PB666

Why exactly is this thread still active?

Energy is a property of matter. The difference between matter and other energy is that in matter the energy is tied up in feilds that interact and stabilize each other, and/or the whole. If you were to pluck just one of these out, the rest would become energy of various sorts. Energy added to matter in any form increases the mass. Energy in the form of photons can create matter de Nova at high enough energy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pair_production This general requires a perturbance such as a nucleus, but in the early universe there was a plethora of exotic particles running around that suffice tonprovide the impetus.

Gravity - stuff that should rest has a tendency to wake up and run to other stuff. Quantum mechanics. Small units of things don't obey rules and prefer to gamble their lives away. Relativity. We don't like too see things go too fast were they get funky. General relativity - stuff that should rest is actually resting only we don't see it because we have a warped point of view. deBroglie hypothesis - we all got the shakes. The bigger you are the faster you shake. Laser - electron and magnetism things whip atoms into shape like soldiers in a formation. Higgs boson - a wave of nothing traveling nowhere that grabs at things and makes them feel all heavy. If mass was a woman Higgs would be her period. .

Power transformer could have shorted to ground, overheated, volatilized some kero then ignited it.

In KSP blowing up is ALWAYS an option.

I think this plane pushes its specs in every possible way. This is NOT a passenger plane, it seat 150 people, and that has to be standing room only, jeeze. They are going to re-manufacture this, with one operational 225 and a heck of and expensive outlay.

NASA says the opposite, this group never ceases to create 100 irrelevent side arguements. They have stated the thrust output at power.

http://phys.org/news/2016-09-genesis-projectnew-life-exoplanets.html Genesis project.

Lets not add information that is not published. That order is vested. You test in space first, then you think about commercializing. Other than the ethical concerns here, the primary problem as I have stated above concerns the power up and distribution of thruster. You may want underpowered thrusters (lightweight as possible) spread out in space. Otherwise you are wasting a KW of power for a nanoNewton of thrust.

Thats not true, it caused 5 or so folks here to just bubble over with strut speculation, conspiracy theories and other diatribe. It must have been an intergalactic psychotacheon ray.

Well of so then we just throw in a conspiracy to mix things up. How many private rocket companies other than ULA have had a run longer than 6 flights.

You guys are making alot of hype about conspiracies and the like. There a whole bunch of different launchpad disasters that can occur at least one of them has a probability of happening every 60 years. Seriously SpaceX got like 6 flights up in a row, they were do for a faux-pas, nothing exciting there.

Doubtful

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/chandra/record-breaking-galaxy-cluster-discovered.html This is sort of an interesting article, it is sort of self-fulfilling because they look for the glow of gas as a sign that clusters have formed. Loose galaxies cluster at a point with the intergalactic gas mobilizes and associates with the largest galaxies in the cluster. By moving from distance regions into regions with more stars that gas heats up and glows. What these researchers found that the gas actually reoccupied quietened galaxies causing a rash of new star formation.

We are going way over here, why would it be a strut, you consider a mechanical problem. Its most likely a plumbing or electrical. You guys seem to forget that while they can standardize the Falcon launcher, the cannot standard the connection with the payload, consequently on site you are always going to have welders, fasteners and plumbers finishing off the work. I remember an occasion once in our group where a contractor was installing a new copper hot water line and was pressure testing the line, only he forgot to close the bleed at valve at the bottom of the system, which just to happen to be over the work area. 2 inch copper with re-pressurized city water, that ole gal was in for a bit of a surprise when she had a full rain storm of warm water in the middle of a room on the 2nd of 9 floors. If it was not the hydrazine tank that ignited first, then i could simply someone who forgot to secure or close a fitting. Prolly sitting in a corner red-faced going whoops.

Hydrazine mearly needs a catalyst, if its leaking. Kerosene is too dense to become volatile at the LO2 degassing temperature, there could have been methane, residue from a glue such as liquid electrical tape that will flame gas. If you had a kero spill on a heated surface, again thats an if, not an assumption, then you could have a surface fire that progressed to a hydrazine explosion once the hydrazine tank heated. There could be chemicals in the hydrazine that caused a runaway reaction.

What's a tweet, you like grab little birds and put them in bed.

1. Why is there hydrazine being stored on the launch pad 2, Why was someone keeping alot of it in a place were you could blow the bejezzus out of everything. (at most you need a few pounds of hydrazine not enough to blow hades sky high). Safety protocols.

Voyager 1 won the space race.

Actually for an SUV you can generate up to 1000 watts of power. That is sufficient to trickle charge but also provide climb and acceleration assist with a small battery and a auxiliary motor. Again, direct wiring solar into the electronics has been the biggest hold back, because the solar feed has to be highly filtered. One could have two batteries, one that feeds power to the car and the other from the battery that then switch when loaded to supply and the other to load. As for engineering panels onto a vehicle, the bigger problem, aerodynamics, is doable.

I was shocked when I found out that was is Dsney that did that, terrible. Someone won the space race? According to the people in this group we built the shuttle and it consumed NASA like ebola termite, the soviets collapsed and they lost, now they build rockets for us because we too scared to build our own people carriers. Am I summarizing the feeling here correctly? Maybe SpaceX won the space race?

