 |
 |
||||
|
|
||||
Lim Jyue (lim_jyue@pacific.net.sg)
Wed, 22 Nov 2000 12:59:33 +0800
Sorry for the slow response, but I needed a break from the extensive
mailing on the list lately.
At 07:11 11/20/2000 EST, Chaos025@aol.com wrote:
>You were the one that mentioned the possible effects that could led to it
>collapsing. Besides, while dry air is not very conductive, humid air is. Does
>that mean that the M-Craft system can be used better over water than over
>deserts? And if so, how does that explain the While Base and Albion cruising
>over the African Savannah?
Uhm, I'm not too sure what you mean here. An I-field *should* be
electrically neutral, so conductivity of the medium shouldn't be a matter.
Besides, my idea is that the I-field displaces sufficient air for the ship
to "float", hence allowing it to freely leave and re-enter Earth.
>If air is displaced, why aren't I-fields used in place of doors for air
>locks, as seen in Star Trek and Star Wars?
Simple, really. I-fields are energy-dependant, so in an emergency --
like loss of power, for one -- the "doors" won't work. And the cost of
maintaining a I-field door as compared to a sliding slab of armour doesn't
justify the installation of such a system.
>I think you are wrong about the displacement of air by the I-field bubble. I
>feel it is more reasonable that lattice work of I-field structures support
>the vehicle on top of a virtual bubble, not a real bubble.
Uuuuh, I'm not too sure what you mean here.
>I once read that the M-Craft system used this I-field structure as a way of
>spreading out the mass of the vehicle across the ground surface (or water
>surface), allowing for a frictionless slide at a set altitude. At very high
>altitudes, the I-field "bubble" has negligible affect of the those on the
>surface, but at very low altitudes, the "bubble" can crush light structures
>and most living things. Hence the approach corridors used by the Pegasus
>class ships we see flying over land and sea in Gundam.
I don't think so. This means a Minovsky Craft operating at high
attitudes would need to extend the I-field all the way down to the surface
-- which is very difficult, considering the nature of the field, the energy
requirements and such.
It's like supporting the craft on a pillar of Minovsky particles --
as I understand your description -- and given that the Minovsky particles
are short-lived, I'm not convinced that such a system can work if it's
supposed to be purely GEV.
>Then how are I-fields formed and shaped?
I don't know. In my original post, I admit as much, but Mark Simmons
came by and gave the official explanation. It didn't quite mesh, so I'm not
too sure.
>Admittedly, if I-field are susceptible to magnetic fields and you wanted to
>get through an I-field, all you would have to do is use you own magnetic
>field to merge your way through.
I don't think it's that simple. Yes, you can use your own magnetic
field to merge into an opposing magnetic field, but the I-fields of each
would repulst each other AFAIK.
>I agree, I was just questioning your description of how you think it works.
>I'm seeing "holes" that your I-field theories aren't sealing. Like the
>M-Craft "bubble" for one.
That's the whole point of posting the theories for discussion, right?
-------------
Lim Jyue
ICQ: 24737555
I am careful not to confuse excellence with perfection.
Excellence I can reach for; perfection is God's business.
-
Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at http://gundam.aeug.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Wed Nov 22 2000 - 13:43:59 JST