PB666

They have been contacted, in a universally understood sign language (after a couple of drunks wandered onto thier shore and they tried to retrieve the body) they essentially told us to screw off. Video is not suitable for posting according to forum rules, the shame of censorship. You folks consider that first contact would be an vocalization or writing jesture, give thought to the fact it might be a highly profane body jesture basically telling you to go away.

you guys firgot one tiny detail, engines throttle up on the luanch pad and the fuel line exerts rotation against kerbal which resists and the outside tanks resist the turning force, when finally the outside tank goes empty kerbal is no longer attached,matmospheric pressurre is lower and the otsidectanks are lighter sonthere is alot less there to resist that force. Having said that a decent gimble and reaction wheel handkes the problem. you guys argument should have begun with all things being held equal, but end with a rocket flight is a highly dynamic process in which all things do not remain equal in the process.

Other than diatribe you have written nothing of any significance here.

Hes an id--t, what i originally said was asteroid sized, that aspect would be applicable for both colonizing or offense across interstellar space. an just to point out where he is seriously flawed in his critique, an aggregate mass at the front of a near luminal speed vessel is actual what you want, because collisions with gases and space dust will produce a myiad of particles and radiation which you want to absorb before they are absorbed by your inhabitants, food supply and sensitive electronics. A thin shield of lead does not work when it comes to many elementary particles. The other aspect of an asteroid shaped object is that it might not be recognized as a threat, a death star would be easily recognized as a threat (just make certain that ambient heat ir soectrum is released on the lagging side of the craft). The other thing is that over the course of long space flight there will need to be factories and the raw materials of those factories inevitably come from space dust, in the case of roids alot of nickle iron silicon, ect. As one approaches a target, it might be a good time to begin making short range fighters, or if the enemy is weaker, colonizing or terraforming equipment.

http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1113411769/for-the-first-time-scientists-observe-a-two-phonon-quantum-interference-123015/ This is kinda of a science dead period for the forum and just about anywhere. Phonons are simply waveform quanta. If we remeber everything has a wavelength, the more massive the object the smaller the wavelength.

There are several problems, 1. computer control has to change with the loss of each stage, the angular vectors change as the outside engines. 2. The fuel has to be shutoff only for the outside engines while all engines are powered and those fuel lines need to separate with the expired nacell. 3. The fuel in the outside tank is pressurized both for its turbo and for transfer, its level is dropping which means its hydrostatic pressure is falling, while the recieving tank is not. Therefore there is a pressure dynamic between the two tanks that will overpressurize the turbo, the turbo then needs a pressure regulator on it so that it is getting constant fuel. My solution to this problem is to use an sfrb of exact duration required as the base of the outside tank. and place an aero lf tank on top of that, its height being above the starting level of the inside tanks it needs less pressure to move up. Since the sfrb's do not gimble gimbling is reserved for the interior engines The problem with asparagas is that it increases drag by flattening the verticle profile and widening the horizontal profiles. If you want realy great speed after liftoff, then aero tanks and transitions can get across that mach barrier earlier. A mission like new horizons which the launch trajectory is nearly verticle through the atmospere, energy is lost in terms of time spent over the launch pad, so really good sppeds save energy, but require low drag. If you are launchin a superwide space telescope you might use asparagas cause you have to linger at suborbital velocities for longer periods of time.

Which, if you are on the ship, would have to be the antimatter factory on the ship. It takes energy to make anti matter, so that there is no benefit to making antimatter in flight except as a catalyst. To go through the process matter antimatter collision make an enormous amount of energy, as much as the mass of the partcles, howvwer when we talk about the energy required for subluminal interstellar travel its not trivial to store. For it to be useful you would have to contain a sizable fraction of the ship mass in antimatter. Its not simply storing anti matter but storing massive amounts infallably for centuries, because once you arrive at your destination you need to decellerate.

The death black hole. hmmmm, death pulsar, death inflationary quantum singularity, you never know what hit you. My question is why in a science forum in a game without weapons are all the noobs here suddenly interested in fantasy superweapons.......... kiddos, guess what we have no targets, unless you want to blast ice volcanos on enceladas.