If you serialized thermocouples around the exhaust system after the catalytic converter, there is alot of waste heat. In addition solar panels can be used to generate solar power. Toyota does not like to put these directly inline with the other electronics because unfiltered static from the panels messes with the other systems. On your typical car there is alot of waste energy, so there is no need to summarily grab the perpetual motion machine argument . . . . however, there are more efficient ways of storing waste power. Electrolysis requires water of a certain type, and is very inefficient and produces alot of waste heat. Compressed air can store work and deliver it on demand (such as for starting vehicles, low weight force engaged shaft impellers can deliver rotational force). You can even used ambient cooled compressed air to aircondition a vehicle. Directly you can eject it out the back at several 280 m/s of (maximum) exhaust velocity 50 kilos of gas with and ISP of 27.4 can generate 13500 dV/cars mass = about 20 miles per hour or add about 2 mph on the freeway (about the same amount on drag the A/C causes when its running). The problem is that you can only do this for a few seconds unless the upstream power conversion is hideously efficient. Isolated lithium ion battery can store and deliver power just about anywhere with about 90% efficiency. This is particularly useful for hybrid cars because the weak point in the power-train is the first 10 kph. The tranny and engine are about 25% less efficient than optimal because of this. If you can remove the first 5 mph of acceleration you can shift to a continuous variable transmission, and the engines performance can be tuned to just driving not start motions. IOW use an alternative power system to provide impulse for the smalll amount to time the car needs to get moving and devote the engine and power train to efficient motion once moving.

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2016/08/the_lasting_damage_of_fake_documentaries_like_mermaids_the_body_found.html Interesting expose.

http://phys.org/news/2016-08-stars-previously-thought.html New article out on the matter.

Reading these comments but honestly -lets see the paper. -still waiting for it to be spaced. When the second is done I will draw my conclusion. http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/emdrive-nasa-eagleworks-paper-has-finally-passed-peer-review-says-scientist-know-1578716 "Thrust data in mode shape TM212 at less than 8106 Torr environment, from forward, reverse and null tests suggests that the system is consistently performing with a thrust to power ratio of 1.2 +/- 0.1 mN/Kw ()". This equates to 833,333 Kw/N which makes it 360 times more efficient than a photon thruster. This is bad news for its proponents as I will describe below. Had it been one 10th of power utilization efficiency rate of a photon drive then we could be hand waving about interactions with nuclei within a reasonable vicinity. But as we will see, such a low ISP means that many particle interactions outside the device will need to create thrust. I space such mass is not available in any reasonable vicinity. To get matter to reach that efficiency we have N = 2 * eff * Power/Ex Vel. If 1.2 mN = 2 * 1000/ ? Then ISP = 170000s (1666666v) (or higher since the efficiency is probably lower) we are talking about a very efficient ion drive, but what are the ions. If the thrust is in the 5 e -6 range then 16666666 then mass rate, if we argue these are net velocity vector electrons defecting per moment of time. that comes to 5E-6/1.666E6 = 3 x 10-12 kg per second. THat may not seem like much but an electron weighs very little and are highly weight efficient charge carriers (less if the electrons are reflected at 1.5 E-12) That is roughly 6 micro-moles/second of electrons be stripped off their atoms (presumably something) deflected off of something electrons and returned to the device. 6 micro-moles a second is a heap of electrons. Lets just examine this. Emission of plasma around the sun is 1.3×1036 per second. This comes out to about 1.3 E 36/8E32 per passing per square meter at 200,000 m/s. Or about 1600 hydrogen per 200,000 cubic meters outside the earths magnetic field. 1/40th of a hydrogen per cubic meter. Thus means you need how much volume behind the drive to generate thrust. 1E-26 moles of gas per meter, sometimes as high as 1E -21 sometimes lower depending on the direction of the plasma in space. Lets take the higher number, 6x-6 /1E-21 you would need a volume of space 1E15 cubic meters in size to achieve the acceleration. What is the minimum radius of that volume? 130 kilometers. So here is my prediction if the Cannae drive is working off of electron resonance generated by the electron cavity to produce a 5 micronnewton of thrust it would have to be, on average resonating electron out 100km in deflection path that is a million kilometers in an orbit. My prediction is that in space, the thrust production saturates very quickly, in the nanonewton-micronewton range with rather low power utiliization. On the bright side it will not need alot of panels, because utilization is comparably low and blowing out parts will also not be a probem, and so lightweight designs will be useful, but instead of being able to make Hohmann transfers it will have to spiral to its destinations over years. Will likely not be able to break low earth orbit. I should point out that resonant electron orbitals have no confined range, they can act over great distances, but the probability that they can act over great distances diminishes with distance in most situations that im aware of. A bigger lighter-weight cavity, a lower wavelength and we might be able to magnify the distances, but at what cost to ISP, lower is the enemy here. They can in a graphene sheet act over a near infinite range, but given no dimensional facilitation for such a cavity resonator outside the cavity, the distance of interaction is probably going to be a small multiple of the wavelength and the shape of the cavity. An electron travelling through such an open expanse of space may find no atoms to interact and return back with most of its departure energy intact.