Solar and Cosmic radiation at Venus L2 (VL2)
Brad Guth
Solar flare rads or Sv?
Cosmic rads or Sv?
If ISS were relocated to VL2; how much additional shielding would be needed?
How much rocket engine and fuel for 18+ month station-keeping?
Joann Evans
>
> How much dosage per day (24 hours)?
>
> Solar flare rads or Sv?
>
> Cosmic rads or Sv?
>
>
> How much rocket engine and fuel for 18+ month station-keeping?
* Recipie for rabbit stew:
First you catch a rabbit...
And you propose accelerating this relatively frail structure out of
Earth orbit, and decelerating into Venus orbit with...what?
(And low thrust engines, powered by who knows what, would mean
spending a lot of time in Earth's VanAllen belts.)
And you propose providing re-supply of life-support cosumables in
Venus orbit with...what? (Man does not live by stationkeeping fuel
alone.)
And emergency evacuation and escape will be provided by...what?
You're welcome to be the crew, if you wish.
Brad Guth
Thanks much for your sort of non-flak feedback.
Actually, since others smarter than this village idiot haven't much
bothered to deliver upon one damn worth of anything that's the least
bit positive towards Venus, I researched into radiation issues and, lo
and behold, I learned a thing or two.
Read this page and let me know if I've over/under shot the mark:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/l2-radiation.htm
In addition to whatever shielding (obviously lots), the actual
amount(s) of rocket energy is obviously the next step. I'm thinking of
strapping on a few dozen of those Russian or Chinese solid fuel
rockets and then if need be a procession of relay missions that'll
keep ISS powered up and on course for VL2, that's including beer,
vodka and all the pizza you can eat.
All we need are a few volunteers and preferably of those having little
or nothing to lose (among others, I vote for Martha Stewart). I'm also
thinking "enterprise" as in allowing only those willing to pay and
therefor accepting the risk as a once in a lifetime adventure (perhaps
their last).
Sending out relay missions for re-supply and crew change would
obviously work best upon the 18 month orbit cycle when Earth and Venus
are nearest. Obviously that's still a good long stay, sort of cabin
fever inducing that may require a great deal of pot and/or Prozac in
order to remain human.
Of interest, I've located and recently updated another conjecture
worthy page:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/no-lie.htm
Actually this scheme needs some refinement, in addition to a metric
tonne of loot and the guts to go along with it.
Regards, Brad Guth / IEIS 1-253-8576061 http://guthvenus.tripod.com
alternate URL: http://www.geocities.com/bradguth
Brad Guth
about space radiation. Since I'm not as perfect as yourself and, my
pro-NASA Borg implants have been malfunctioning, I thought some of the
other wizards of outer space could explain something that's oddly
getting in the way of reality. Seems there should be a verifiable
alternate source of actually measured radiation levels. Oddly, I've
been trying to read about such but, those simply either do not exist
or there's some other reason(s) why.
I've tried another shot at my understanding what's out there, in the
way of calculating free space TBI dosage:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/vl2-iss-03.htm
I've also updated the following few pages:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/venus-mars-manifesto.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/exploration.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/vl2-iss.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/vl2-iss-01.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/vl2-iss-02.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/vl2-rocket.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/vl2-radiation.htm
Geoffrey A. Landis
> I'd like to read if there's something other than what I've learned
> about space radiation.
Yes, there is a ton of data out there-- it's mostly in the old paper
journals, though, so you may need to hit a good research library to find
it.
> I've tried another shot at my understanding what's out there, in
> the way of calculating free space TBI dosage:
> http://guthvenus.tripod.com/vl2-iss-03.htm
In this URL, you calculate:
:> ... About Earth L2 (EL2): radiation dosage per year (based upon
:> aluminum shielding)
:> @0.0 mm = 4+^5 rem
:> @2.2 mm = 4.14^3 rem
:> @22.22 mm = 2.85^2 rem
:>
:> Away from EL2 (fully solar exposed), perhaps we should, for good
:> measure, multiply upon the above by a factor of 10
No, at Earth-sun L-2, there's essentially zero shielding due to the
Earth. There is no reason to multiply by ten!
:> That's 40+^5 rem/year
at 0.0 g/cm2 (based upon but one solar max event).
:>
:> Further
calculating for all of the typically lesser flares per
:> year, lets multiply by another factor of 5.
