What if the ideal breakthrough space propulsion physics solution were also easily-achievable?

That would be some pretty bold, good news if true, wouldn't it?

If you have a few minutes, let's walk through the possibilities.

In your wildest imagination, what would the ideal space propulsion breakthrough innovation be like? What qualities, capabilities, properties and attributes would it have?

This is what I came up with.

It would be useable.

Obviously, it can't be just an idea. It has to be a thing, like continuously defying gravity at will or riding on light anytime, anywhere.

It would be reliable.

We would want it to be consistent and trustworthy, a source of confidence.

It would use what's happening in nature anyway, like the proverbial sun coming up in the morning, and tailor it to our advantage.

It would be fast.

The ideal breakthrough innovation would be instantaneous and continuous, always ready for speed-of-light convenience on-demand. It would take advantage of the fact that activity at the smallest scales in nature, the atomic and molecular level, and of light itself, is a lot quicker than at our scale, and very reliably repeats itself a quadrillion, 1,000,000,000,000,000, i.e., 10^15 times per second. This would allow us to use time as a tool, freeing us from repetitious, time-consuming efforts such as loading and reloading fuel.

It would be compact.

It would consist of materials that are neatly packed for the best density, affording us utility and convenience, allowing for decentralization and wide distribution.

With a small footprint, it would appeal aesthetically.

Imagine a handy little soup can of "thrust", like something from 1960s science fiction.

Combining the last three attributes, reliable, fast and compact, our ideal breakthrough propulsion physics innovation would be efficient.

It would embody the best use of materials, time and space to achieve a desired result. This is generally called energy density. How long and how fast the energy can be used, are described in different terms. But since we want it repeatedly, for as long as we want and all of the time, it's easy to simplify to the notion of energy density plus time. Ideally, it would do most of the work using natural phenomena hardwired by nature and recurring in time, so that once deployed, it just does what it does until we stop it.

The propulsion physics breakthrough would produce the most useful reactions in the largest numbers, in the least time and repeatedly, within the smallest space.

To visualize such ideal efficiency, think of the energy released from the atomic bomb by only two pounds of reactive material. Remember those first grainy moving images from the 1940s? Now imagine them reversed and in slow motion. Instead of exploding light, heat and radiation, we'd capture such energy from the sun and other stars and focus it for a far more productive end.

We'd like to cause something like that to happen not only just once and explosively, but continuously, smoothly and repeatedly at 10^15 times per second. This would allow a physically much smaller space to produce reliable on-demand propulsion.

It would use "too good to be true" math.

The atomic bomb example shows how we can use our cosmic spot, roughly in the middle scale of space, to our advantage. We have yet to fully explore these same advantages in time.

Math explains how the "too good to be true" actually is true, and makes the "impossible" easier to accept objectively.

I like to think of it this way:

"Large numbers of little things, doing little things quickly and repeatedly, add up to very big things."

It would use easily-explainable science.

Ideally, for the sake of confidence, we'd want to know why an innovation is efficient and reliable. As we advance technologically, there is no reason why such knowledge can't be made increasingly understandable and accessible to the average person. Advanced space propulsion systems and concepts imply an elegant simplicity.

The breakthrough needn't necessarily be based on some new discovery, but perhaps on old, established reliables put together in a new and better way. It could use well-known natural principles, but perhaps more wisely.

For example, consider our atomic bomb in reverse. It's constructive, not destructive. Think of it continuously and smoothly focused to a productive end, instead of exploding just once.

Concepts like that are easy to understand.

It would be self-actuating, continuously using the least amount of effort to perpetuate itself.

We'd like to just set up our ideal device and let it run. It would continuously be doing something useful in keeping with its hardwired nature. It would just keep going, in the way we think of fire feeding itself, eliminating or minimizing the need for constant attention with refueling and the like.

"Nature-based" applies here because highly efficient natural devices already exist that do most of the work we envision, such as atoms, molecules and photons. Reliably, they always behave in a certain ways in certain circumstances, just like the sun coming up in the morning. Our mission is to create and perfect the ideal circumstances.

There may be no "perpetual motion", but fourteen billion years and still ticking is a good start.

It would be sustainable.

