Spacescifi

People always say the heat is too much, when we have virtually unlimited mass to shed the waste heat. We know how to create a fusion reaction, but trying to contain it with a magnetic field is like trying to band jello with a rubber band. It will slip out inevitably. So I propose a solution that, while expensive and it might increase global warming by some degree, WON'T slip out the fusion plasma unless you desire it to. Idea: Create the fusion reaction some way and sustain it. If we don't know how to sustain it or have a way of doing so then that's the main problem. I thought we did. I assumed holding the reaction was the problem because it melted everything. Yet there should be a way to keep a fusion reaction chamber from melting on earth. How? Regenerative rocket based cooling. Pump liquid helium or liquid hydrogen through the reaction chamber walls to keep them from melting. Will probably need either a spherical or cylindral shaped reactor since either is better for even flow of pumped liquid to cool it. Outside the fusion reactor building you would see rocket bluish plumes shooting up into the sky instead of steam plumes you see at nuclear plants, because more energy would be generated and thus more heat. Can this be done or am I oversimplifying it? Because if I thought of this surely somebody would have come up with a reason not to. I hope the answer is not liquid hydrogen and liquid helium are too expensive to burn constantly at a fusion plant. Because I don't think they are. We have more hydrogen than we could want. As for money, we (the USA) already spend ridiculous amounts on matters arguably less important, so that argument does not hold either. But if physics says it cannot be done, I can accept that.

Scifi Engineer: "Ah.... entropy, my nemesis! We meet again... for the last time!" Entropy: "What are you smoking? I've always been. Always will be. You on the other hand..." Scifi Engineer: "Bring it on! Time to meet your maker or... efficiency or.... something. Whatever! I'm taking you down!" Entropy: *rolls eyes*

*mouth waters* But... what if an engineered and constructed form of uranium had 1000× more energy capacity than normal uranium? We got naquadah boys! Lol. I do find it both informative and amusing that if real life super energetic unobtanium existed it would be deadly to to even be nearby let alone handle, as you would need radiation protection at all times.

Cool. So for healing damage (which happens far more than we would like to think), reproduction, or growing up to adulthood, such a being would need food. But if stranded out in the desert they could go farther without tiring out. But without water they would die like any normal person. The good news is their energy level would be good, so they would have more energy to spare to look for water and food.

So the millon dollar question is what would a reactor have to do or be to use 99% or even 70% of the fuel rods as energy? What? Nuke it lol? Something something really hot like fusion lol? I say it jokingly but I am genuinely curious.

Imagine unobtanium packed with 100x the potential energy of the uranium we use for nuclear power. Would physics even allow for such an element to exist? If so... where? A planet orbiting a blue giant (better mine it and run before the blue star goes nova in a few millenia lol). Or... provided we had a scifi machine that could force or compact any element together im any state, would that allow for creating super uranium that is 100x more powerful? If so... what would be it's properties? Assumptions: More radioactive... meaning suit up in a protective suit to even mine it, and especially if you are going to use it in any sort reactor.

Would physics even allow for an organic or cyborg (part organic) life form that eats food to rely on electricity as an alternative energy source when there is no food available? They would still need to drink water, but if electrically charged they could go without food for a week without feeling hungry or tired from lack of food. Though in practice this is really bad because if done too long (weeks) the organs would atrophy from lack of being used. In practice they would begin to lose weight, but would paradoxically still have normal energy levels as a person fully fed so long they are charged. Thoughts?

I would say pulse fire it, but something tells me doing that with a nuclear reaction only limited by flow rate would be a challenge, albeit not an impossible one. So the plasma drive version of a nuclear saltwater rocket would be designed to pulse fire rather than for continous exhaust and with a magnetic nozzle.

Yes or no? Would this extend it's travel range greatly?

Never got it. You can direct private message me if you want. Or not. It's up to you.

Water can freeze in vacuum, but doing so is dependent on mass and temperature. Whether the ice plugs the leak or not depends on the ratio between evaporation and ice, in other words, how much water is lost to the void and how much actually turns to ice to seal the breach. Whether or not urine from astronauts shooting into outer space (as they have been shown to do) completely evaporates before it freezes I don't know.... but I think so given it's warm as anyone elses. I suppose if the design wanted to ensure freezing then he could ensure it already was as cold as possible while still liquid, that way more of it freezes when it begins to evaporate.