Let's not multiply by a fudge factor of 5x; instead let's stick to the
actual data. No wonder your numbers seem "whopping"-- they're a factor
of fifty too high!
>...
--
Geoffrey A. Landis
http://www.sff.net/people/geoffrey.landis
Brad Guth
conservative side of living, thus multiplying for additional solar max
events as well as for accumulating upon a year's worth of all those
lesser flare events that are under a solar max rating seems rational
if not a heathy thing to do.
I still believe the L2 position offers something, as the worst of the
worst radiation being delivered by the sun is of what's headed in a
relatively straight line, as being blasted away but also just radiated
from the sun, thus being in the shadow of an effective shield is a
good thing, somewhat like standing behind the lead shield in a medical
chemotherapy lab is a good thing.
If you have any reference to the sorts of data upon radiation that
circumvents relatively dense shields, such as the Earth or Venus, I'd
be quite interested.
Venus represents a smaller globe but the L2 is closer as well as the
atmosphere is significantly better at stopping radiation, not to
mention the option of being situated at 0.95 L2 or even as close as
0.9 L2, which should exclude nearly all of what the sun has to offer,
though obviously that's not doing squat for cosmic radiation.
Geoffrey A. Landis
> Thanks for the good information. However, I tend to remain on the
> conservative side of living, thus multiplying for additional solar max
> events as well as for accumulating upon a year's worth of all those
> lesser flare events that are under a solar max rating seems rational
> if not a heathy thing to do.
You're free to multiply the data by any additional multiplication
factor you like, if it makes you happy. However, once you multiply by
an added factor of 50 to be "conservative," I don't see why you should
be surprised at how high the numbers are.
> I still believe the L2 position offers something, as the worst of the
> worst radiation being delivered by the sun is of what's headed in a
> relatively straight line,
Here is your error. The worst of the radiation is protons, which are
charged particles, and hence travel in curved lines.
> as being blasted away but also just radiated
> from the sun, thus being in the shadow of an effective shield is a
> good thing,
Since the solar-flare protons move in curves, being in the light
shadow of the earth does not put you in the proton shadow. The Earth
is a relatively small shield viewed from L2, and pretty much
ineffective.
Brad Guth
OK, that I can somewhat understand, especially of Earth's magnetic
qualities acting somewhat like a proton refocusing lens. However, I
did mention using a nuclear powered EMP solution that could allow a
somewhat lesser L2, such as .95 L2 or perhaps even the 0.9 L2 position
which is somewhat more protected and, since Venus indicates little if
any magnetic qualities, there's less likelihood of the planet helping
to pull those nasty charged protons back into the L2 slot.
I believe there's some value into what Earth's magnetic filed is doing
as to bending those charged protons; Am I right?
Also being closer to the solar blast zone ott to give what's situated
at Venus L2 a better shot at alluding the bulk of TBI dosage. The
amount of expected radiation at VL2 is what I'd like a better
understanding of, as I applied the rather primative factor of 1.9
because I've noted that the solar influx was calculated and/or
measured as roughly 2600 w/m2.
Geoffrey A. Landis
> OK, that I can somewhat understand, especially of Earth's magnetic
> qualities acting somewhat like a proton refocusing lens. However, I
> did mention using a nuclear powered EMP solution that could allow a
> somewhat lesser L2, such as .95 L2 or perhaps even the 0.9 L2 position
> which is somewhat more protected and, since Venus indicates little if
> any magnetic qualities, there's less likelihood of the planet helping
> to pull those nasty charged protons back into the L2 slot.
>
> I believe there's some value into what Earth's magnetic filed is doing
> as to bending those charged protons; Am I right?
L2 is far enough away from Earth that the Earth's magnetic field
focussing is probably negligible, although i haven't calculated it.
> Also being closer to the solar blast zone ott to give what's situated
> at Venus L2 a better shot at alluding the bulk of TBI dosage. The
> amount of expected radiation at VL2 is what I'd like a better
> understanding of, as I applied the rather primative factor of 1.9
> because I've noted that the solar influx was calculated and/or
> measured as roughly 2600 w/m2.
For the case of solar particulate radiation at Venus, the average dose
will be multiplied by a factor of 1/r^2, since it's closer to the sun
and intercepts a larger fraction of the emitted radiation. However, you
will win a little with reduced galactic cosmic radiation, which doesn't
penetrate the sun's magnetic field as well.