Why is sustainability an ideal attribute? Because it's reliability plus time, something that won't run out. We'd like our breakthrough innovation to approach the perpetual, or to at least to give us the confidence that we'll have it available to us for "long enough".

It would be made with and run on, abundant materials and natural occurrences.

For the sake of cost, convenience and reliability, we'd prefer using things that are easy to find, make and replace. Ideally, it would be composed of as many readily available materials as possible. These would likely be basic elements making the best use of their natural tendencies in an environment of common natural occurrences. Of course, we'll have to set them up to optimize. And undoubtedly, some very fancy technology will be facilitating at the atomic, molecular and photonic level, probably metamaterials and optomechanical devices.

It would be achievable.

First, we must be able to visualize our ideal innovation confidently, knowing that it can be realized. We'll have to create the conditions that allow basic elements to operate at peak efficiency. That's where our own nature, as "nature-based" problem solvers, comes in. This will have to be thought through first with cold realism, not giddy idealism, while bearing in mind that when nature meets human practicality and engineering meets imagination, it's no time to be timid.

Perhaps no phrase has ever been more of a "reality distortion" than "it can't be done".

To date, progress has favored the optimistic.

It would be simple.

The "ideal" would be devoid of unnecessary complexity restricting our use and understanding. It would use basic physical and chemical reactions optimally, with the fewest materials and moving parts. It would be easy-to-understand, operate and maintain.

It will be easier to explain to a typical child of the future than the well-educated adult of the present.

It would be anthropic, compatible with human life.

For the sake of health and safety, it would favor smooth operation over unnecessarily dangerous force and produce the minimal amount of byproducts. It would allow for flexibility and freedom, and be widely distributable, useable anywhere.

It would be intuitive.

The ideal breakthrough propulsion physics innovation would seem intuitive in its design, use and intelligibility. It would fit seamlessly with human behavior and sensibilities. Its archetypes might even remind us of the "nice" part of nature, green, clean, comforting and peaceful. It would encourage us to feel like part of a system.

It would be innovative.

Finally, it would be innovative, not simply change for change's sake, but because adapting to, or even considering novel originality is often how we imagine new things ourselves. Innovation in itself benefits us all, expanding the entire paradigm horizon. And here we are.

"If you do what you always do, you get what you always got." - Albert Einstein

Well, that was a nice wish list, but what if this ideal is entirely possible?

What if the "breakthrough" came about by simply reframing the problem, combining old reliable, but disjointed scientific silos and optimizing what we already know? Maybe we really can look to nature for basic, smooth and continuous low energy reactions that "add up" to something useful. It might be something as ruthlessly efficient as the atomic bomb but gentle as a floating cloud.

It is suggested that this is indeed achievable, and the next breakthrough propulsion physics solution may well have been found.

In fact, it might look exactly like the Hydrogen Light Pump-Jet, or (gx) for brevity.

Essentially, this is an optomechanical photonic pump used to manage gravity by enhancing the inherent capability of matter, e.g., hydrogen, to absorb and expel light, causing both a continuous loss of mass-equivalence and radiation pressure. For a quick overview, click on the image, it goes to the "ad" slides. The images there and the balance of this webpage are meant to give you an idea of how and why this idea works.

In the plainest language possible, hydrogen is contained under the conditions needed to easily and continuously manipulate it, probably within a metamaterial in an optomechanical device. The hydrogen is stimulated using photonic or electromagnetic force causing it to absorb and expel ambient light. By definition, the absorbed light becomes mass temporarily as it passes through, and is then expelled as light, propelling with radiation pressure. Alternatively, this may be viewed as minimizing the effect of gravity because of the continuous loss of mass, i.e, it may be described from both Newtonian or Einsteinian viewpoints. Either way, this absorption and emission, to wit "pumping" repeatedly in the femtosecond range, 10^15, times per second, "propels" or "frees" the hydrogen and whatever is attached to it. The process allows the device to elude the effects of gravity and it is thus able to "move" from a gravity-centric frame toward a "speed of light" frame caused by the cumulative effect of pumping light repeatedly in low-gravity environments like space.

The relevant scientific threads supporting this have been around for a while, some in silos for centuries, but were never consolidated and completely thought through with utility in mind, particularly mass-energy equivalence. Extrapolating the behavior of small particles into breakthrough propulsion physics probably isn't task-specific routine science, but it is where the "fresh eyes" cliché has historically proved its worthiness.

