KG3

This article caught my eye. http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/physicist-proposes-new-black-hole-alternative/ "What do you get when you cross two hypothetical alternatives to black holes? A self-consistent semiclassical relativistic star, according to Raúl Carballo-Rubio (International School for Advanced Studies, Trieste, Italy) whose recently published results in the February 6th Physical Review Letters describe a new mathematical model for the fate of massive stars..." Repulsive Gravity "Now, Carballo-Rubio adds an extra force into the mix: quantum fluctuations. Quantum mechanics has shown that virtual particles spontaneously pop into and out of existence — the effects can be measured best in a vacuum, but these fluctuations can happen anywhere in spacetime. These particles can be thought of as fluctuations of positive and negative energy that under normal conditions would cancel out. But the extreme gravity of compact objects breaks this balance, effectively generating negative energy. This negative energy creates a repulsive gravitational force."

I believe the problem with this type of volcano is the chamber of liquid lava has allot of gasses dissolved into it. Anything that lowers the pressure on the lava (like pumping it out of the camber) can cause gasses to come out of solution, like opening a bottle of fizzy water that's been shaken, except instead of getting sprayed with fizzy water were talking about cubic kilometers of molten rock.

I feel very uncomfortable with any technology or science that is created specifically to single out a single population of people. Especially if it is a population that is actively being persecuted in different parts of the world and lives could be put at risk as a result.

Trilobites are basically lobsters without claws right? Sorry not much help.

Are there actually regulations for satellites? How does building the capability to deorbit into the satellite in the first place effect the cost? How often do controllers loose contact with satellites before they get the chance to deorbit or put them into a parking orbit?

Crackers! Whose gunna pay for all this!!! It sounds like whatever the method(s) used it's going to be nearly as expensive to take something out of orbit as it is to put it up there in the first place. Is there some way to factor in the cost of cleaning up debris to the cost of new missions? Are businesses who build and maintain satellites getting better at planning to deorbit their stuff when they are done with it?

It's been shrinking for allot longer than the time between pioneer and voyager. http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/observing-news/jupiters-great-red-spot/ "In fact, astronomers know that the Great Red Spot has been shrinking for more than a century. In the late 1800s the feature was nearly 35° wide in longitude, which corresponds to about 40,000 km (25,000 miles), or roughly three times Earth's diameter. By 1979, when Voyagers 1 and 2 flew past Jupiter at close range, the longitudinal extent had shrunk to 21° (about 25,000 km), though its width from top to bottom remained essentially unchanged at about 12,000 km." Also: http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/hubble-planetary-weather-watcher-outer-solar-system/ At Jupiter, the researchers recently determined its shrinking Great Red Spot is getting more intense in color, possibly because the chemicals that give the storm its color are moving higher up in the atmosphere. Surprisingly, the storm also appears to be getting taller. Researchers previously thought that the contracting storm would host stronger winds, like an ice skater who spins faster by pulling their arms inward. Instead, however, the storm is expanding in height. “It’s almost like clay being shaped on a potter’s wheel,” NASA stated in a press release. “As the wheel spins, an artist can transform a short, round lump into a tall, thin vase by pushing inward with his hands. The smaller he makes the base, the taller the vessel will grow.”.

Ok, thanks. I found it! It does say it has a high ISP but doesn't say much about thrust. I'll take your word for it. I won't bother trying to build one at home. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fission-fragment_rocket "The efficiency of the system is surprising; specific impulses of greater than 100,000s are possible using existing materials. This is high performance, although not that which the technically daunting antimatter rocket could achieve, and the weight of the reactor core and other elements would make the overall performance of the fission-fragment system lower. Nonetheless, the system provides the sort of performance levels that would make an interstellar precursor mission possible."

Do you know anything about alpha emitter propulsion? I think I came across it being mentioned somewhere. The idea was that a radioactive material could gently push a small (presumably unmanned) spacecraft without any moving parts for a very long time. I guess it could also provide electricity as well, I'm not sure. It sounded very simple but I don't know how effective it would be or what it would or what application it would be good for. I don't even recall if they said what material would be used. Is uranium hot enough, plutonium? I can't seem to find the source of this article.

Oh... yah but it's an ANVIL!

An anvil mod sounds like a good idea to me. I can think of lots of challenges, can you shoot an anvil onto the top of the VAB or shooting anvils on different planets and moons! Would it be possible to shoot an anvil from the surface of Minmus and have it land on the Mun? Yes, slow and patient explosives only!

There is a space milled into the bottom of the anvils which will hold about of pound of black powder. Usually it takes two anvils to shoot an anvil. One anvil is placed upside down on a firm surface (like blocks of wood) on the ground. A second anvil (the one that gets shot) is placed right side up on top of the first anvil. Between the two anvils is about 2 pounds of black powder. I have seen a video in which a guy uses the breech of a navel cannon (around 6" I think) to shoot the anvil instead. Note that if there are any imperfections in the castings of the anvils you might wind up with a 100lb fragmentation grenade! Apparently anvil shooting is done competitively. Points are given for time aloft and how close to the launch site the anvil lands.

Cycling, you could go way fast without any wind resistance!

Ok, I guess it might be alright to post this here because it does involve ballistics and what not (I am a black smith)? If not sorry. I know anvils aren't the most kerbal thing to make fly, I mean it's not like making a submarine fly or anything like that but I'm sure there is physics and stuff involved right?

