Spacescifi

For reference I considered this first: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_fusion_weapon At sufficient tech scales Clarke is right I think. I know it would require manipulation at subatomic scales never done by us, but in theory, if an advanced scifi race had a bunch of regular earth dirt, and had a high enough tech level, could they not somehow fuse the nuclei found in the dirt together to create a bomb? Basically, what I am saying is that should it not be possible to fuse ANYHING that has a nucleus with another nucleus? Sounds like all you would need is super precise manipulation of the strong and weak forces to pull off. Since IRL it is hard precisely because nuclei do not want to fuse and we force them to with nukes. Implications? No reliance on uranium necessary, only on whatever fantastic machine that can fuse anything and whatever mass you can grab...which is everywhere. Would be perfect for the spaceship always hungry for propellant concept. Now she (the ship) does not have to be a picky eater. Anything will do so long she is doing it Orion style. What do you think?

Nope...would probably give away the gambit. Though actually I probably should, since most average joes and janes don't know the moon moves a kilometer per second. Might give them a fighting chance. To put things in perspective, putting your foot on the road outside while driving is a bad idea...the moon is like that...on steroids. Anyways...at least they learn somethong about space in the offing. That speed is always relative to something else, no matter how fast you are going. Yeah I think the one thing no one calculated for is the solar plasma surrounding the sun. That would actually apply some conductive heat, not just radiation In other words,no matter the skin color, at best you get a tan, mid to worst you get crispy skin on one side of your body and depending on what stuff you put in your hair...it may be on fire or at least smoking.

Thanks. I like to use this as a trick question with average folks: "Which is would you choose if you must? Teleportation to the moon's surface from Earth's surface for ten minutes in a space suit? Or teleportation to the surface of the sun for a nanosecond and return back to earth? Everyone picks the moon and dies. Speed difference kills but most are unaware of that LOL.

Not for scifi...just curious if a human could survive this dressed in a plain t-shirt and jeans. Race car drivers survive a 100g's or more for a brief momentary crash. Sun's surface is 27 g's. So if a person was teleported from Earth with same Earth speed they had from Earth to the surface of the sun and only stayed for a millonth of a second before teleporting back to Earth would they survive? My guess? Maybe...but burned. Someone here already knows how much heat can do what in a millonth of a second to a human.

While I admit I do not know for a certainty, I believe the answer is in a manner of speaking...yes. I say that because DNA alone retains a lot of info after people die. However memories are not like computer memories. I do not think they could be read scifi style. We are talking flesh and blood and synapses. If you want to read that, you would need to have perfected human engineering and cloning to god-tier levels. In short...perhaps if you had a healthy cloned body you could do a brain transplant...that's assuming the brain is still fresh and has not begun to rot. Time would be of the essence, just like organ donors. Most people are not eidetic memory holders, so the clone's past stored memories would likely be associative and emotionally triggered just like for normies.

So it's a new year, and I know that the only one who can ensure it is better than 2020 is me. So to that end, you won't see me for some time. When or if I do return, it will no longer be to ask scifi questions. Instead I would just post short stories or short multi-choice interactive short story posts. By now, I know enough to do orbital dynamics some justice as well as conservation of energy. Thank you all for your kindness,and answers. And I know I have said I would be gone and have come back within a month. I guess I enjoy the knowledge, and actually writing scifi is hard and requires a lot more committment than playing around here. Yet it is what I want, and I have enjoyed learning the craft of writing before. Scifi itself is a distraction ironically. So I will actually need to unplug myself to create. But that is a trait-creativity, that I admire greatly anyway. I rather do that than consume whatever the powers that be call scifi nowadays, even if some of it is garbage to me. So on that note....when or if I return, I will be different. Thanks to all. Good-bye.

Thanks...I was looking for IRL plot enablers. There are none sufficient enough. So I guess I will use my version of a goauld sarcophagus....only it is a Biological Restoration Unit (BRU). Meaning you step in for your restore point BEFORE launch to space, and when space makes you sick somehow you restore by stepping in again. The price to pay? Memories. You're memories are reset to prelaunch too at the restore point. So crew would need to keep goid journals and records so they are not clueless once they reset. Bonus? Could live forever resetting...at the cost of memory of what you did each time, aside from records you leave behind for you to view later. Multiple restore points allow you to relive ANY age saved...with records of who you were as an older person readily available.

