmospheric). The waves are reflected of the piston, but if the piston moves fast enough (relative to the rest frame) the wavelength gets longer (ie frequency drops).

Ok in the real world we both know the higher than atmospheric pressure is really pushing the piston, but that's my point. Using the thermodynamics derived from Newtonian physics just isn't relevant in this instance, unless you are trying to warm up the mirror as well as push it. You need to have an understanding of relativity, and (to some extent) quantum physics to see this one.

I did my (aero) engineering degree at Loughborough, physics degree with the Open University so I'm not trying to hoodwink you! :) But let me ask you this: How far will Thermodynamic engines allow us to travel into space?

Mart
 
If the sail is stationary there is no redshift, so there is no source of energy. I realise this is a version of Zeno's paradox, but is still a valid observation.

The red shift mechasnism would give maximum thrust at v=0.5c (I think) whereas the momentum argument will give max thrust at v=0

The great thing is that this is going to be tested soon.


Cheers

Greg Locock
 
Hi Greg,

I see the source of the confusion now. In the same way that the beauty of a good engine lies in it's details, the beauty of physics lies in the details.

Consider an initially stationary mirror. The photon stravelling at speed c, strikes the mirror then bounces back off at speed c. The mirror recoils at the instant of impact, so that the reflected photon is produced from a moving mirror. Now relativistic doppler shift is not the same as acoustic doppler shift (with which you are no doubt familiar), but ends up demonstrating a similar effect. Since the mirror is moving away from the source, the reflected photon will now be redshifted, as it is re-emited from the mirror.

As was said before, the redshifted photon will possess less energy than the original photon. Since E=MC^2 or M=E/(C^2), then the reflected photon will have less mass, therefore momentum can be said to have been transferred from the photon to the mirror.

I could go all relativistic mathematical on you, but there is no point since I'm sure you see the reasoning. As for the quantum physicists? You don't want to know what they think - trust me on that! ;-)

Mart
 
OK, that make sense. Since the mirror is non-rigid then I can even believe that the local velocity at the point of re-emission is high enough to give a significant red shift.

But this shoud be a general result. I don't notice that mylar (or any other eg mercury) mirrors red shift particularly.





Cheers

Greg Locock
 
Well, as I said the beauty lies in the details. It works for either a (conceptual) rigid mirror or a flexible mirror. These effects are really very small, but then the forces are also very small. It will be red shifted, but bearing in mind the high value of c, it would be very hard to measure without specialist equipment.

A result of General relativity tells us that radio transmissions from stationary (relative to earth C og G) will be blue shifted as they travel down the our gravitational field. I'll bet that the radio signals from QuinetiQ 1 aren't even vaguely perceptably shifted though. ;-)

I always thought it was a shame that non of the appollo missions carried atomic clocks, since that would have been the ideal demonstation of the twin phenomenon! I don't like using the word paradox, since once you understand about proper time (time measured with particle/spaceship/galaxy of interest) you see there really is no paradox.

BTW I take it you're a Dunton lad? I've been struggling to get back into mainstream engineering since BMW/Rover fell to bits - hard times... :-(

Mart
 
Gold answers the doppler theory in a letter to New Scientist this week. Incidentally he points out that the proposed experiment will work a sthere are plenty of other particles in the solar wind to drive the sail.

Not Dunton, me, not by 10000 miles.

Cheers

Greg Locock
 
So he's hedging ;-)

Gold's arguments ignore laser tweezers, where laser beams are used to constrain atomic particles. I think that this is a nearly perfect example of strict photon pressure mechanics, since it turns out that the particles are able to be cooled to near absolute zero strictly by the action of the lasers.

TTFN
 
In the past russia has launched some solar sails like Znamya so i think they had the data about the effect of light over the mirror.
In a conference about two years ago (you can see the presentations on the site of glasgow university) Astrium admit to use soem solar sail for AOCS ,i don't remember from the presentation if it was a mirror.But it works.
 
I think he's going senile. There's some odd statements in his argument.

He's first assuming that a mirror does not allow redshifts. That makes no sense.

Then he talks about an aborbing object ceasing to absorb energy once its heated up. That's not true. An object in thermal equilibrium emits and absorbs an equal but nonzero amount of energy. If the input energy had a directed momentum (and the output radiation didn't), then momentum could still be transferred.

Conservation of momentum for radiation (photons) is observed everyday in particle physics experiments. Its not voodoo.

His argument about energy and momentum conservation giving contradictory results with radiation is also meaningless. Its well known that a free particle cannot absorb a photon. This is one of several reasons. Instead, both particles scatter. Atomic and nuclear physics would be completely different if this weren't true.

Then saying E/c is not a vector? Well... yeah. That's because the vector component was left off!
 
"Yes, but if it is a perfect mirror then ALL the photons are reflected, so there is no source of energy to accelerate the sail."

If the sail is a perfect mirror, then all of the impact momentum exchange of the photon should be seen.
 
Sure, but where does the energy come from? If all the photons are reflected at their original frequency then there is no net energy input to the system, so it won't accelerate.

Cheers

Greg Locock
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top