Science and Tom Swift Fleshing out The “Well Bud…..” explanation (Jr.) Charlie Campbell

Science and Tom Swift

Fleshing out The “Well Bud…..” explanation

(Jr.)

Charlie Campbell

The Sky Queen was an “Atomic Aircraft “ and was powered by a nuclear reactor.

How does that work?

The text gives no clue. Published 1954

The Flying Lab was a vertical takeoff aircraft that took Tom almost everywhere in the series, and in both ways was like the Red Cloud from Tom Sr.

Sky Queen Blueprint from Syndicate Archives (cleaned up by Kim Keeline)

Tom foresaw the Future (Laboratory Space Filled with Cubicles)

Not much help there.

Syndicate probably did not understand the physics.

The History:

• The possibility of a Nuclear Aircraft was proposed by Enrico Fermi in in 1942

• In 1946, The US formed NEPA (Nuclear Energy for the Propulsion of Aircraft)

• Supplanted in 1951 by ANP (Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion)

• Program was first “canceled” in 1954, (Publication year of Flying Lab) but limped along until 1961

• $1.08 billion 1950’s dollars were spent.

How Does that Work?

Normal Turbojet

CompressorTurbine(Drives Compressor)

Burner (Heats Air)

(edited from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUxP3PCDRTE)

Idea: Use a reactor instead of the burner to heat the air.

Air is diverted behind the compressor, passes through the reactor and reintroduced ahead of the turbine.

(edited from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYhEETIIMUk)

The US built Engines and used them in ground tests

HTRE= Heat Transfer Reactor Experiment

The X-39, a converted General Electric J53 turbojet

HTRE-1/2 and HTRE-3 as seen today on display at the Idaho National Laboratory in Arco Idaho

Advantage:

•As a nuclear aircraft requires only uranium as fuel, it could fly until the crew ran out of food.

•Idea: Load the thing with Atom Bombs and have it cruise around ready to invade the Soviet Union at a moments notice – as SAC did later and much as nuclear subs do today.

•Required a huge aircraft for crew, living quarters, not to mention the reactor.

First to fly would have been the X-6, a modified Convair B-36.

The Nuclear Bit

Many other designs (Some serious):

Convair NX-2

Many other designs (Some serious):

Northrop

Many other designs (Some serious):

Lockheed

Many other designs (and not so serious):

Many other designs (and not so serious):

Mechanix Illustrated, 1955(Their own design)

Problem: How to shield crew from radiation?

Cockpit far forwardto protect crew from radiation

Wings towards the back to support reactor weight

Problem: Shielding is too heavy to fly.

Voila: Tomasite"But even with the atomic engines and jet lifters, she'd never be able to stay in flight without your wonderful invention, Dad—the one Mother named after us.“

"Oh, you mean the Tomasite plastic," Mr. Swift said. "Anyway, encasing the nuclear reactors with it is better than the old-type lead and concrete shields, and I believe it will absorb the radiation more effectively."

But for Tom???

Bigger Problem:

• What if the thing should crash spreading radiation everywhere?

• Should it ever penetrate Soviet airspace, the Russians would have to think twice about shooting it down.

Yet, in the early 1950’s Aircraft were considered to be the most likely candidate for nuclear propulsion (over rockets and submarines).

Probably because there were no workable missiles and no way to deliver nuclear weapons except by bomber.

Missile development ended nuclear aircraft and Kennedy canceled the program in 1961..

Ok, if this is the engine

Then what are these?

You knowthese things

And if this is 3 stories ≈ 30ft.

Then the cockpit windows are at least 8 feet high

Artist renderings were based on the DeHavilland Comet (operational 1949), the first commercial jetliner

Engines in wings

Swept Wings

Windows are about the same size relative to body size

What made Tom’s rocket special was his

“Fuel Kicker”

Published 1954

The kicker was a rocket-fuel energizer. It consisted of a yard-long section of ten-inch pipe, tapering at each end into the smaller piping of the fuel lines. The bulge was loosely packed with a metallic oxide catalyst and covered at both ends with platinum gauze niters. Tom's invention, using an alcohol-liquid-oxygen fuel combination, was designed to absorb the hyper-powerful radiation of the sun and shoot this solar energy into the liquid-oxygen supply, converting it into highly explosive, poisonous, blue liquid ozone.

With the help of the kicker, Tom's fuel would be much more efficient than any other combination yet known. In addition to the enormous combustion heat of alcohol and liquid oxygen, he would get additional thrust from the decomposition of the ozone and would decrease mass ratio.