I guess I was interested in the old fashion afterburner jet engine (not the high bypass turbofan type) and how they are similar and different from a rocket engine. They are similar in that both combine fuel and oxidizer to create a fast expanding exhaust and thrust. However the rocket exhaust exits via a bell shaped nozzle and the afterburner exhaust exits basically via a tube. Maybe the jet engine has to accommodate the %80 or so of the stuff in the air that isn't oxygen as well as the exhaust?

How are jet engines related to rocket engines in regards to chamber pressures and exhaust velocity? (I'm asking about the type of jet engines with an after burner) They are basically an air breathing rocket but don't use a de Laval type nozzle, right? They are by definition designed to operate in an atmosphere although at different altitudes and air pressures.

That's a serious case of crab!

I think the whole point is that they get to test a nuclear powered cruise missile where it doesn't matter if it crashes. If they tested it on earth and it crashed people would complain about the radiation or try to reverse engineer the thing if they could get their hands on the pieces.

These new weapons are supposed to maintain the balance of power. How worried should Putin be about the US antiballistic missile program's ability to neutralize Russia's current missiles?

They don't have chock blocks in Africa?

Yes, it's a very clever solution to his transmission problem and it works great on flat smooth ground. I would like to see what happens it he backs it up over bumps, pot holes, debris or even a patch of sand or snow!

The laws are different from state to state. In Massachusetts (where I live) it's every year and the quality of the inspection can vary from service station to service station. I once failed for bad windshield wipers. I think they just wanted to sell me a pair of their $60 windshield wipers. Everyone seems to know of a garage that will pass their car without looking too closely at it, although the state seems to be cracking down on this. They should at the very least check the ball joints and tie end rods! They are supposed to check emissions, lights, tires, breaks, parking break, horn, wipers and check for rust. I'm not sure but I think other states have different laws as to how often or how closely they look at the cars. Commercial vehicles like trucks, tractor trailers, and busses are subject to national Department of Transportation (DOT) safety regulations and are inspected differently. One of the big complaints by truck drivers about the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was that trucks driving over the boarder from Mexico were held to lower standards of safety therefore cheaper to operate and more dangerous on the roads.

The space shuttle did have self destruct explosives on the SRBs and the external fuel tanks. I remember that they ruled out the possibility of the explosives accidentally exploding as the cause of the accident. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Challenger_disaster#Recovery_of_debris_and_crew It had been suggested early in the investigation that the accident was caused by inadvertent detonation of the Range Safety destruct charges on the external tank, but the charges were recovered mostly intact and a quick overview of telemetry data immediately ruled out that theory. They also blow the rocket up when it goes off course but I'm not sure how badly off course it has to go before they blow it up.

The internet is an amazing resource. I was born in 1965 so I remember some of the moon landings (the ones after 1970 or so). Sure everyone thought the rockets were amazing but not many people new anything about how they worked, at least not the kids and adults where I lived. We certainly didn't have people discussing the merits of different rocket fuels, engines, strategies for getting into space and such as there seems to be now! I must say the KSP community and moderators here seem to do a great job of answering peoples questions and steering them to useful resources. It's really easy to make people feel stupid (even unintentionally) when they ask a question but it seems like people here are quite helpful, at least going by the tiny fraction of the millions of posts I've read. I do have great faith in the scientific method. I'm particularly fond of astronomy and feel lucky to live at a time that's seen so much progress in this field. Hubble, Chandra, Swift, WISE, Kepler, ROSAT and the soon to be James Webb just to name a few in orbit! Also the 8.2 m(!!) Subaru, the10 m(!!!!) Keck telescopes on the ground. LIGO on line! And many many other observatories as well. Plus the technology available to amateurs that allows them to work alongside professionals. http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/amateur-astronomer-captures-supernovas-first-light/ [The pixel was initially so faint that Buso didn´t recognize it as a supernova right away. Nevertheless suspicious that the bright spot might be something interesting, he reached out to some professional astronomers — only to find that none were available. Then he called another amateur astronomer, Sebastian Otero, a member of the American Association of Variable Observers (AAVSO). Otero helped Buso send an international warning for other astronomers to follow up. Both amateurs are receiving credit as coauthors of the research article published in the February 22nd Nature.] Yes I am a blacksmith or actually a farrier (I shoe horses), there is a slight difference between the two. I use hammer, tongs, anvil and forge to make and shape horseshoes to be applied to horses feet. I was at a contest just last week in Kentucky (yes we have horseshoeing contests). A guy there showed me a set of tongs that he had made out of titanium that he travels with to save weight in his luggage!

There was a time... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Frank_Statement The tobacco companies fought against the emerging science by producing their own science, which suggested that existing science was incomplete and that the industry was not motivated by self-interest.[11] With the creation of the Tobacco Industry Research Committee, headed by accomplished scientist C.C. Little, the tobacco companies manufactured doubt and turned scientific findings into a topic of debate. The recruitment of credentialed scientists like Little who were skeptics was a crucial aspect of the tobacco companies' social engineering plan to establish credibility against anti-smoking reports. By amplifying the voices of a few skeptical scientists, the industry created an illusion that the larger scientific community had not reached a conclusive agreement on the link between smoking and cancer.