Jump to content

GearsNSuch

Members
  • Posts

    152
  • Joined

Reputation

278 Excellent

Profile Information

  • About me
    Sprocket Scientist

Recent Profile Visitors

1,469 profile views
  1. Perhaps they should print the money and use it as a more cost-effective form of rocket fuel.
  2. Rings in a binary planetary system. The cursory Google search didn’t yield anything. How would these work? Theoretically the ring would just orbit the center of mass, but would a figure-8 configuration be stable as well? I ran a (highly inaccurate) particle-based simulation that seemed to indicate both would work, but I’d be interested to see if there’s hard data on this.
  3. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_7K-ST_No.16L Two, in this case.
  4. So that’s what all those Boring Company bricks were for…
  5. Gotta love the COVID warning on the second tweet. What would be the drag impact on ascent of scales vs. tiles? I’d guess scales would be a good bit more turbulent…
  6. You have to cross the Karman line for the royalty-free space music to suddenly start playing. If the royalty-free space music doesn’t play, are you really in space?
  7. "Your Amazon order has been delivered."
  8. (Somewhat off topic, but...) If magic use is based on knowledge and training, perhaps the more accessible information that the 18th-19th centuries brought could simplify the process. Rather than climbing a mountain to learn Fireball I from a sage of yore over months of training, you could just pick up a book or take a class and learn the spell in the same time you might take to learn to shoot a rifle. Additionally, a greater understanding of the “science” behind magic could simplify and strengthen the processes of learning and casting.
  9. Would be a shame if an asteroid hit the other side and spoiled the resemblance...
  10. That is simultaneously one of the dumbest and best things I have ever seen. It's a massive chunk of metal gracefully hovering under its own power- it shouldn't work, but it just does. And that is fantastic.
  11. Russia is still very much present and capable after the USSR's fall. There's just no motivation or reason for the state funded Roscosmos to continue to innovate. The rockets they have are reliable and cheap enough– why bother? NASA has a similar problem with SLS (not to bash on it). Between the Soyuz and now the Crew Dragon, there's just not a good enough reason to speed development on. Why bother when there are other options present? During the Space Race, the USSR and the U.S. both had such massive, innovative, and successful space programs because there was a clear goal (winning) with clear benefits (political and strategic power). Ultimately, it was a win for both countries, and something previously unimaginable on both a technical and political level, the Apollo-Soyuz project, became possible. The reason why something like SpaceX can be successful and revolutionary is because there's profit for them in innovating. That's always been the reason, but where that profit comes from has shifted from political sources to commercial, at least in the here and now. So, if some enterprising individual in Russia wanted to found a private launch company and had the brains, finances, and connections to do so...
×
×
  • Create New...