From the Book:

The Science:• Ozone, O3, with three oxygen atoms (normal Oxygen is O2) is a great Oxidizer because it is eager to dump an Oxygen atom to go back to the more stable O2.• O3 is the most dangerous component in air pollution. It makes one’s eyes sting and throat sore as it literally oxidizes your cell membranes.

“…converting it into highly explosive, poisonous, blue liquid ozone.”

• Glassman lists Rocket oxidizers in performance order as: O3 (Ozone), F2 (Fluorine), F2O, NF3, O2 (Oxygen)…….

(Glassman, I, The chemistry of propellants, American Scientist, 53 (1965) 508-524)

Chemistry wants to combine Elements From this side with those From this side

Fluorine

Oxygen

Hydrogen

Noble Gases:They don’t play the game

So Fluorine, furthest to the right, should be the best oxidizer

Why??

So why is the Ozone reaction:

3H2+O3→3H2O

Preferable to a Fluorine reaction

H2+F2→2HF

Or for that matter preferable to the Oxygen reaction

2H2+O2→2H2O???

The answer is in the text (sort of):

“….he would get additional thrust from the decomposition of the ozone…..”The reaction:

H2+F2→2HFIs really (at least) three reactions:

H2→2H F2→2F H+F→HF

} Decomposition Reactionswhich consume energy

} Part that Produces Energy

The answer is in the text (sort of):

“….he would get additional thrust from the decomposition of the ozone…..”

So: 3H2+O3→3H2O

Produces more energy at the end because it consumes less energy decomposing the Ozone.

But the first stage of ozone decomposition 2O3→3O2

actually produces energy (Ozone can burn by itself.)

The Science Part II:“The bulge was loosely packed with a metallic oxide catalyst …designed to absorb the hyper-powerful radiation of the sun and shoot this solar energy into the liquid-oxygen supply, converting it into highly explosive, poisonous, blue liquid ozone.”

As all Southern Californians (should) know, Ozone is produced catalytically by an interaction between sunlight and Nitrogen Oxides or Unburned Hydrocarbons. So yup this is true.

(except that the rays of the sun are not “hyper-powerful”).

Also the kicker was intended to work at high altitude

"Well, the short-wave-length radiation we are looking for doesn't reach the ground. It's filtered out by the atmosphere between twelve and twenty miles…”

Correct in that only ultraviolet light (with a short wavelength) has enough energy to break the bond between the Oxygens in O2, freeing two O’s to join with other O2 and form O3.

Correct in that 97-99% of the ultraviolet is absorbed in the Ozone Layer lying between 20km and 40km (12.5 and 25miles). [Wikipedia numbers]

The Energy Problem:The kicker was a rocket-fuel energizer. It consisted of a yard-long section of ten-inch pipe, tapering at each end into the smaller piping of the fuel lines

Essentially the kicker used solar energy to convert Oxygen to Ozone.

One can get no more extra chemical from the ozone that the solar energy supplied which is roughly 10inx36inx(0.0254in/m)2x1KW/m2= 232W =0.00000001xpower of the Saturn V first stage

Conclusion:

As written the basic idea of the Kicker is sound.

• Ozone is the best Rocket Fuel Oxidizer

• Ozone is produced catalytically with sunlight

But:There is no where near enough energy in sunlight to make a difference.

A vertical takeoff, supersonic aircraft and submarine

Notice that it looks like a flying saucer with a large central rotor

Published (1956)

The Avro Car

A vertical takeoff, flying saucer shaped aircraft with a large central rotor, originally proposed to make Mach 2.

Sorry, no submarine

The turborotor actually directs the flow out through the rim where the air is directed downward by the Coanda effect.

The Avrocar was proposed in 1953 and, as a near flying saucer, made a big splash in the popular press. But it did not “fly”until 1958.

A good thing because If the syndicate had seen it fly, well…… this is as far as it got off the ground.

(Edited from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PIu3rGAA3k&feature=related)

One of the two Avrocars built as it is today in the warehouse for the Air and Space Museum

The program was canceled in 1961

It always bothered me that the rotor must work continuously underwater

Bud should have nicknamed it

(animation by FredKuentz)

“The Flipper Ripper.”(Blame Fred)

• just stirs up the bottom reducing visibility• Definitely not Dolphin safe

The Space Friends CodeFrom Mechanix Illustrated, December 1947 pgs 84-88

Discovered by James Keeline

Proposed using Mathematical symbols as a way to speak to aliens

Ended with a picture of an oscillograph equipped device used to “pick up interplanetary messages.”

Incidentally, Grote Reber was one of the great pioneers of radio astronomy.