Easy ways to think of this include, "reusable rocket fuel", "extreme turbo hot air balloon", "continuous radiation pressure", "the light burner" and "rocket fuel x 10^15". Until one of those names or concepts takes hold, it will be abbreviated here as (gx), short for "gravity transparency", rather than using the cumbersome "Hydrogen Light Pump-Jet".

"Large numbers of little things, doing little things quickly and repeatedly, add up to very big things."

In light of this proposed method, let's address those ideal attributes again and see how it measures up. We'll do it in reverse order this time, from the "wish list" to the most useful and basic.

It's innovative.

This is a completely original approach from inspired fresh eyes. It's entirely novel, not simply change for change's sake or another predictable iteration. It came about unintentionally and independently, through curiosity, intuition, observation and research free of corporate, governmental or institutional influence.

As a result, this is the first and only propulsion approach to continuously pump light through matter for thrust.

That alone makes it singular and distinctive, and why it may be called a "breakthrough".

It's intuitive.

Once its basic natural principles are understood in their simplicity, (gx) seems intuitive, comporting well with human sensibilities. One of its archetypes, a floating cloud, has been hiding in plain sight all along and reminds us of the pleasant aspects of nature, green, clean, comforting and peaceful.

The notion of light propelling something heavier than air is easy to understand when we drop the math and science for a moment and think intuitively. We see this happening with gravity-defying water in clouds and levitating plastic, i.e., balloons, and can envision mimicking and improving upon this common phenomenon. With a little thought, it becomes clearer. Multi-spectral white light is pumping through a cloud, invisible light through a balloon and bold-colored flames from a rocket. "Mass energy equivalence" isn't exactly intuitive until the commonalities are considered, but what it tells us and we haven't exploited is, that light itself can be used as fuel. The faster light is pumped through mass, the easier the mass will elude gravity. Somehow, millions of tons of water in those clouds outside your window are levitating, molecule by molecule.

Replicating that seems sensible, intuitive and instinctive.

Even a guy like Bill Gates, with lots of available diversions at his disposal, spends time thinking about "flying without feathers" and Beating Nature at Its Own Game.

That's the essence of what we're doing here, perfecting the light-matter interaction.

It's anthropic, amenable and compatible with human life.

The (gx) approach favors clean, smooth operation over unnecessarily dangerous force. Other than the generic challenges nanotechnology manufacturing presents, it will produce the minimal amount of byproducts, making it distributable and useable anywhere. This allows flexibility and freedom.

The process uses only ambient light and does so highly efficiently. The challenge of balancing the net input-output wavelengths will have to be considered however, which at this level of efficiency, is a good problem to have. It allows us to envision light-propelled spacecraft with the ideal green propellant thruster.

"The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift." - Albert Einstein

It's simple.

This process is deceptively simple to understand. It's "subtle but not malicious", one might say. Essentially, it's only hydrogen pumping light, which happens naturally anyway. It uses basic physical and chemical reactions optimally, and eliminates unnecessary complexity.

"Breakthrough" talk notwithstanding, big problems don't necessarily require complicated solutions. Sometimes the answers are hiding in plain sight and significant insights emerge from everyday experiences.

Although this innovation can be described with impressive scientific obscurantism, Feynman diagrams and equations involving curved space, it's also just a reverse-engineered, nature-based solution. If you have a three week old helium balloon from the Ocee Dollar Tree losing altitude near a window on a sunny day, take a mirror and reflect the sun onto it. You'll see the same "antigravity" principle that will soon allow us to have light-speed travel. When the appearance of "steam" or "evaporative melting" causes heavier-than-air water clusters or snow crystals to fly off the face of the Earth after a Pennsylvania spring shower, or on such a clear blue New York City winter's day, maybe there's a very simple reason for it. And perhaps there's something universally applicable we can learn from it.

Throughout history, seemingly mundane observations like those have inspired more than a few innovations. This is another one of those times.

It's achievable.

Some of you are starting to visualize this, knowing that it can be realized, understanding that it will take a singularly focused effort. This is where our own nature, as "nature-based" problem solvers, comes in. We can create the conditions which will allow these basic components to operate at peak efficiency and our lives will improve dramatically. It'll have to be carefully thought through first, but the concept is undeniably sound. It simply reflects the physical world as it is.