The last sentence about water being sucked out into vacuum and freezing seems rather suspect... that is literally what hollywood has shown. Space is cold hollywood says. But consider that space is a vacuum. The most efficient way to transfer heat is via conduction (heat transfer from solid/liquid to solid/liquid) or convection (heat transfer via gas to solid/liquid). Radiation is less efficient at transferring heat compared to convection and conduction. What will happen when water hits vacuum is that it will boil because there is no air pressure to keep it intact (and temperature won't matter so long as the water is liquid already to begin with). So the bit about water freezing to seal a breach is a no-go that would never be approved by space engineers concerned about people surviving. I am not trying to be mean, just honest. Science and life are amazing, but they are also both unforgiving and will make anyone pay with their life for ignorance. Which is why the greatest powers humanity ever has had or ever will ((in my opinion) are knowledge and the will to use it

Rules: Same oxygen content as normal earth. The nitrogen can be reduced and replaced so long life is not effected so adversely there is no way it can adapt to cope with the change. What percentage reduction is safe and what gas would be safe? 20%? 30% 10%? I am guessing some less reactive gas. With less nitrogen plants will be adversely effected and only the hardiest plants will survive. Meaning on an Earth world like ours they might grow to monster size as they have kess limits on them on their native home alien earth.

I will go first. There is with few exceptions any dietary or nutritional guide that will work for everyone. It is necessary to be in tune with your body, and seek out the foods that make it feel well or healthy. I was feeling ill for days, coughing with a feeling of congestion, and a burning sensation in my chest when I blew my nose or coughed hard. So I ate oatmeal today and what do you know? I feel less congested and I'm not blowing my nose constantly nor coughing constantly anymore. My nose is not even running anymore. I almost cannot believe oatmeal... mere oatmeal, DID all of that! Now in my case I can do this because I have no allergy to oatmeal and I also have no issues I am aware of with gluten. So when you are sick, remember the foods that helped you in the past, and you could also do research, but honestly for me the most reliable guide for what is good for me is how my body reacts afterward. What health lessons have you learned as an adult?

Literally in my case. It was always presented as a bad thing to not have faith... at least while I did not know any better. But afterward I feel far more free, and also far less vulnerable to manipulation by those who really don't know the future better than you or I nor can they prove the things they claim as true. This next song is a great song for motivation. To win or succeed at... well, anything in life.

Ouch. I was unaware of that. I guess we will be second staging for all eternity except for places so hazardous it won't matter (lifeless worlds).

Why? Pure fusion bombs don't fave the same radioactive fallout as nukes do.

IRL the process would be more complex, but I wanted to simplify it for the sake of SSTOs being common in the scifi setting. Engine Configuration: Spaceship with dual turbojet or turbofan engine (depends on which one is more optimal for the task) Each is attached to a straight wing off both sidewalls of the ship in the middle. The wings which can pitch rotate, thus rotating the engines as well. Choose whatever engine is best for the scifi scenario of landing, turbojet or turbofan? I read turbojet is best for highspeed but turbofans are very efficient at lower speeds using less fuel. Of course since this is scifi we are actually using plasma turbojets or plasma turbofans that both have sufficient power and won't melt from the heat while providing sufficient thrust. Scifi ability: Although the ship lacks proper antigravity it does have gravity resistance which can be toggled on or off as needed. What that means is if the ship is already falling it will stop further accelerating from gravity, even though it will keep falling... just not with any added acceleration. Also if the ship ascends straight up and stalls engines in the air, at the point gravity should pull it back down it will just hover in place. Low Geostationary Orbit: Possible thanks to pure fusion external pusher plate propulsion and gravity resistance hovering. Fusion external pulse propulsion is efficient enough to slow a vessel in orbit to geostationary orbit, and gravity resistance prevents the spaceship from falling down until it is toggled off. This also avoids the need for heat shielding since falling straight down is faster than a curved reentry trajectory and turbojet or turbofan engines would be employed to slow it as well... whichever works better for the task. Main Question: If a 300 ton SSTO with the OP engines is falling from the karmin line (boundary of space, we can orbit closer due to gravity resistance), can I just rotate my turbojet or turbofan engines so their fighter jet petal style nozzles are pointed downward while the ship falls horizontal and engage the engines? Would it even work? Since the ship is falling down and the turbojet or turbofan engines are sucking air down to shoot out as plasma as they are falling away from it? I was thinking a better tactic would be to dive the ship headfirst, level out over land while flying, and once the landing spot is found fly straight up, stall the engines, flip the ship horizontal, flip the engines so the fans are vertical while the nozzles are downward, and finally engage the engines once more for a controlled descent. So... which engine would work better for this? Plasma turbojet or plasma turbofan? Remember it's a scifi setting so they have the power generation figured out as well as not melting the engines from operating while providing sufficient thrust. That said it still would not be good for them to do a fiery reentry, which is why SSTOs have a pusher plate at the rear for pure fusion external propulsion to slow for low geostationary orbit while gravity resistance keeps the ship aloft until it is ready to fall. The external pulse propulsion also propels the ship into space when air is too thin for turbojet or turbanfans to work. Also I chose the fighter jet petal nozzles because they look cool, and they can thrust vector by tilting, as well as adjust to widen as the air thins in higher atmosphere.

