Value chain · CLM-0059
In plain terms
The two fields were largely the same people from the 1970s, and papers linking them were still appearing after 1991.
The claim as recorded
The ionospheric physics and space solar power literatures were substantially the same community between 1974 and 1991, including Thome and Perkins in Physical Review Letters in 1974, Perkins with Oberman and Valeo in 1974, Duncan and Gordon in 1977, Perkins and Roble in 1978, Perkins and Goldman in 1981, and a dedicated journal, Space Solar Power Review, whose volume 2 is dated 1981; bridging papers continue after 1991, including a 2002 paper in Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics motivated by the MINIX and METS rocket experiments that cites Perkins and Goldman and Perkins and Roble, before a 2004 ESA review.
Scope and limits
A history assembled from citation trails, not from a published account of the field. The 1991 to 2004 gap first stated here is withdrawn: a held 2002 paper bridges the two fields inside it. ONE LEG OF THIS CLAIM IS WEAKENED by SCN-004, 2026-09-06. The support calls the existence of a dedicated journal, Space Solar Power Review, from 1981 "the strongest single indicator" that the connection was once routine. That journal has NO RECORD in either index reachable here: Crossref's journals index returns zero for the exact title, Crossref works returns zero exact container-title matches and drifts to the modern and unrelated Space Solar Power and Wireless Transmission, and NTRS returns keyword noise and no journal record. THIS IS NOT DISPROOF - a 1981 journal predates DOI registration, and NTRS indexes NASA STI rather than third-party journals - but the strongest single indicator is not independently confirmable by any route available here. The claim is NOT retired: the author-and-venue trail is a separate leg and stands.
What it assumes
No assumptions are recorded against this claim.
Where it comes from
Author and venue trail established 2026-09-02. The existence of a dedicated journal, Space Solar Power Review, is the strongest single indicator that the connection was once routine; SRC-104 PDF p24 cites "Space Solar Power Rev., 2, 87-101, 1981", so volume 2 is 1981 and volume 1 earlier (inferred from volume 2's date). Post-1991 bridge: SRC-273 (2002) PDF p1 names the MINIX and METS rocket experiments as its setting, and its reference list (PDF p10) includes Perkins and Goldman and Perkins and Roble.
Related records
- Answers question
- QST-009 not published in this release
Cite this
energyaperture.com/c/clm-0059
CLM-0059, Energy Aperture, as of 2026-09.
Connected records
Other published records linked to this one. A list, not a judgement.
- Also from SRC-104
- CLM-0042The 230 watts per square metre figure applies to one frequency and one design lineage. Japanese designs at a higher frequency allow up to...CLM-0057There is a formula for the instability threshold. It depends on electron density cubed, electron temperature to the fourth power, and...CLM-0075When ESA revisited the question in 2004 it used the 1978 theory and did not cite the 1979-81 Platteville tests or NASA's 1981 revision of...CLM-0079The 1978 paper modelled both a ground facility and a satellite case, and its 500 watts per square metre figure is a power flux for a given...CLM-0083The formula is the right type but nobody has said how far it can be pushed, and at space solar power frequencies the wave is about 200...CLM-0108A 2004 ESA review found that during the October 2003 solar storm, just under 20 per cent of a space solar power beam would have been...CLM-0109In normal conditions the ionosphere takes essentially none of the beam. In a severe solar storm it could take a little under a fifth of it.CLM-0130The quiet-condition absorption figures from four sources do not disagree. One of them states an upper bound and the others sit inside it.More on the source page.
- Also from SRC-273
- CLM-0165A search for other, independent scientific papers that might confirm or challenge the well-known formula used to set space solar power's...CLM-0167A 2002 computer simulation, done because of two Japanese space-solar-power rocket experiments, modelled a different kind of plasma...