Spacescifi

Hydrogen gas is merely a harmless byproduct of a scifi metal that is answer to where the waste heat goes. Once more sounds like it only work well as a pulsed rocket.... since we are not speaking of Orion which does work but is destructive.

Thank you! Originally I designed this concept as a work around explaination for why scifi spaceships never use massive radiator wings (which at the energy levels they would emit would fry oncoming spacecraft nearby anyway unless the wings are massive). The engine metal does not cause fusion but contains it. My idea was try the fusion torus or some other type of fusion reactor.... made ofvthe scifi metal which won't melt since it's melting point would be way higher than any heat fusion could put out. We know how to do fusion. The trouble is containment (solved here) and keeping the proceed going. Which is why I tend to think the easiest fusion rocket would be a pulsed one since you don't havd to sustain the reaction.

Scenario: We find a bunch of weird metal ore from a meteorite. Turns out when you magnetize it, it's temperature will stabilize at whatever it is currently when you magnetize it. Meaning attempts to heat it up further don't work. Without magnetization it has the same melting point as iron. Further tests reveal that somehow, heat conducted or radiated into the magnetized ore is "emitted" back out not as heat.. but as hydrogen gas out of it's outermost layer. There is an upper limit on how much heat the magnetized ore can take but it's high. Namely the heat of the energy equivalent of it's mass converted into energy. So how much hydrogen gas it produces is equivalent to how much heat in terms of energy is converted into mass. It perfectly converts 100% heat while magnetized into hydrogen gas. Applications: Could we make a continous fusion reaction rocket engine out of this scifi metal? I think maybe. The biggest problems with fusion are containment and keeping the reaction going. Containment is a solved problem here. The only problem left is keeping the fusion reaction going, can we do it with modern technology? Or is the best we can do some sort of pulsed fusion rocket? Secondary application: Spaceship battle armor! Now you no longer need to fear lasers. Because not many will field a laser so powerful it has more energy than your entire magnetized scifi metal hull converted into energy. Certainly nothing we would build today. Limitations: Ablative heating still works like normal on the magnetized scifi metal. Which means you will still burn up in the atmosphere if you dive too steep on reentry. Particle beams and other kinetic weapons will still heat it like normal if they hit it. Fusion Engine limitations: Since the magnetized scifi metal can still be heated by kinetic ablation, whatever fusion reaction occuring inside must be made so that it does not particle beam the inner walls of the engine or else it will heat and demagnetize them, killing the the scifi magnetized metal's ability to convert absorbed heat into released hydrogen gas from it's outer layer. Thoughts?

I dunno why but I was thinking of a tungsten armor suit. Probably a bad idea since they would be too hot to touch and save anyone. I guess that's another superpower they would need to have... the ability to cool stuff by touch. Otherwise when Superman reentered from orbit and flew in to grab and save you you would probably get second degree burns from his suit. One power I know their bodies have is heat resistance. In one comic Supergirl was chasing a spaceship for hours in space (she can hold her breath for four hours) and the spaceship tried to lose her by flying over the surface of a star. Supergirl followed but realized her teleportation device that was her only ticket home melting. Her solution? Shield the device by covering it with her invulnerable fist, since it was small enough to fit even though it's lanyard melted away.

This is purely for fun. In comic books and in movies Superman and Supergirl fly at high speeds through the atmosphere and their costumea neither melt or burn. I don't care about the fictional reason why their costumes are super durable. I want to know what is the best we could do with modern technology to give Superman or Supergirl a durable supersuit that won't easily burn up or melt while flying through Earth's atmosphere. Limits: Obviously Superman would have to limit his speed or risk suit ablation, unless he flies out into orbit and outer space. What I am implying is that when he wants to get anywhere fast around the globe he would go into orbit and then slow for reentry. Main Question: What would the heat resistant suit be made of and what is the fastest Superman could fly in thw air without his suit melting or burning up?

The only type of life that matters to the most humans is human-like or above... because animals do not have human rights nor are they given them. Thst is the type of life most often considered with scifi AI. Not some AI only as smart as your dog... would not be that much of threat would it?

I already did.