Thanks! So if anything, this would be something a desperate Supergirl from the comics would do... likely near the ocean, since even she knows better than to wreck cities while flying despite her tendency to push her powers to the max more than her cousin. That... and he kept an eye on her when she was just starting out specifically to keep her out of trouble.

I get that... but would it be an orange/yellow fireball streaking through the sky or a blue one? I know the color of a fireball hints at how much energy at times is being emitted. If it was his cousin, especially the one from the 2005-2011 era, she would probably be a blue fireball at some point (shows less restraint using her powers to the point that people say and think she's both stronger and faster than he is). I have... it's a nightmare. Clark would either be forced to stay a virgin or romance any female kryptonian villain he found stuck in the phantom zone... or his own family. At least Powergirl comes from an alternate universe, so it would seem slightly less weird than Supergirl.

So you are saying he would still look like a fireball? Why would he look like an orange or yellow fireball though? Are you saying thst when air is compressed and heated to a high degree it looks like a fireball regardless if any ablation of mass is taking place?

Curious... since the streak of fire seen on spacecraft during reentry is from the ablation of the craft's heat absorbent disposable surface. Superman does not ablate and neither does his costume, in fact he has his own kind of forcefield aura that not only keeps him clean from bugs gunking up his suit, but also from melting from heat. So if Superman goes supersonic in atmosphere, I imagine he would look like a blue whitish fireball. Why blue? Ionizing the air from the heat, and no mass is being ablated, just a lot of air being compressed and released really fast. Superman basically turned himself into a ramjet no? Flying low doing this will make people mad, since the constant sonic boom will shatter or crack windows as he passes overhead. So flying suborbital into space before reentry would be the ideal way for Superman to fly, but I suppose in desperate situations he might make exceptions. Curiously this is much the same scenario if a scifi ship with the classic forcfield bubble was hitting atmosphere and blocking it with the shield. The shield would not leave any sort of ablation streak unless it was actually ablating (and typically they don't since that's the whole point if having a forcefield). If flying fast enough I presume you would get a blue whiteish ionized plasma fireball streaking through the air here as well.

I wanted to design a scifi SSTO around the gimmick of being able to cancel the pull of gravity. I soon realized rocketry would be wastefull when I could just turbofan and coast into space. Sure it will take longer but not unbearably so, maybe an hour more. But it's worth it for not having to expend propellant. For space travel they would use a special vacuum reaction drive that pushes off space vacuum itself for thrust and won't work within thick atmosphere. Requires vacuum conditions to work.

I don't mind your feedback. Carry on or not as you wish. Telling a good story is what matters in the end. And there are different levels of SOFT scifi... theres Star Wars science fantasy that is soft as a marshmallow, and then there is Stargate SG1, which is like a jelly bean. A bit of thin candy hard science, but ultimately full of fiction in it's gòoey center.

Does not bother me. Possible solutions: 1. Access to unobtanium that specifically generates a zero gravity field when electric current is applied, which grows larger the more current is applied. Earth has none, or if it did once, was mined of all of it a long time ago by space aliens who use it. That's basically taken from Stargate, only a different function as opposed to naquadah. Can be found on select alien worlds. It also allows the excuse for not visiting Earth even though they know where it is (they have no unobtanium so nobody cares about Earth lol). 2. Bootstrapping alien tech so advanced you cannot retroengineer it (thus the turbofan). Yet claiming you made it to appear you're more technologically advanced than you really are (also from Stargate, Goauld loved doing this).