• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by p1t1o

  1. Very likely just down to inaccurate modelling, probably all Zeros. Or a made-up hodge-podge. But they look instantly Japanese hey?
  2. You can extrapolate from what happens up to 1c, or speculate/hypothesise, but the long and short of it is....within the bounds of known science, the question does not make sense. The words "beyond infinity" literally cannot translate to any meaning, like "less than purple". It is the same as asking "what happens if the spacecraft turns into a crocodile?" Within the bounds of the totality of human knowledge, it is not possible to exceed c, it is also not possible for a ship to spontaneously turn into a crocodile. The two possibilities are equivalent. It sounds like Im making fun, but Im not, it is a fascinating subject to discuss - but in this case, it is a dead end. To make guesses about what happens when you accelerate beyond c, means that you discount all of known science - which means that the answer does not have to conform to known science either. Therefore, if the answer "it is unknowable/impossible/non-sensical" is not satisfying enough, the only alternative is "literally anything could happen". It could create a universe, destroy this one, turn into strawberry icing or anything else in between. The best answer we have, disappointingly, then is that you just could not pass c. Not everything you can imagine, is possible in reality. I think that might even be proven, Im not sure. We are getting dangerously close to philosophy here. (In case anybody is thinking along the lines of "Ugh, dead end? How do you think progress was made if people stopped at " dead ends"? I'd say, sure, we can examine what happens beyond c, but first all you have to do is make a paradigm-shifting discovery that realigns the virtual entirely of known science, whilst still explaining everything else just as well as we can now. Its a big ask, but do that and we can talk superluminal. I'll wait )
  3. p1t1o

    Rocket exhaust flowback

    Im sure its possible to take measures, but its not going to be a healthy engine! And yes, because I just googled "rocket turbo pump diagram" or something
  4. Its a sad thing almost. The first manufacturing run of the ammunition had a defect that compromised the thrust nozzles, meaning that all of the ammunition in existence had lacklustre performance and reduced accuracy (spin stabilised by angled rocket exhaust. Compromise the exhaust and you compromise the accuracy.) It was not uncommon for a round not even to make it to the end of the barrel as the weapons were re-cocked by the bullet as it was fired and with the below-spec thrust, they sometimes didnt manage it. (And yeah, I imagine you could put your hand over the barrel and stop it) Unfortunately for rocket-gun enthusiasts, the under-performing weapon made so few sales, to nobody's surprise, that another manufacturing run on the ammunition was not feasible financially and the rocket-gun died behind a desk. It did see some service in Vietnam though, and those who used it liked it alot. They admitted it had no power at close range, but the sound it made ("ZWIIIP" apparently) was unusual and hard to recognise, and did not originate from the shooter's location, meaning that your position was given away much less when firing, which I imagine is all the more important in jungle warfare.
  5. There exists today, proposals for systems operating on a similar principle, but slightly less sci-fi. The high-velocity jet of a shaped charge can be disrupted with magnetic/electric fields, the advantage here is that the jet is only destructive if well aligned/focused so it only takes a moderate disruption to negate its penetration. It relies not on a static magnetic field, but on the current flow between two layers of armour. One layer is highly chaged and a pentrating jet connects the circuit to the other, the resulting current generates fields which "spatter" the jet. It is hoped that it can be upgraded to deal - by dumping enough energy into it to cause it to melt - with kinetic "rod" type projectiles one day. I am not sure how far this has gotten or if it is vaporware however. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_Armor https://www.bmtdsl.co.uk/media/6098489/BMTDSL-Electric-Armour-for-Armoured-Vehicles-Casestudy.pdf
  6. p1t1o

    Rocket exhaust flowback

    The "turbopumps" used in major rocket applications are extremely powerful. Powered by partial combustion of the fuel/oxidiser mix itself, they can generate thousands of horsepower. What you are thinking is correct though, total thrust available is dependent on inlet pressure, the chamber is designed around this and if chamber pressure rose above inlet pressure, yes, you would get damaging (probably catastrophic) backwards flow.
  7. p1t1o

    Shower thoughts

    So I recently realised that there is no such thing as bird milk and that birds dont have nipples. I am objectively aware that this is not necessarily surprising, especially if you know even the smallest amount about birds, but for some reason the realisation came upon me suddenly and its a weird concept to hold in my head. You've probably never thought about "bird milk" before, but is that because you are consciously aware that it cant exist, or merely because you've never thought about it until now?
  8. That is actually a very good point and something I did not consider with my earlier response, it is literally a tank with battleship-calibre weapon! However, not the right kind. That particular 380mm weapon, amongst other of its contemporaries, could indeed be devastating against tanks (heck, even modern tanks, if using modern technology) with a shaped charge. But in reality they would be of very little anti-tank use. They are more closely related to mortars, have a very short (few hundred m) ranges, not really accurate enough to target vehicles (esp. moving ones, projectile too slow) and are designed for demolition of fortifications. In my earlier comment I was imagining a 300mm kinetic anti-tank weapon, which would be huge, essentially identical to a 300mm battleship gun. FunFact: 380mm projectile for Sturmtiger was rocket-assisted: 290mm "dustbin" projectile for Churchill AVRE (similar class of vehicle) : Another FunFact - shaped charges are powerful, there exist today, shoulder-launched RPG variants that can penetrate frontal MBT armour. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1551418/MoD-kept-failure-of-best-tank-quiet.html (no poop they kept it quiet, thats a no-brainer. "Hey enemies! This weapon can damage our tanks!") IIRC the tank was actually missing its usually applique ERA panels on the front, which disagrees with this article, but I could be wrong/misremembering. RPG-29, penetrated frontal armour of a Challenger II. However, internal effects were limited to partial destruction of drivers left foot, and more minor injuries to rest of crew.
  9. p1t1o