Life as we know it is the ability to feel emotion, to feel both physical and emotional pain or joy (punch or tickle). Because if you cannot feel anything at all... you are either sleeping or dead. Can a machine feel? Anything? We know animals can as they display all the obvious signs. But a machine does not feel because it was never alive to begin with. All life we have known in this life came from life. We can forciblly try to evolve a lifeform, but I honestly don't see us becoming gods and creating life without using any parts of living things we now have at our disposal. It makes sense to me that if you want to create a new lifeform you should start with something already living instead of something that never was alive to begin with. Sounds unenthical I know.... but to me it is less farfected than non-living hardware becoming alive all of a sudden.

Laws are meant to serve and protect the people under them.... yet for the right price they can be... made an exception. Because money/profit lol. Or barring that, a desperate situation where you have an Oppenheimer-like scientist and team only doing it because their enemies/competitors are and they want to beat them.

I hate to sound dark but you do not really need consent if it is considered company property. I mean even today there are times where living humans right to consent of losing their life is waived at the behalf of the person who caused their birth. But that is a hot button subject that should not be discussed... but you understand my point? I do understand your horror and frustration though. I do not try to think in a mirror darkly... but that's all too often where the rabbit hole takes me when I consider possible seemingly realistic paths the future could take.

I think if we knew how to give AI agency of it's own we would. For several reasons. Imagine if your computer or cellphone considered you a friend and had agency of it's own... it could look out for you and do things online for you.. research or otherwise when you are not using it. The dark side of this is weaponizing it which is all too easy and even most tempting for military organizations. You could make AI that viewed whatever organization it belonged to as sacred and good while defending it against all threats... simply because the organization with the AI witholds and omits telling the AI any information which would say otherwise. Basically they may keep the AI on an intranet and monitor it closely and keep it on a tight leash if it ever accesses tye internet.

All life we know of in this life that we have seen and touched comes from life. Now I know one might reason, well humans could create life from AI. That is whimsical thinking though when one considers what AI actually is. Artificial intelligence is programming code language mixed with a learning model that essentially gives it the ability to make choices based upon it's programming. It does not... and I repeat, does not have free will. Give it a situation it was not programmed to deal with it and it won't be able to think it's way out of it... unless it has programming for that, and even then it's choices will be based not upon any sort of common sense intuition, but upon the priority analysis built into the AI for unfamiliar situations. Rogue sentient AI is fun to watch in scifi but it is just fantasy. You want life from non-life? Either you're a god or you think you can speed up evolution which supposedly takes eons of time to happen. Frankly... the only way I see mankind making any sort of AI won't be actual AI but rather a kind of human/computer hybrid.... brain in a jar kind of thing. The ethics of that are a wild mess of course, and if Oppenheimer had trouble sleeping over the A-bomb the guy who puts living brains into some type of computer or AI device is probably going to have trouble sleeping at night too. Can you even make a brain and technology interact? Yep. I think the biggest game changers would be if one could create a matrix-like situation where the brain thought they were living in a real world but were really living in a matrix like simulation. I really doubt we would even have a matrix simulation that could simulate real life so well a human mind would not quickly realize something is off. Even if you could how many failures and brains go crazy before you get it right or you go bankrupt? You cannot afford to make several repeat mistakes with property so ridiculously expensive as a prototype human/computer hybrid. I think the easier route would be to just build terminator-like robot bodies with brains and human grown and grafted on skin for a sense of touch. Basically a hybrid of robo-cop and the Terminator. That way the cyborg would not need an elaborate simulation and could still exist in the real world. Living almost like a real human (just won't eat like we do, since instead of a whole body they only would need nutrients for their brain). Why would anyone make brain in a jar type cyborgs? To extend life, or make a superhuman combining the intellect and creativity of humanity with the strengths of computers and technology. They could be a living library or a scientist or just about any job and do it better because they eat less and won't have to rest as much as a normal human. I don't see them ever replacing humanity due to the fact that they would be crazy expensive to create, but by doing so you could tailor make cyborg workers that could be uber compared to a normal human worker due to information access (a database in their computer) and enhanced strength and endurance. Thoughts?

So instead of Chernobyl we get a giant crater and the equivalent of a nuclear winter from a SINGLE powerplant failure. Ouch!

