Spacescifi

Perhaps not. That is what they do in space sims like Oolite before making them small enough to scoop. Yet I also reckon that it would be faster to break up a large rock to scoop than take all day drilling when you are not sure what's inside...unless we have ways of knowing that too. Maybe beaming it with x-rays will tell you what it has inside I don't know.

Re space sims; I personally find adding a realistic angle on asteroud mining to only add to the gameplay factor. I can also tell you that playing oolite trying to chase down broken asteroids is a pain in the butt, made even worse by airplane maneuvering in space since newtonian is not allowed. Despite the fact they are slow boulders broken up. Lasers are best for burning, since pulse lasers are the kind of thing NIF uses to ignite nuclear fusion. By the time you can lase pulse blast ANYTHING solid you are into station base power levels, and your vessel would be so heavy with reaction mass for the lasing that it would have very poor thrust, making it a poor mobile spaceship. That is why I am for now on anti-laser and pro-railgun when it comes to asteroid mining. I might keep some lasers inside for carving up stored rocks, but tge breaking I can do merrily with slug rounds. And I am sure there is even a way to shoot rounds with explosive shells if I want extra scattering.

I find it disturbing how in space sims overpowered lasers can blast an asteroid into bits. For a LOT less energy one could do the SAME thing with railgun cannons. So to me, railguns and netting are the easiest way I know of to break up small asteroids for mining. Now if is a BIG asteroid? Do what Bruce Willis did. Drill and bore via an auger to create shafts down deep into the asteroid. Insert nukes. Fill up shafts with asteroid debris dust so nukes are surrounded by reaction mass. Detonate. See big rock separate into little rocks. Repeat as desired until the rocks are small enough that the railgun and netting approach is viable. Your thoughts on this? EDIT: Missiles I really do not see them useful for hitting the rock, given the fact that a miner ship must close distance to collect anyway. Yet they are VERY useful for deploying tethers and nets across the asteroid in advance before it breaks, which would save propellant limited miner vessel from having to chase down every rock in every direction. The rock would break up, but with tethers, it would not fly off into the distance forever requiring a chase. Funny irony? A miner vessel of this sort could also be used as a warship. So saying you are peaceful asteroid miner won't mean you are not well armed. In fact to blast asteroids to bits you MUST be well armed.

So you're point is that due to power inefficiency of lasers, they will never make much viable use for asteroid mining, and even less for space combat. They are best used in factories on worlds with chemicals readily available to power it. Might as well fly up to a space rock and pop out a drill and net to catch loose chunks while the mothership attaches itself with tethers and landing legs to the rock. To not need radiators you would need perfect blackbody mirrors that reflect all your blackbody radiation out. Interesting article: https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/369862/hot-blackbody-and-hot-mirror With perfect 100% reflective blackbody mirrors, you probably won't need radiators. Just reflect heat away.

Wow. He even tackled a blond office lady! Funny and shocking all at once. But yeah...I can see klingons being a bit more mild than this guy...unless they already intend to kill, it is kind of cowardly and dishonorable to tackle a female...at least if the klingon actually follows the Klingon ethos. Not all do.

The old TNG/DS9 Klingons are mainly good for jokes I think...so here goes. I used to work at a nearly all Klingon office. I was one of two humans who worked there. Working for Klingons has it's pro's and con's: Pro: They don't terminate anyone's employment. Con: They either allow you to quit in dishonor or fight whoever wishes you to quit the job in battle...surrounded by a ring of fire while armed with bat'leths while the workmates watch as spectators. Whoever surrenders or dies first loses their job. In short...the boss is ALWAYS a tough guy...otherwise he could not keep his job. I quit the job after the other human was heard saying 'dishonorable' things about our boss. The boss called a meeting after work and said he had received word that the human guy said nasty things about him...then he he challenged the guy to combat to keep his job or to quit in dishonor. The guy chose to fight, but was not prepared to lift a bat'leth, they are heavier than they look! The Klingon boss easily knocked the guy's bat'leth to the floor, which made the man plead for his life. "You're not even worth killing! Go on and quit. Get your things and go....in dishonor!" The klingon bellowed as the man scrambled away in a hurry. After I saw that I was like...nah, I'm good. So what's your klingon funny office story?

So what is 'recovering' now that we are in COVID?

Bravo! You just killed the scifi trope of space laser combat! No lasers in Elite dangerous! No lasers in Children of a Dead Earth! Since they would run out of chemical too soon and do too little damage in the process. Granted, ED is total fiction...they probaby use sustained fusion to power their lasers ingame. Children Of a Dead Earth does not have that to rely on, so they probably rely on free electron lasers or something non-chemical. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-electron_laser https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wired.com/2011/02/unexpectedly-navys-superlaser-blasts-away-a-record/amp So there are yet other options afterall and will there likely be even more because...