Only those have a strong force can measure the force in others. The rest of us are third eye blind, without the royalties of course.

asteroid sized, its not a cliche its my opinion and only my opinion. To be a cliche you have tomcare what other people think on the subject, i don't.

the 747 one of the largest passenger ac has one of the longest glide of any coomercial ac. There are many things that go into drag, jet versus turbo fan, wing loading, air control surfaces, speed, altitude, pressure, temperature. At higher velocites mach effects on parts of the aircraft, .... My opinion, and only opinion, is that the first interstellar craft will be an asteroid sized object, the benefit of which will be to maintain genetic diversity of the colonizers, since outside of modern day fatasies there is a glass ceiling for speed which ultimately is independent of weight (once your out of the inner. solar system surface area for solar energy ceases to be a significant factor), but the marginal ability for any collection of biotes is going to be dependent on space that will be tolerant of micronutrient cycling.... biote> waste> composte > micronutient and gases> phototrophe>>biote. All of this requires space, a power suppy, and currently orange and blue leds and the capacity to make both. If your biotes are living the entire trip: t = d/speed following the 2n rule popsize should follow generations. we can rewrite our equation. unit of t = gen = 22 year therefore unit of d = x * 22 ly this will drive the physicist nutty but if we express speed in c then it becomes the proportion y of c. t = x / y and population size should be safely a multiple of 2t say 16t So lets say are target novaterra is 150 ly and speed is .01c, x = 150/22 = 6.5. 6.5 / 0.01 = 650. And we round off the population size 10000 inds. every ind needs 100 cubic meteres os space (This includes the power plant, radiators, food production, recreation, resource regeneration, radiation deflectors. Lets say the density of the vessel is 0.1. So the volumn is roughly 1000000 cubic meters or .1 km by 1 km by .1km in size. its mass would be 100,000,000 kg. The base assumption here is that a viable fusion power will develope that is permessive of recyclable operation for 15000 years. Technically its a fantastic feat, it would mean wer could create perfect recycling and one machine could make any number of things, including itself. Not really concerned about warmachines. chasing sublumial craft through interstellar space is a futile occupation.

Right? and all caps in the title also.

You could not even begin to describe all the bad physics in star wars, there are no obvoius visible glitches, but to give an example suppose we take the falcons ground collision, the outer dimensions of the m falcon was approximately that of a 737, its descent and was about 25 degrees and rougly going 200 knt, the sine of 25 is roughly 0.4 which means its verticle descent rate when it impacts the ground is 80 knts, to survive the hull would have to be something like a foot thick with interior walls struts and trusses equally robust, so then lets just the passenger is 2 meters from the hull on impact at 40 meters per second and his decelleration is constant (obviously its not but we could asses the minimum g-force). 2 = 0.5 a t ^ 2, a = 40/t therefore 4 = 40t, t = 0.1, 2 = 0.5 a 0.01, 2/0.005 = a, a = 400. Using the continuity therom, it is therefore deduced that the passengers could not survive because at some point when the falcon hit the ground the passengers experienced maximum g forces greater than 30g in fact it had to be greater than 40g. They all died. The list of similar g-forces throughout the movie are the same. So since the laws of physics do not apply over much of the a tion physics the governing law must be non-physical or mathematically defined, its fantasy.

i figure he is correct, someone is going to have a thicker pocket liner because of this. Last call so to speak because its obvious that either private or NASA the west will have a manned launch capability, and the western money will trickle down to zero.

'IF' being the key word. Its no more of a fantasy than wormhole hypothesis. Fantasies after all open up all kinds of logical possibilities, for example if I can say focus the plasma of a star into a planet, then I can beam that plasma to blow up 5 planets at once, and sell a billion in a movie theater on one night. You cannot really argue that one persons fantasy is more logical than the nexts. Fantasies sell, reality is less palatable. As for theoretical physics, if you want to set a practical limit then this is one of the goalpost. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_catastrophe, Lol. String theories problems are small in comparison. Albeit, we can just put these things on the table and just say what they are: Alcubierrie drive (tachyons and the like) Wormholes, wormhole travel Traveling backward in time Quantum based transporters applied to larger than Planck's scale objects. I for one do not believe that entanglement intrinsically limits communication, as the latest experiments seem to demonstrate, the limit may be on space-time (IOW how long-far that it can be done). So for example say I created a billions pairs of entangled particles which I then separated into two identical boxes, I then send one on a ship to a distant world, say 400 hundred years in the future the sent unit is resolved on a timed schedule, followed by observation of the stationed unit, there is nothing to per-say prevent communication as long as the resolution occurs before observation. I could theoretically used this to create a bit map and instantly create an image elsewhere at some later point. Then the question is how to create and keep pairs without their states being modified. Light for instance is difficult to store in situ, electrons are similarly difficult. The extrinsic factors may limit its use in communication. As the latest quantum computing experiments demonstrate that as long as a process does not interfere with other process that 'have go back in time affects' they can proceed along independent lines. If all the wormholes in the universe are preordained, then I could travel back in time using a wormhole to a point when inflation stops, drop a grain of sand at a certain point, and cause a huge sector of the known universe to evolve in a completely different way.