    Concept for a Jupiter-Saturn-Haumea flyby probe

    I love the idea of visual image cameras on the atmospheric probe. For some reason, we have sent multiple probes to gas giants but we have precisely zero imagery from within the atmosphere, even though it ought to be some of the most spectacular views in the system! Bonus points for colour video. I mean, its not like high definition video cameras cant be made extremely tiny for a a handful of grams of mass, I dont see why it could not be done. As for names, its tough. Jupiter and Saturn are Latin whilst Haumea is a Hawaiian fertility goddess. I tried to think of something that could link them... For the [real] cargo intended for aliens, I am leaning towards a full download of the internet on some robust media. Its full of questionable content, but you couldnt get a more honest or complete picture of humanity. We'd just have to trust that any aliens capable of responding would understand what it was and what it represented. If Im an alien and I receive a bunch of info from another alien that says nothing bad about them, Im suspicious already. In fact thats a philosophy I follow in life. Met with a broker yesterday (buying 1st house! yay!) and he told us what he was worst at and my respect, and willingness to work with them on our business, went up significantly. Ok so theres worse stuff on the internet but heyho. Perhaps we might leave out the "dark web". Trajectory - various long range probes have made multiple slingshots around Earth before heading out, it may be possible to extend dV or reduce fuel proportion by taking advantage of this. And the voyager probes (IIRC) utilised a rare alignment of the planets to visit multiple places and gain slingshots around each, it would take careful study and prediction of planetary positions and probably a lot of computation, to find another highly optimised trajectory like that. Do you know roughly how long the trip to Haumea could take?
  10. p1t1o

    The Cow Event

    Fair, apologies
  11. Engagement range, nature of likely targets and size/mass of carrier vehicle vs. size/mass of weapon+ammunition. A 300mm tank cannon round would be practically unstoppable, but your tank would weigh 500tons and have a max land speed of 3mph and a vehicle range of 30miles (wild guesses obviously, but you get it). It would also be impossible to camouflage and a sitting duck from the air. Battleships are now obsolete, along with their armaments, main guns are now missiles and naval guns top out around the 155mm mark these days, give or take, for land targets and smaller, closer targets not worth a $500,000 missile.
  12. p1t1o

    Thread to complain bout stuff

    o_0 I'd say report it to the manager but I get a gut feeling that the manager (who is likely aware of this person's employment) might not be much more reliable.
  13. p1t1o

    Big Steel Rockets

    People who build rockets, dont build probes or satellites, they provide a service. Rocket building and advancement, I would presume depends strongly on the demand for launch capacity. Anyone know what the supply/demand ratio is like? Without demand, no funds for new rockets. And without significant demand, it would take a significantly improved rocket to break into the market. Thats as far as I figure it anyway.
  14. p1t1o

    Concept for a Jupiter-Saturn-Haumea flyby probe

    lol GMTA Imagine the look on their faces...
  15. p1t1o

    Concept for a Jupiter-Saturn-Haumea flyby probe

    A mass of energetic but stable organic compounds to show that we understand chemistry. A critical mass of uranium in a sub-critical arrangement to show that we understand nuclear concepts. A mass of lithiuim deuteride for ummmm....ummm....ballast? All wrapped up in a pure gold, precisely machined container to show that we understand fine machining/metallurgical principles and precise engineering.
  16. This, whilst very interesting concept indeed, is not "AI". Or, its what comes after AI, but it is not AI or SGAI or anything like it. This is more like species transcendance. Using artificial means to reactivate evolution of the species as well as enhance, replace, accelerate and control it. Yes, "Artificial Evolution" is a good name for it, and it follows that it would be the next order of magnitude up from AI.
  17. SGAI = strong, general AI. Or "true" AI. SGAS = strong, general artificial stupidity. Precursor to SGAI and a term that I have made up myself which may have questionable utility Commander Data is an SGAI. HAL may be SGAS.
  18. Things dont always automatically evolve up. Biological life certainly doesnt. Vast majority of times, things evolve...dead. I think I coined the term "artificial stupidity" which is A) a term Im unashamedly promoting in case it actually takes off and I become famous and rich (you miss 100% of the shots you dont take) B) is something that we will achieve WAY before artificial "intelligence" ("true" SGAI). C) would be functionally analogous to an unoptimised human mind, which can take the form of anything from a vegetative state to mild mental illness. D) STILL would be kind of a HUGE deal in terms of achievements in artificial thinking/computing/existentialism. E) possibly a continuous spectrum where the line between "SGAS" and SGAI is impossible to define. And on top of that, my personal gut-feeling is that there is some non-zero chance that "true SGAI" is a straight-up impossibility. Like trying to build chemistry with bricks instead of atoms.
  19. Turns out buying a house is totally different from buying anything else in your life. FunFact - newly built developments in London rarely come with parking. Not surprising, its London, space is a premium. But if you are in a new-build you are also ineligible to apply for a council parking permit (available to anyone else in any other kind of property, or any renter) which just seems deliberately cruel.
  20. I think what we are dealing with here is a difference in definition of the term "AI". You appear to have a much more "transhuman"/"transcendant" definition, whereas I think most of us are working from the "standalone artificial life/mind" perspective.
  21. p1t1o

    Shower thoughts

    Thats about it. I think "poison" is a fairly generic term though - if you drink/inject/bathe in it and it kills/hurts you, its poison. But a toxicologist would draw a distinction between toxic effects and an allergic response.
  22. p1t1o


    @DAL59 The christmas hols have passed...I really want to know what the answer is!
  23. Oh thank goodness! Tell that to a shoal of fish