farmerben

https://www.space.com/nuclear-fission-neutron-stars-heavy-elements-gold Theorized a long time ago, now there is some evidence for it. Heavy elements are created when neutron stars collide and release plumes of degenerate matter, which fissions down to the elements we know.

That wouldn't work. While the Lagrange points are technically single points, the tidal forces associated with them are so weak that they describe huge regions of space. In the image posted above you can see the Greek and Trojan asteroid clusters at Jupiter's L4 and L5 points. The influence of Earth's L4 and L5 are scaled similarly.

Yeah it's 611 seconds. Most neutrons do not escape from the surface of stars.

There are practically zero neutrons in space. Because a radical neutron has a half life of about 14 minutes before becoming a proton and an electron. Proton induced fission is a thing for very heavy elements and high energy protons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/(614689)_2020_XL5 There is one object 1.2 km in diameter. Then there are a few notables in the 300m diameter range. There is also a fair amount of dust at L4 and L5. I agree it's a good spot to test out some of our technology. The resources are however miniscule compared to all the other asteroids.

Known asteroids of the inner solar system. There is something at Earth's L4 and L5 so it might be good to check out first, there is just not much.

The best place to look for my keys is underneath a lighted lamp post.

Are there spray on products to patch holes in spacecraft hulls due to micrometeorites? I assume epoxy works in space since the hardener is part of the mix. But, I've never seen spray on epoxy. I believe it could work. What about spray foam like great stuff? Has anything like that been tried?

It's too long. What are the highlights?

go for a nine copter

The main motivation for doing so would be reduced carbon emissions. Natural gas has slightly more energy per kg than jet fuel. Tankage is the issue. Has this already been done? What are the pros and cons?

Joking? Mass is so important, we need to find a way to integrate communications gear with the sail. Sending an interstellar signal with a CubeSat will not be easy.

Jupiter has a radiation belt 1000 times stronger than Earth's Van Allen belt. It's full of high energy protons. We should study Io. I predict that certain isotope ratios which we use for atomic mass will be different there.

Still in the near future it is probably way cheaper to have 3x times as many lasers on the Earth's surface rather than deep space satellites.

When it comes to laser driven light sails where is it best to put the lasers? Earth's surface is not ideal from the atmosphere and rotation standpoint, but the cost is lower than putting them in space.

links?

I heard that polywell disapperead into a venture capitalist blackhole, and hasn't released anything to the public in over 20 years.

If the actual mass differed from the predicted mass, somebody screwed up badly in a way that would likely cost the mission.

This is a prototype from the New Zealanders. They might not have the capability to leave Earth's SOI. Even if they did the mass of communications gear would greatly retard the prototype.

I wonder if you could get enough neutrons with a Farnsworth Fusor. Those are cheap.

I'm still a fan of accelerator driven reactors, which use a proton beam and spallation neutrons to incinerate nuclear waste. These get rid of all the weapons grade material and longest lived waste. You still have the cesium and strontium to contain for a few centuries. People who are not fans of this approach mostly complain about the expense. But the expense is worth it, if it eventually leads to cheaper and better proton beams. Because proton beams have numerous potential applications including ones in spaceflight. One idea I have is that a deuterium beam could be way better than a simple proton beam as a spallation neutron generator. To the best of my knowledge the research has not been done, and particle accelerators with deuterium have barely been tried. It would be worth it to create one from a pure research perspective.

I had a lengthy conversation with Chat GPT about religion and politics. Much of which I cannot repeat here. And once hit a temporary violation of Chat GPTs terms of service for a question. Chat GPT says : Which is, I suppose, somewhat honest and optimistic.

What do you mean by "maglev pantograph" ? Does this mean magnets under the track and induction coils on the engines? I searched that the typical diesel-electric locomotive carries about 16 tons of fuel. I'm not sure how many miles/hours that will last. But it's equivalent to over 600 tons of batteries. You can put over 100 tons of freight per car ( around 200 tons max total car weight). So you have to swap batteries often, or recharge them. It is possible, though probably impractical, to have 6 cars full of batteries just to match the range of diesel.

Power is not a problem. We have diesel electric hybrids now. The issue is batteries have 40 times less energy/kg than diesel fuel.