With the foundation proposed here, we can imagine ourselves eluding gravity at the speed of light and achieve it.

It's not going to leap off the screen and become a reality, however. It's been a slow, patient pursuit to get only just this far. This is not even close to a "moonshot" or Manhattan Project yet, merely a compelling concept meriting careful consideration. Exploring its potential is in our nature as curious humans, and investment will cost very little in light of the "space race" mentality dollars continually pursuing identical Newtonian projects. Instead of more of the same, we'll need people that are interested and involved in creating fresh technology, i.e., understanding a new application for the basic physics described here. It should begin as a steady, rigorous effort by dedicated people moving prudently in the manner of, e.g., NASA Innovative Advanced Concepts but privately, like the "small sat" satellite startups.

This is a chance to go far beyond the current short-sighted goals of the status quo and consider something completely new.

The Photonic Age has dawned and space travel breakthroughs are going to emerge. This is one of the first.

"Nothing is more imminent than the impossible... what we must always foresee is the unforeseen." - Victor Hugo

It's sustainable.

For reliability plus time, (gx) depends primarily on things that won't run out soon, such as hydrogen, light and time itself. This gives us confidence that we'll have it available for "long enough". We can envision it approaching the perpetual.

Think about it. Somewhere out in a Pillar Of Creation, a hydrogen atom is breathing photons, passing light through itself 10^15 times every second, completely mitigating gravity, just as it has for long before the Milky Way was ever formed. That very process is similar to what's happening in the clouds above you right now and is just waiting to be put to use by us.

We will create our own hydrogen cloud and ride on it.

It's only a matter of time.

It's self-actuating, continuously using the least amount of effort to perpetuate itself.

Hydrogen molecules, atoms and ions do what they do, reliably on their own. We'll just set up our ideal device, let the light shine in and allow it to run. It will continue to pump light for propulsion in keeping with its hardwired nature, producing the pumped mass-equivalence, i.e., "thrust" we need. These nature-based, highly efficient natural components are already doing most of the work we envision anyway. Reliably, they always behave in certain ways in certain circumstances, just like the sun coming up in the morning.

While there may be "no such thing as perpetual motion", fourteen billion years and still ticking is a good start.

The thing with hydrogen is, if you keep feeding it photons, it will keep generating thrust. It's an ideal green propellant.

But don't take my word for it.

It uses easily-explainable science.

The science behind this can be made understandable to the average person. It's not some new discovery, just a couple of established old reliables put together in a new and better way. We know that hydrogen atoms and molecules are efficient and reliable, continuously pumping light through themselves, but simply have not applied this knowledge. Whether we dig into the depths of scientific complexity as far as they go, or just use common sense, the results are the same. The way forward is clear.

Someday, hindsight may describe this as a natural, obvious iterative step based on mass-energy equivalence. It simply and inevitably moved the frame from Newton to Einstein. Others may call it an accidental dumbing-down backward into sheer elegance. We'll see.

What follows are excerpts from an unpublished webpage, mostly containing technical information on hydrogen, observations on gravity from several viewpoints, and prospects for configuring optomechanical metamaterials in order to accomplish this.

An easy way to understand this concept is by simply re-framing our earthbound conundrum from, "How can we make this mass, e.g., a rocket, move at the speed of light?" to "How do we attach ourselves to mass that already continuously moves at the speed of light?" This process contemplates attaching our "mass" to that of hydrogen's, taking advantage of its natural tendencies, using time as a tool, then optimizing it. It asks us to move beyond simply using "stored" light, but to visualize and maximize a continuously re-loading engine and build around it. Nature provides us with that engine. What we must do is set it, tune it, guide it and maintain it. That may seem tautological at first, but we are halfway there now. Consider the mass we build around tiny liquid hydrocarbons with air conditioning, courtesy lights and cup holders. One can also liken the notion behind this process to just a highly sophisticated balloon.

Because of its unmatched ability to absorb and emit light, hydrogen, which can be thought of here as our "fellow mass," is inherently about as gravity transparent as it gets in this universe.