I see. Thanks. So I suppose the only thing a nuclear reactor could do to booste a chemical laser is heat up the chemicals prior to whatever reaction is used to power the laser. The irony is that the chemical would probably have to be burned like propellant in the process...so not efficient. With chem lasers do you actually run the risk of running out of chemical? Does it vape away or something? EDIT: Answered. The USA airforce laser recirculates the chemical so it never runs out. Can fire so long it does not overheat. Virtually unlimited zapping. Yet according to wikipedia other options besides chemical lasers are being sought: Despite the performance advantages of chemical lasers, the Department of Defense stopped all development of chemical laser systems with the termination of the Airborne Laser Testbed in 2012. The desire for a "renewable" power source, i.e. not having to supply unusual chemicals like fluorine, deuterium, basic hydrogen-peroxide, or iodine, led the DoD to push for electrically pumped lasers such as diode pumped alkali lasers (DPALS).[18][failed verification]

What if we someday find a way to convert 99% of nuclear reactor power into a laser pulse? Would still be too weak with two reactors? So that the best you could do is slowly scorchan asteroid?

Forget the politcal angle for discussion and let us discuss the physical challenges. Lens radius: Five meters wide Power: Two nuclear reactors. Challenges: Lasers are hardly the most efficient invention. They make a lot of waste heat, and that will need to be shed via radiator fins. That is overlooked I think when high yield repeat use space lasers are considered. Main Question: What is the most powerful laser we could put in orbit on a spacecraft that we still wished to move under it's own thrust? Bonus Question: What is it's effective burn range? Given the 5 meter focusing lens? That's the irony pf spacecraft, the heavier the equipment inside a spacecraft the lower it's overall max thrust will be. Since heavy equiment has more inertial resistance to push against. At some point your rad fins become so heavy that your EPIC space laser has so low thrust that it may as well be a station. What is the sweet spot of spaceship weight where you can get as powerful a laser with nuclear power as we can expect with modern tech on a mobile spacecraft? Would such a laser be suited well enough for asteroid mining or not? This is not for scifi..just curious what our current limits truly are.

Thanks...regarding the heat, that seems solved actually. You WANT the heat. Laberge suggests a vortex of liquid lead and firing the plasma down the empty tunnel created by the liquid lead vortex, then compressing it rapidly (60 times a second). The liquid lead exchanges heat with heat exchangers to drive a steam turbine which also powers the pistons. The only heat issue I predict is perhaps the plasma melting the injectors, since the walls of the chamber are otherwise surrounded by liquid lead which will protect them anyway. The only problem Laberge still has is...plasma. He said it did not last long enough in the vortex before compression to create fusion, but he said they are working on that. Added to that is that the plasma must be compressed like sphere, not any other way...which plasma LOVES to do. If he can beat those challenges, he will have more than enough to hire Bill Gates as his pool boy and as many Porsches as he could want. I do think the wear and tear on the plasma injectors is the biggest possible point of failure, even if he did get ot to work. Breaking even for power generation will be hard. Does the sun even do that? I think even it has more mass than the energy it puts out. If that is truly so, then it makes what we are trying to do seem impossible...get more for less.

Answered and fixed: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation

Well...if the MIG fired the missile off what are the odds it would hit the American jet diving for the desert? My guess? The US pilot was trying to confuse the missile...probably thought it was heatseeking and would see one HUGE target as the jet neared the ground instead of homing in on the jet like it should. There is no debating the tech and training advantage though. US pilot even said he felt sorry for the guy...but still enjoys staying alive

I would tell you if I could. KSP will likely...I think...

Not. Fast. At all if gravity is high enough. That is the only answer I can give right now...but suffice to say...uf you have scifi gravity generation...you can also slow time locally wayyy down. That said...the gravity alone might crush anything in it...so that's an inconvinience if you were using this instead of a refridgerator for your food.

Yeah...I had no considered the fabric savings loss. But Washington is only an example. There are mzny variations of breeches, and with modern tech I am certain breeches with fabric savings could be designed well. Kind of how shorts provide more maneuverability than pants, but with breeches you are all covered and STILL have manuverability too...assuming you are'nt wearing boots and are wearing shoes.

What do you mean 'create fuel'? More fuel for fusion? Or propellant? I am not sure what new materials could be made after fusion is perfected, but I gather they would be power intensive to make. I like what Canada is doing though...trying to brute force it with pistons. If that does not work, perhaps a combinatio of the canada piston solution with a magnetic torus might work? Never hurts to throw everything to the wall to see what sticks I say. If that STILL does not work? Add strongly diamagnetic chilled fluids to mix and maybe that can help somehow...I dunno.