Diving Seacopter Page 47

Published(1956)From the Dust Jacket:

"Tom, that strange gas is fantastic-disintegrates everything it touches! What do you think it is?"Fascinated by the amazing report from a pilot who crash-landed in the African jungle….Tom Swift Jr. …. replies: "Sounds like anti-protons rampaging. Such a phenomenon is unknown on earth. This may be the greatest discovery of the century. It could revolutionize the whole science of atomic energy. Let's investigate that taboo mountain."

An anti-proton is a proton with a negative charge. When it comes into contact with a proton both are annihilated producing 4 gamma rays.

The Oklo Natural Reactor, Gabon, West Africa

Analysis of Uranium from the mine showed a depletion of the fissionable component 235U and a surplus of fission products indicating that, billions of years ago, the mine had gone critical.

But 235U has a half-life of 700 million years and a few billion years ago when the Oklo reactor was operative, was at about 7% concentration.

Apparently 5 different areas in the mine went critical at various times, all when the rock because saturated with water which served as a moderator.

Today, natural Uranium has only 0.7% 235U and must be enriched to about 3% before it can be used in a water moderated reactor.

Similarities between the Oklo Reactor and the Caves of Nuclear Fire

• Both are located in Caves in Africa

• Both are activated by water

• In Oklo the water served as a moderator

• In Caves of Nuclear Fire: "At high tide, the water passes over a bed of uranium ore and a nuclear catalyst. The protons produced from the water trigger a nuclear fusion of the uranium with other atoms in the mineral bed to produce Exploron.” [the anti-proton gas.]

(That makes no sense.)

Differences:

The Oklo Reactors were standard Uranium fission reactors

The Caves of Nuclear Fire produced some kind of anti-proton gas, Exploron

Any similarity is pure coincidence

Caves of Nuclear Fire was published in 1956

Oklo reactor discovered in 1972

Unless????

The possibility of water moderated natural reactors was first proposed by P.K. Kuroda in two papers in 1956:

Journal of Chemical Physics, v. 25,781-2 Journal of Chemical Physics, v. 25,1295-6

But: • They probably appeared too late in the year for Caves

• I have found no indication that these were noted in the popular press that the syndicate would have read.

Most likely Caves was inspired by the production of the first proton/anti-proton pair in 1955 (More later)

The Energy Problem:

Tom Swift is full of bad energy calculations.

Usually they grossly overestimate the energy produced by (usually) solar power, but in Nuclear Fire, they grossly underestimate the energy produced.

Craig chuckled. "Seemed that way, I'll admit. To make sure, I got other containers and tried the experiment again. This time I watched until the glowing gas did appear. Sure enough, the containers vanished-in an intense burst of white light."

Well if the containers weighed say a half-pound the E=mc2

energy produced would be 2x1015 Joules = 0.5 Megaton

The Terrasphere

Winner: Tom’s dumbest invention

• Could only work in perfectly vertical caves

• Why a sphere?

(Humans don’t fit easily into spheres)

(Spheres aren’t easy to handle and don’t fit easily on things

like flatbed trucks)

(animation by Fred Kuentz)

The Inspiration is undoubtedly the Bathysphere, the first device to explore the deep ocean.

William Beebee, Bathysphere inventor

Actual Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea diving bell set on the roof of Aqua Tech Sports, 1800 Logan Ave, San Diego

No problem going vertical in the ocean

Spherical shape is best for resisting large pressure.

Runner up: The Spectromarine Selector

….my invention will first heat the stuff with infrared rays in order to boil off the moisture in the form of steam... there's a powerful vacuum pump at the rear of the housing, operating through a long hose with an intake at the front."

So it’s a heat lamp and a vacuum cleaner

But there is some science there"Well, anyhow," Tom went on, "under low air pressure, water boils at a low temperature. So the moisture will turn into steam without getting too hot. The same idea is used in producing evaporated milk."

Published 1958

My Favorite Cover

Notice that the Challenger is controlled bywood handled levers like something from the steam age.

Published 1958

"Sort of a miniature atom smasher, isn't it?" Ted asked.

"Works on the same principle," Tom explained, "but a better name would be a particle accelerator. …This machine speeds up the particles just to make them increase in mass."

"And this housing at the bottom is the particle racecourse?" put in Bud.

"Might call it that." Tom chuckled. "The racecourse is actually an electromagnetic field provided by the magnet. We also have to create a vacuum, so that the speeded-up particles don't go bumping into any air molecules."

The solartron was a matter maker that used the relativistic increase in mass to turn energy into matter.