Hydrogen is there for us to use, there is no need to re-invent the wheel.

Light is the rule, we are the lumbering clumps of slow exception.

Using mass-energy equivalence, this process adds the deterministic inventive step of causing mass to move at c smoothly and continuously, directed efficiently by moving the light, i.e., "c", through it repeatedly and purposefully. It isn't rocket science. It's easier.

That page describes all of this and ways to accomplish it in mind-numbing detail with some 300 footnotes, mostly scholarly articles, but must remain confidential for now. In the meantime, those interested should investigate along the lines of "quantum gravity optomechanics", "radiation pressure", "Poynting vector", "hydrogen spectrum", "Saha equation hydrogen", "mass-energy equivalence", "Saha-Langmuir equation", "laser (cooling, trapping, levitation)", "optical tweezers", "levitated optomechanics", "gravity theories", "gravity waves", "general relativity", so forth and et cetera in Google and Google Scholar.

We're going to tie all that together using metamaterials and optomechanics for the ideal photonic propulsion system. One of the LinkedIn articles mentioned at the very beginning of this page proposes it this way:

"Lighter-than-air carbon nanotubes, graphene films and sponges are known for their hydrogen storage capabilities. Also, carbon's optical, mechanical, thermal and electrical properties offer various methods of stimulating hydrogen to pump light. This combination allows the possibility of a material that can pump light for thrust, achieving an unprecedented gravity transparency. In space, continuously pumping light will have a cumulative effect on velocity unmatched by current and planned technologies."

"The European Space Agency's (ESA) new air-breathing electric thruster represents a slight move in this direction. Light-breathing in a gravitational field can be seen as its logical Einsteinian extension."

This propellantless approach may be distinguished from others because it is an open system, unlike the proposed closed systems using the quantum vacuum, Unruh waves or inertia in general. So "conservation of momentum" principles are not a problem here. Indeed, the momentum transference from light to matter may be seen as a distinct advantage. Nor does it dig as deep as those approaches, but only as far as gravity waves and gravitons. Described as "light freeing mass from gravity", it might also be seen as light pulling, pushing from within (unlike sails or beams) or dragging mass through gravity, somewhat similar to the mechanisms of those concepts. It can also be viewed as a disentanglement, a smoothing of the local gravity-mass "fabric", caused by light passing through, allowing the mass a greater degree of freedom. Perhaps a photon's spin-1 partially unties a hydrogen atom's knotty spin-1/2 electron from the vastly more dense, but simpler web of spin-2 graviton foam.

Overall, its components and principles are presently better understood and much more easily observed, despite being vastly underutilized.

It uses "too good to be true" math.

This underlying principle represents a major distinction from the current thinking, capitalizing fully upon the rules of causation. We can use our cosmic spot, roughly in the middle scale of both time and space, to our advantage. The "too good to be true" actually is true, and when applied to the physical world, makes the "impossible" easier to accept objectively. We've done this before with space to an extent, e.g., the atomic bomb, rockets and nuclear power, but not fully in time.

(gx) uses time as a tool, another reason it can be called a "breakthrough".

Fasten your seat belt and start thinking along these lines. Consider the thrust from some typical one-and-done rocket fuel, but multiply it by roughly 10^15 times a second. True, a one-and-done burner or combiner includes lots of extra one-time mass from oxygen, hydrogen, hydrocarbons or even ions, but that's not even going to be a rounding error in the long run. So, throw out the one-time mass benefit of your favorite fuel but add the permanent continuous loss of mass-equivalent at 10^15 times a second. Do that for any rocket calculation you choose. You're going faster, longer and quicker with far less. Every which way you calculate the thrust (how much - or in this case, how much less), dot m (how fast - 10^8 compared to 10^5 or 10^3) and ISP (how long - years versus seconds), or by conceptually simplifying those parameters into a reloading, light-pumping momentum-exploiting "rocket", the numbers are staggering. Do it for yourself, your way, and get it over with. That's the best way to learn and quickest way to form an opinion.

The photon mass attenuation coefficient, a general concept covering light-pumping ability, looks promising for work in this area. It's well-studied and comes with a nice array of radiometry units that will keep lots of engineers so busy out-optimizing each other they'll eventually forget all about the yesteryear of "thrust", back when the horse was still behind the cart.