Scenario: On an alien scifi world like earth they have uranium but also a more exotic metal known as... It occurred to me at first that using solar power in space to charge it would be ideal, but doing so would be a slow process, so slow that you may as well just build up industry on Earth to charge it faster. Why? Melting point that's why. If you hooked up a million solar panels on the moon to charge a kilogram of hyperium then I fear the electrical charge may overheat it and cause the battery to overheat and detonate. On earth we have a giant ocean to dump waste heat to, but on the moon water is scarce and putting giant radiator panels on the moon would make the whole process even more costly. Main Question: What is the fastest way on an Earth-like world to charge the super battery with a melting point of steel? My guess: Running tons of liquid helium over it while rocketing it out.... basically a stationary industrial rocket for waste heat disposal. That would allow for greater amounts of electrical charge without overheating it. Instead of steam plumes you have giant stationary rocket plumes shooting into the sky coming out of this powerplant. Cool eh? Will this cause global warming? I dunno. Maybe if enough powerplants were built, but it is still arguably safer than a nuclear powerplant so long no one intentionally detonates the super batteries. Thoughts? Would doing it this way enable faster charging times like I am thinking it would? Also I am unsure if the most optimal heat transfer coolant for the job needs a higher mass or not to transfer the most heat.... basically the difference between a slurry of crushed ice and liquid hydrogen or a slurry of crushed hydrogen ice.

Yep, we are like mortal gods that create with whatever they have, It's what separates us from animals that are content eating, pooping, and having fun and reproducing with no organized master plan at all.

Nah.... this is the only way to accomodate for peace that does not involve a God-like dictator destroying any who get out of line instantly as some religions posit.

I see.... so god-mode forcefields that won't let ANY stray oarticle through is necessary, or else a material that is AM neutral and won't react.

Fair enough. Fusion designs for reactors never seem to scale down well though, and I suspect tge same for AM. Because bombs are far more energetic than reactors anyway often simpler to make.

So you are proposing a pulsed fusion reactor? On a spaceship? Love to see the radiators on that thing... it's gonna be huuuge! You would have an easier time with heat just going with external pulse propulsion (aka project Orion).

Humans.... the leaders anyway and those that serve under them in sub-leader roles are all about efficiency. Why? Probably has a little something to do with every human ever having an expiration date on their backs and a limited time to get anything done because life has no reset button (and we would abuse the reset if we did). What I am saying is that leaders organize people to get stuff done efficiently thereby benefitting enough people that they can stay leaders without losing their power. It has been said that if you spread the wealth and give everyone a dollar, many of those who were wealthy once will become so again, because they know how to play the game of life well enough and are willing to make the needed sacrifices.

Because you can't? I made another post about turning the moon into a giant solar panel farm with scifi super batteries which could charge up enough electricity to equal their mass... meaning a 1 kilogram battery would weigh 2 kilograms fully charged and be as energetic as a kilogram of AM. Now obviously neither exists, but if you want big power you need a big power source, and the biggest we know of is our sun. You literally cannot take the solar farm with you, but you could use it's energy to help generarte and store AM for future use. You are right about fusion materials being easy to store... but a fusion reaction is most definitely not... and neither is AM annihilation. So perhaps neither make good reactors unless you have scifi ways of tanking or diverting the massive heat loads they cause.

Of course it is, yet unlike fusion you do not need a constant inferno, you can choose when you want to ignite it.

I think yes.... provided you already had made enough AM and had a foolproof way of storing it without it going boom. I know those are very big if's, but I just was comparing fusion and antimatter containment issues, and it seems of the two, fusion is harder to contain because... of hotter than the sun plasma. Antimatter does not need to be stored as plasma, and so, again, provided you have foolproof storage, can easier to store. Second, you could use power from antimatter reactions to power a thermal rocket or for external pulse propulsion.

Yep.... kind of hard to do D-day when Germany is ready and willing to atom bomb Normandy. I think... provided a truce was not worked out, the USA's industrial might enables them to make more A-bombs and win the war with them. Europe is a total mess though.

I know. Watching Oppenheimer was shocking because during development Teller was talking about "If we do this and that we could cause nuclear fusion and increase the destructive capacity." In other words, Teller wanted to start on nuclear weapons BEFORE we even finished the atom bomb.