[snip] It could work, but for Trek it would not fit, since their main engines are in the rear, not the bottom. They would have to flip over and point upright. I also see no glowy lights underneath that would indicate Trek engines. One could attribute the hovering to antigravity, but that too is never mentioned as a factor in Trek

Probably more Brits who view the american use of the word football as the 'llegitimate son' of the the game they love which Americans call soccer. I guess since American English is descended from British english, they are probably right too LOL. Proper english. They should know. Properly. They use that word a LOT more than the USA too.

SEP field? Do you mean structual integrity field like in Star Trek? That is pure fiction. I don't know what a SEP field is. Either way, conservation of energy is still a problem that is not addressed. Who cares about the Kzinti lesson when shuttles that are essentially nukes are landing in populated areas and people drive them around like flying cars? That's FAR more dangerous! All it takes is for one to go off and goodbye starfleet in San Francisco.

You just went probably beyond scifi...since you love hyperbole. That is more or less similar to what Biblical angels did. Standing in fire or going into it unharmed.

Amazingly...still not good. Or rather...too much of a good thing. On an earlier thread of mine I discussed how conservation of energy would make most scifi spaceships flying bombs. And by bombs I mean big ones, all the way up to nuke and beyond. Consider that the amount of energy to hover for hours at a time by sheer thrust, lifting a few thousand tons is...non trivial. In other words, we are talking bomb territory. And it would mean that every single ship they have, shuttles included, is likewise a flying mini nuke. Granted they do not blow up that way in canon, but it is not as if ST cares much about conservation of energy anyway. If one wants to do conservation of energy justice, you have to make your own scifi instead of look to popular scifi. That said...I use loop holes for mine. Namely, my drive has plenty of thrust...which will be gone in 15 min whether or not you even use it once you engage the drive to online mode. No it's not a traditional rocket, and yes they do have backup drives, but not a lot because government heavily regulates the energy equivalent of having many bombs aboard.

While I have no need for this, the fact that put yourself out to answer his question...that's impressive to me.

Hmmm...perhaps the scifi answer would be greater atomic control? Like program the atoms of the suit to move to intercept radiation...that seems like too much to ask though. Perhaps mirrors? Gamma ray mirrors would be nice if we had them. I suppose if we had 100% reflective mirrors of EM that would also work...at the expense of slowly cooking the astronaut inside once or if the cooling system died. Neutron mirrors? Probably too much to ask LOL. Would be nice though. Thanks...I wanted to know if there was an IRL alternative. I am quite able and ready to use make-believe, but it is not my first resort if IRL can handle the matter at hand just fine. Same reason I prefer kinetics over lasers, since kinetics are far more efficient at DPS.

Answer? I want to say yes...but as you know, the universe is like: "Sure...you can do anything you want...if you are willing to PAY for it and you KNOW what to pay with." By pay the universe usually means mass and energy, and knowledge is required to know what specific combo of mass and energy to use. So what would a 100% proof radiation spacesuit look like? Not unlike this I presume: I know glass helmets are cool for scifi but they are anything but radiation proof. Radiation Proof Requirements: I want 100%. radiation protection, not 50%, and definitely not the barely any at all like IRL. It need not stay that way forever if constantly bombarded by radiation, rather it needs a 'shelf life' that can tank radiation flawlessly for hours on end before it begins to gradually fail. Which is still better than IRL spacesuits that barely protect astronauts from radiation. Material solutions: Outer hull of suit probably made of lead. Secondary hull probably some hydrogen plastic. I can't think of any other materials that can block out the full array of deadly EM the cosmos puts out. What do you have to solve this? Is it even a practical thing to solve in tjis manner? Or is the dream of a 100% radiation proof spacesuit only a dream? Even if it only is radiation proof a limited time, like 8 hours?

Nukes of various yields would be needed...especially plenty of low yield ones for rendezvous and docking with other vessels or stations. Might wanna retract solar panels and rad fins on the receiving vessel when the mighty Orion begins blasting to slow down.