Start thinking in terms of zero gravity. Everything is moving as our serene light-burner remains completely still, Earth silently spinning off at 67,000 mph. You numbers-types will have plenty of fun inventing new empirometrics, turning rocket equations, hops and gravity assists inside-out, determining how to float through an expanding universe with moving galaxies, because those stars are coming to you now. When gravity becomes meaningless, the frame changes. No matter how it's done, you'll see that this quickly adds up to astronomical amounts of ever-quickening continuous thrust, inertial mass reduction, negative mass propulsion, bent space, pulled space, speed of light whatever and the like. The numbers quickly overwhelm, and it becomes easier to just think of this as a concept.

Now let's compare this "10^15" engineering design philosophy to the "one and done" firecracker transactions of a popping hydrocarbon rocket fuel bond, the premature wasted spurt of an oxygen-hydrogen combination or the drip-drip-drip of rapidly depleting ions. Think about how much more hydrogen can do if used correctly.

Imagine finding a humble penny. Now imagine finding 10^15 pennies. Next, imagine finding 10^15 pennies a second, every second.

Notice that the rote rapid quick repetition routine I keep repetitiously repeating starts to mean a lot when doing math with a ubiquitous "10^15" tacked on to everything. If there's a twist, kicker or trick to all this, that's it. Except it's none of those things. It's math. Those are the rules.

Ponder it. Play around with it.

Now do you see the inevitability?

"Large numbers of little things, doing little things quickly and repeatedly, add up to very big things."

It's efficient, i.e., reliable, fast and compact.

Efficiency happens when using the "is" correctly. The (gx) process embodies the best use of materials, time and space to achieve a desired result. This is nearly optimal energy density, used in time at full capacity. It will do this work repeatedly, for as long as we want and all of the time, using natural phenomena hardwired by nature. Once deployed, it just does what it does until we stop it, thoroughly fulfilling and satisfying the notion of energy density plus time.

To viscerally comprehend such vastly improved efficiency, think again of the energy released by the atomic bomb from only two pounds of reactive material. Visualize it reversed and in slow motion. Instead of the exploding light, heat and radiation, imagine it coherently captured from the sun and other stars, and pulled through two pounds of material for a far more productive end. Visualize it happening continuously, smoothly and repeatedly at 10^15 times per second, far faster than we can see. The repetition allows a physically much smaller space to produce such astronomical amounts of reliable, on-demand propellantless propulsion.

Using more of the fourth dimension allows us to use less of the other three.

Understanding that concept is how we go from looking askance at claims of "rocket fuel x 10^15" to acceptance of a powerful reality. This is a material with superior density, which is used for a far more efficient process and does so repeatedly, fully utilizing time. To say that it compares quite favorably to current and proposed methods is an understatement. Click on this comparison slide for a quick overview.

The thing with hydrogen is, if you keep feeding it photons, it will keep generating thrust.

It's compact.

(gx) primarily uses materials that are neatly packed by nature for the best density and reused repeatedly. This provides utility and convenience, allowing decentralization and wide distribution. With a small footprint, it will appeal aesthetically. It'll be tough, if not impossible, to compete with the energy density and absolute utility of hydrogen and its ions for this propulsion system application. The next level can be envisioned, but probably won't be feasible for quite some time.

The handy little soup can of "thrust" from science fiction isn't far off. We'll just have to work for it.

When I first fully realized that a small amount of hydrogen can do so much, it hit with a a visceral reaction. I literally fell halfway out of my chair. It was a euphoric, disorienting sense of freedom. That day I saw the clear blue Alpharetta sky as water, jet trails looked as boat wakes do from an airplane. I was dizzy for a few days, and sometimes Earth still feels like walking upside down on the ceiling, but you adjust.

Once you've viscerally "felt" this concept in the body and mind, it blends, mixes and merges into acceptance. There was a too-long anecdote edited from here, ending with the conclusion that I ultimately adapted by relying on the bomb example, math and my own nuclear power background to finally rationalize this. The world looks different, old and slow, but cozy old-timey. And now I'm duty-bound to propose this, as tinfoil hat crazy as it seems, knowing that the math is what it is and the science says what it says, ultimately substantiating an unshakeable confidence.

It's fast.