More funny, take human waste, freeze it then use a mass accelerator to eject it backwards. Even more funny, take a focus gamma irradiator place it on a object then have is shine high energy gamma back at the ship to accelerate the ship and coincidentally killing everything on board. If we want to propel things on the Nelson-Hah-hah metric, we can do alot better than mirrors. How about a nuclear reactor that produces radioactive cobalt as its waste which it the mass accelerates for propulsion. Even better a ship that creates warp fields around two proximal adjacent bodies and hurls them backwards therefore propelling itself forward at near light speed (notably altering the orbits of the two celestials until eventually they collide).

The assumption here is that it is a zero sum game, their might be sufficient increase in business for both. The other thing is niche markets, even if one company perfects efficiency in one rocket size, another company can optimize in larger or smaller rockets.

Yeah, as long as the west and their fed is willing to put money into the system. Looks like 2020 before US will have a manned launch capability so . . . . . . .

And wormholes are a fantasy and entanglement is not, if we extend the logic then ftl communication is a fantasy.

Having seen the movie, not only do the structural materials survive insane forces and accelerations, but also the living beings survive being dropped from tie fighters on a ground collision trajectory and survive. Within space they routinely exceed 30g. The basic physics for the movie are pretty bad. Then we go to the nuclear physics, in which the entire plasma from a star is store within a smallish device on a planet and then injected into space to then kill other planets. You can convert regular matter into a compressed bosonic matter, but once you do that you cannot readily retrieve it, and it certainly would not be in a form that you can transport it across space in a stream and expect it remain as a cohesive plasma when it arrives, all nuclear fusion will be lost, it would simply be protons and electrons. These flaws can be added to the flaws of the original movie whose plot it basically copies.

Funny, but impertinent Wormholes convieniently explain long range interactions on the quantum scale, unfortunately for the rest of the world these are not called wormholes but entanglement.

Sure, we need to see what the line looks like once they start cycling, but it could be years before that is in an equilibrium state and you can estimate the variable cost per cycle. This stuff doesn't startup from a lemonade stand, you need to sit on a pretty heavy cap inv before you are going to have a consistent revenue flowing in, if the fed were smart it would return th interest lost on the investment (return on investment if place elsewhere) cause its sure not going to be properly expensed in depreciation. Basically the only way they would ever get that back if they sell they whole thing or go public and sell stock. You just dont have lines of people banging on your door wanting too launch cargo into low earth orbit. The other thing is that there is nothing stopping the chinese from copying thier rocket and offering an asian verion of a space truck, of course a national gov can afford to throw many if they think its for the overall benefit of thier economy. What i am saying barring a sudden unexpected demand for mod/high end payloads, the don't have enough clients to reach an equilibrium state where they can basically spread there startup cost over hundreds of cycles and 10s of launchers. The true cost may not be known for quite a while.

Are you sure they are using strait kero or an aircraft equivilent thereof, they may have additives in the fuel that prevent high temperature ploymerization and carbonization? Reply to discussion concernig BO versus SX:I see now we are getting into the 'whose rocket is bigger discussion'.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-string-theory-science/ This particular article uses string theory as an example of great chasm can grow between experimental and theoretical phyicist, calling in scienc philosophers to modulate. The problem with theorectical physics is observations set boundaries, that either have to be obeyed or observationally explained. Once niether of these can be done tolerances in application can result in a variety of possibilites, as has been suggested by multiverse opponents, there could be universe with laws different from our own. Occamic reasoning applies to limit unneccesary complexity in theories, and only observations can ultimately found a basis for more complexity.

Are you comparing an SFRB with a paper plate? Just remember paper plates cavitate,mleak spill, etc. Lets not overstate the case like the OPs link does but lets also give the reuseabikity folks have thier day in the sunshine, im a big reusability fan, i minch up old legal documents and veg waste and compost them, I hate waste, erks me to no end, The other thing is that returnable vessels help to keep the density orbital bands clean. I see alot of promise with this vessel for potentiall building a mid orbital factory, because it looks like there is the potential of having an assembly line of fast turn over vehicles, if NASA can have an in orbit assembly platform then we can seriously talk about manned missions within the inner solar system.