Excellent information. Faster ships with significant cargo will be a no go forever until we find a way to overcome or cheat the rocket tyranny of propellant mass. Even antimatter won't help much since unless you plan on burning through plenty of it and making round trips back to AM producing industrial bases to refuel you can forget it. Since there are only a few places where making that stuff in quantity is viable according to research (Saturn orbit around rings) and probably a few more besides Earth. To be honest, even with hyperjump, without some form of medical miracle like Goauld or similar or a massive centrifuge, our space heroes are going to be a LOT like the lady astronaut in the video when they get out after landing on a world. In other words, no quick heroic rescue missions on planets like on scifi. They would only be beaten badly. There are a limited number of options for a sustained manned presence across space and time. And it is very ironic that if we are able to manipulate both, the more we would be able to live wherever. Currently I don't think we can manipulate either, but it is safe to say that if you can manipulate time at all, space travel can and will start to open up for you. And if you can manipulate space so as to shorten distances, that reduces space travel time so.... If we could do time forwarding inflight like in KSP, then you would need nothing else, although you will still need a centrifuge on Mars if you want 1g, there is no getting around that. Elon seems not to worry. Maybe he made a deal with the Goauld? Sure the Goauld were proper idiots...but their tech was good enough that it kind of compensated for a long time.

I was way off when I said 100 meters. At least a 1000 meters required. https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/281/what-would-the-size-and-rotation-of-a-station-need-to-be-to-produce-1g-gravity-f

Interesting thoughts. I was referring to the popular 1g centrifuges, which either require 100 meters of distance on a cable or beam, or a large spaceship to spin. To have 1g without disorientation due to the corolis effect.

So we all know microgravity is bad and is more bad the longer we have to endure it. Initially you will 'liquid' (I know KSP censors biological elimination of fluids) a lot, since your body has smart auto mode and thinks it has WAAY too much fluid since it is in places it normally is'nt now. Your heart will eventually become more ball shaped, your vision will blur due to increased blood pressure, blood will thin to compensate, bone mass is lost...etc more bad stuff. Even a few days in space can present temporary health problems, as Heidemarie Stefanyshyn-Piper discovered after spending two weeks in space during STS-115 in 2006. During a press conference after the landing, Piper collapsed, as she was not quite readjusted to gravity. So I was thinking, why not just use advanced medical repair technology? If it is the future why not? The human body does not repair super fast because it does not have the reseorces to do so without damaging other organs (oxygen starvation is a factor). Stargate had a total fantasy sarcophagus that could repair just about any injury. While less realistic right now than a centrifuge, I see no reason why we could not build machines in the future that can repair humanoid bodies back to 1g standard by accelerating the body's inherent healing factor somehow while also accepting the burden that the body would otherwise take a hit for. What do you think?

Yes...highly informative too. For me I started with Scott Manley vids, but later came here. I assume for the ISS that it is put in a rather stable high speed, so as to prevent premature deorbits. Faster orbiters would deorbit faster, but that would take longer than it takes to rendezvous if they do it right. Obviously one would be a fool to orbit a spacestation as close to the atmosphere as possible, so I am sure distance also plays a role, as atmosphere tends to deorbit stuff in flames.

Are you? If so how does your significant other feel about your KSP time?

I assumed there was a range of LEO orbits, otherwise vessels would have a harder time doing rendezvous with the ISS. Plus the game Space War shows as much. You can slow as much as you want, but it will only make you curve hard into the planet. If you have enough thrust you can even stop orbiting and fall straight down. I may not have KSP, but I was aware of extremely low orbits capable on airless bodies like moons.

It would mainly be valuable in a scifi story setting where a ship does not have the delta v to leave orbit and a planet is trying to shoot it down (missiles/lasers). A rescue vessel will attempt to rendezvous with it and then use a jump drive to escape. IRL landing is always an option, and I suppose even in scifi, but if that makes you a fugitive and it is not even your homeworld...

The first one LOL! But yeah....it is easy to forget that rocket exhaust does more damage in vacuum to solar panels since there is no air to slow it down. Thanks for the time tables...the possibilities in scifi could be some sort pf rescue mission without much time (because they are bring shot at).