When a fighter jet is locked on to by another is that the end all be all of combat? It seems so. I watched a reenactment of the latest USA vs Iraq war and an American jet was locked on to by an Iraqi MIG. The American was scared and dived toward the ground and pulled up before crashing. The MIG never fired the missiles it had even though it had missile lock...the pilot lost control on the dive and crashed. Makes me think maybe...missile lock is not everything. Since in videogames if I fire a missile the target is usually going tp get hit if it lacks serious boost. In real life? It probably pays to keep your plane's nose facing the target because your missile will run out of propellant faster than they do in videogames. What do you know on this? If you are locked on to by another jet with a missile and they fire, can you actually evade it? Maybe it depends on missile type? Maybe the Iraqi jet had cheaper missiles that would need more pilot input to actually land a hit. I dunno...

This is war folks...ouch! Hate to be those guys!

I ask this because I think they can be in some respects: 1. They need not be 18th century tight. I have seen looser variations (even in the 18th century) that won't give you a wedgie and still allow for you to get work done. 2. Using long stockings to cover the shins means you never have to worry about soiled pant legs from work. And socks are easier to clean anyway. I even dare say they would be useful for astronaut wear in zero g. 3. I like the look. Which I admit is totally subjective, not objective. But overallI think they are quite practical wear in many situations. Even in snow it could work. Just wear thick stockings and boots. Worked for George. EDIT: Looks like he clipped on an added shin 'leg' for protection from the cold, but during average weather I doubt that would be necessary.

The plot seems generic (I have seen it before). Unless the characters are written well it would not interest me since I have seen that plot before. Playing God is not the concept I I really care about...rather the reality that immortality is both a gift and a responsibility Something us mortals can still take to heart. Since either way...making wise choices is vital....I would argue even more so in the OP, since there are simply enough threats to their survival in the universe that simply being biologically immortal won't be enough to ensure survival. Although I will say this...both mortal and immortal races would exist, and the immortal would achieve things mortals never could...which shouldbe expected anyway. Knowledge compounded by a lot more experience and time is powerful.

Scifi allows for any narrative one wants, even playing god. That is kind pf the route I am fascinated with, and along that route, I came to a strange conculsion. Suppose you have an alternate scifi alien Adam and Eve scenario EXCEPT. 1. They stay biologically immortal (never aging past prime adulthood) and pass that on to their children. 2. Their maker has no vested interest in keeping control over them and just really wants to watch and see what happens. He gives them three commands: 1. Multiply. 2. Do not by action or inaction destroy yourself or your offspring...unless necessary for command 3. 3. Create/engineer to ensure that the universe itself is not totally destroyed along with all life in it. This heavily implies that in the future they will have the tech power to prevent that one day if they survive long enough. This also implies that one day the very existence of the universe will be threatened. After that their maker lets them do their thing...zero interference on an Earth-like world with wildlife that is like Earth's, in that some can be domesticated but others are wild and will kill for food. Strange conclusion: 1. Conflict with kids is inevitable: The first parents will initially rule over a large family of children. As the children grow up and begin to have children of their own due to mating with each other, soon they will develop clans of their own apart from their All-Father and All-Mother. Sooner or later someone will want to rule themselves intead of letting All-Father and All-Mother tell them what to do. 2. War is VERY likely although not necessarily inevitable: It would no doubt pain the original parents to go to war with their own descendants, but at some point that is the kind of thing that happens when talks break down. 3. How Long Would The Original Parents Even Survive? Yes...big question. Since they would have to survive their own offspring, tech advances, any natural disasters that occur over millennia...and finally when they make contact with OTHER scifi races across the stars (they do exist). Space colonization is ABSOLUTELY essential given immortality and having babies. Too many would mess up planet resources. What do you think? How would you play it if you were an original biologically immortal parent who would pass that on to your kids and fill the planet? Would you try and rule? Or keep a low profile and just support any tech advances you could to help get your race spacebound as colonists one day? Note: Other scifi races across the stars were given commands slightly different than your own, so do not be suprised if that becomes a point of conflict unless you can engender peace somehow nonetheless. Bonus Question: What is the likelihood the original couple would stay together as a couple rather than break up and seek mates among their descendants? Low to impossible? I think the ONLY way they stay together as a couple is if they have the same main goals.

What I want is a 3-D version of Asteroids with real 'invisible' laser beams, newtonian motion, and newtonian flying missiles. Is that too much to ask? I think not! Yet NO ONE I know of has done it. The best I have ever seen is always 2-D!