(gx) is instantaneous and continuous, always ready for speed-of-light convenience on-demand. It takes full advantage of the fact that activity at the smallest scales in nature, atomic, molecular, and, of course, light itself, is a lot quicker than things at our scale and very reliably repeats itself. We'll use time as a tool and free ourselves from repetitious, time-consuming efforts such as finding, processing and reloading fuel.

Light is the basic component here, photons our raw material. It doesn't get any faster folks, and the pumping happens almost that quickly. This will be capable of producing increasingly large amounts of photonic propulsion "thrust" faster than anyone will need for a while, unless they're planning on leaving for Delta Pavonis tomorrow afternoon.

It's reliable.

Hydrogen atoms, molecules and photons are consistently trustworthy sources of confidence, like the proverbial sun coming up in the morning. So we'll simply use what's happening in nature anyway.

Hydrogen reliably pumps light. It's an ideal pre-existing metamaterial that does exactly what we need.

Is what it is, and it does what it does. It's been fourteen billion years or so and the universe is still ticking.

It's fun to face the facts when they're so unbelievably good, isn't it?

Finally...

It's useable.

Bottom line, the ideal breakthrough propulsion system, like continuously defying gravity at will or riding on light anytime, anywhere, already exists. It is light pumping through matter, defying gravity. It is riding on light anytime, anywhere.

It turns out that the glowing orb magically overcoming gravity science fiction writers intuitively foresaw was entirely possible. In fact, it was probable and inevitable, not magic at all. This page told you what it is.

But how can this be?

One day somebody accidentally found an answer and asked, "What problem does this thing best solve?" The problem didn't take long to find. He had worked backward out of curiosity and tripped over a black swan. Nothing was intentionally reverse-engineered, but a nature-based solution was found anyway.

The purpose-driven concept of reverse-engineering from nature, to "beat it at its own game", or "fly without feathers", is perhaps the best guiding principle that science and engineering have going for them right now. I'd like to see more straightforward efforts like this one, the Joint Center For Artificial Photosynthesis. In fact, this webpage is meant in-part to likewise inspire a private endeavor for "artificial anti-gravity", at least until they find the real stuff.

We might then also take the next inevitable step and start looking to the very nature of things, such as light, hydrogen and time used here, to see what do they do best and consider what they are there for.

God's thoughts were good enough for Einstein, they ought to be good enough for the innovation culture.

But let's save the philosophy for another round of Poppers and Kuhns, shall we?

Right now, let's just recognize that (gx) is quite possibly the ideal solution to the problem at hand. Let's admit that nature is onto something here and use it, instead of trying to wishfully think unicorns into existence. What we have in hydrogen seems to provide more than enough potential already.

Final Notes

Despite this quaint presentation, I'd expect more than a few will come away somewhat persuaded that this solution is shockingly close to an ideal, one they never thought they'd see. Join the club. The biggest problem right now is its unconventional source, although the conventional ones are slowly beginning to show more and more interest. Fortunately, the physics ultimately makes the argument idiot-proof and self-evident. That the advanced interstellar deep space photon propulsion system of the future came from someone looking at clouds and balloons seems more than appropriate. It's eventually going to happen anyway. But why wait another 500 years?

So now I'm looking to you asking for help. That's you venture capitalists, national energy labs, pending NASA Administrators, Peter Thiels, Elon Musks, science illustrators, fundraisers, journalists, social media buzz-causers, 'real' scientists looking for that first Nobel Prize just for formalizing this, ecomodernists, futurists, artists, Nascent Light-Matter Interactions (NLM)-types, UFO propulsion technology systems wonks, academics, space buffs or anyone else at all interested.

Here's a very special link just for the venture capitalists, addressing your concerns with some hipster IP jargon about scaling black swans and pivoting unicorns: "The Flying Car - A Black Swan Hiding In Plain Sight". Decks, pitches, speeches, double-secret trade secrets, unpublished webpages, patent documents and the like are available for discussion.

Questions and comments are welcomed on Twitter or by email, bk@suretyinsider.com.

Thank you.

*Nature-based solutions is the latest green jargon that means more than you might think
11 January 2017, Nature
"It may sound vague, but the term represents real and vital concepts."

© 2017 Bryan Kelly