The inspiration was undoubtedly the Bevatron , (BeV= Billion Electron Volts) at that time the world’s largest particle accelerator and which in 1955 had converted energy into the first proton/anti-proton pair

MagnetFigures for scale

Bevatron

Vacuum ChamberBevatron

Bevatron Section with Magnet Removed

Vacuum Chamber “Racecourse”

Coils for the Electromagnet

The Science:

One can create mass from energy in particle acceleratorsbut it is very inefficient

Big Problem -Charge Conservation: The net charge produced must be zero.

Why one produces a proton(+) and antiproton(-) pair, so they add to zero charge.

Tom would produce as much antimatter as matter.

"Right," said Tom. "Now, each of the small squares in the sheet will be made up of twin leaves of Tomasite plastic-one with luxium metal, and the other with conductate metal."

The Solar in Solartron refers to the power source, Twelve, 4-acre, “Energy Collectors.”

Kind of sounds like a semi-conductor junction used in conventional silicon solar cells.

The Energy Problem

Late in the book, Tom uses the Solartron to produce a pound of sugar in a few minutes.

Twelve, 4-acre, Energy Collectors have an area of 194,250 square meters. At 1000 W/m2 they would produce at 100% efficiency, 194 Megawatts of power.

Using E=mc2, this would produce at most m= (194x106W)/(3x108m/s)2= 2x10-9 kilograms per secondRequire 2x108 seconds = 6.3 years to produce a pound of anything.

Published 1959

….the basic principle is fairly simple," Tom said. "As you know, any rock may undergo radioactive aging as its natural elements break down and become other elements. That happens all through the rock. But the layers nearer the surface are more exposed to cosmic radiation from the outside.“…… if you carve a gouge in the rock, the cosmic radiation would penetrate deeper at that point than it would in an uncarved part of the rock. Therefore, the radioactivity inside the rock follows the same in-and-out depth pattern as the carving on the rock's surface.“

"Wait a minute!" Dick snapped his fingers. "I think I get it. By measuring the radioactivity all through the rock, you can figure out what the carving looked like before it was worn away"

The 1950’s saw a huge growth in radiometric dating.

1949 saw the birth of Radio-Carbon dating.

In 1956, Uranium/Lead dating set the age of the Earth at 4.5 billion years.

The Retroscope is sort of visual radiometric dating.

Uranium/Lead dating uses two decay paths:

• 238U goes to 206Pb, with a half-life of 4.47 billion years• 235U goes to 207Pb with a half-life of 704 million years

Basically, one measures the abundance of the appropriate isotopes of Uranium and Lead in a sample. As the Lead came from the Uranium, one can then tell how long it has been since the rock was formed.

The Mention of “Cosmic Rays” (high energy particles from outer space) in the description, implies Radio-Carbon dating

Carbon 14 with a half life of 5730 years is produced from Nitrogen in the atmosphere by impact with a neutron from a cosmic ray.

Plants absorb 14C as Carbon Dioxide during photosynthesis, Animals absorb 14C when they eat the plants.

Absorption stops when the animal or plant dies so the abundance of Carbon 14 gives a measure of the time since death.

Not exactly a Retroscope but……

A technique called “reflectance imaging” inventedby Tom Malzbender of Hewlett Packard brings out details in worn carvings.

Goto:

http://www.hpl.hp.com/research/ptm/ri.html

And play with it yourself.

Published 1962

The Atomicar was an Atomic powered Flying/Floating/Driving machine

(Similar to the Air Monarch from Circling the Globe)

So where did the idea for the Atomicar come from?

The Ford Nucleon!

Reactor Powered Car (1958)

FinnedVersion

The Ford Nucleon!

Reactor Powered Car (1958)

UnfinnedVersion

Reactor and Shielding ( in a removable “capsule”)

Wheels far to the back to support reactor weight

Imagine the traffic reports

"Due to an accident, the 405 will be shut down for the next 50 years....."

Luckily it never got larger than this

And of course there was the Amphicar, first imported in 1961

Now all you need is flight

(Edited from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0QDPHocUgg)

But now we have the Terrafugia, recently approved by the FAA

(Edited from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xo0MEQSGW8w&feature=related)

Science and Tom Swift

On one level it is pretty bad. None of the inventions would work as described. Most of the descriptions are pure gobblety gook.

But I didn’t come to Tom Swift for a science lesson.

I came for some sort of inspiration

Sufficient that:

•The science contains a glimmer of truth

• It reflects current scientific findings

• That there be a good story

To that end we have learned

• A little about atomic aircraft

• A little about Ozone, and rocket fuel

• A little about antimatter and nuclear reactors

• A little about the theory of relativity

• A little about solar energy and solar cells

• A little about radiometric dating

And how all that fit into the time that the stories were written