Level 5
You have to be careful when using capital letters when describing units as MT is megaTeslas (1000 Teslas) where as mT is milliTesla (1000th of a Tesla). Neutron Stars have magnetic fields in the MT range. The strongest continuous magnetic field created had a strength of 45T
Level 4
1 MT = 1,000,000 T, not 1000 T. They're standard SI prefixes: femto (f), pico (p), nano (n), micro (µ), milli (m), kilo (K), mega (M), giga (G), tera (T), peta (P), exa (E), each one being 1000 times larger than the last (there's a gap between m and K to indicate 10^0), there are more but I can't remember them.
I can't really remember the relavent physics to answer the question but I would guess that the answer is no. I would guess that field strength is proportional to input power, but inversely proportional to the square of the distance. That means that if you input 1 MW 1 m away you might get a 1/(1^2) or 1 T field, if you increase it to 2 MW you'll get a 2/(1^2) or 2 T field 1 m away, whereas if you stick to 1 MW and move 2 m away you get a 1/(2^2) or 0.25 T field. Ultimately that means that as the field gets larger it gets significantly harder to keep the field strength the same.
As I say, that's my guess based upon A-level physics from 4 years ago, it could be wrong, I also made up the figures on the spot, they could be completely wrong, but my point was proportionality vs inverse squared proportionality.
Level 5
Level 5
It was on the BBC, as opposed to a forum which I said in the OP. They were discussing ways to keep an atmosphere there, it might go back and remind them alot more than a Magenetic Field is required to stop it going away.
Level 3
Its a maybe, its one of them Ideas that could maybe work, with enough power we could potentially create a magnetic field large enough to go around mars.
But planets magentic fields are usually made by the core, with electicity, and dynamo effect, not a magnet, mars lost its own.
I simply dont know if we can scale the field of a typical magnet up high enough, and am left assuming if we wanted to do it we would need to produce the power of the earths core to make it happen.
You could make an interesting practical expermient out of it.
Level 3
I always thought it was power constraints was the reason they didnt use magnetic field around the space station, Its good to see its being researched as its kind of needed if we are serious about staying in space.
As for water, I think its simply because water can become radioactive, is heavy, and more valuable as a drink.
The news wont cover it anymore because Obama said Nuclear was the future, but the nuclear power plant in Japan, Well its thought it fully melted down, and the fuel rods melted into pellets and are at the bottom, the only thing that stopped a nucelar reaction taking place was the sea water they pumped in, and one could still take place as its leaking all over the place.
But back to my point, they have an absolutley huge problem now of radioactive water, hundreds of tonnes of the stuff and they dont really know what to do with it, experts from all over the world are flying to japan just to try and solve this radioactive water problem.
And i dont know if that could happen from radiation in space, but I would say the fact it can become radioactive is a concern.
Would be cool if it could be used, and its cool to think that soon we might have a mini planet kind of system in orbet.
Website ©2013 Sony Computer Entertainment Europe
All content, game titles, trade names and/or trade dress, trademarks, artwork and associated imagery are trademarks and/or copyright material of their respective owners. All rights reserved. [more info]
