Jump to content

Wjolcz

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,406

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Wjolcz

    Study Suggests Fundamental Laws of Nature Change Throughout the Universe

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted · Edited by Wjolcz

    That title was too clickbaity for me to watch the vid when I first saw it.

    If Earth had all the ingradients to create life 4 billion years ago (which it totally did, so these elements must've been created way earlier) and the physics changes over time then it's not a solution to the Fermi Paradox. If an alien race had a head start of 1 billion years then they could've easily been here by now*. Maybe they got here and we simply didn't check well enough**. So I doubt these constants change over time. When it comes to my opinion, I simply think our space telescopes are kind of s**t when it comes to searching exoplanets with life. Life is very likely to be out there and finding it is a matter of time.

    However, if the universe has special bubbles then that's just scary. It might mean that one of those is coming our way and we will just dissolve without even knowing.

    Anyway, I really don't think it's true. It might be some measurement artifact. Nature doesn't like making special places. People do like flashy headlines though.

    *I also believe there isn't much reason to colonize the entire galaxy and the whole Kardashev scale is very arbitrary and doesn't take many things into account, such as: civilizations that could use fusion to harness as much power as if they would by covering the entire planet in solar panels.

    **Alien probes might actually be in the solar system. I really like this idea.

    Edit 38472: I'm done editing this post.

    Plants on planets around red dwarves

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted · Edited by Wjolcz

    Or maybe photosynthesis is too much of a hassle around red dwarfs. As a plant you spend your already limited resources to grow leaves that don't make much energy. And, if there's any kind of ecosystem (and if we assume there are plants then there are also animals) those leaves are going to be eaten quick. So, harvest energy some other way?

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted · Edited by Wjolcz

    4 hours ago, RealKerbal3x said:

    So Super Heavy has been redesigned again, it seems.

    'Legs similar to ship' worries me. Despite their recent redesign, they're still tiny. Won't it be really easy for Super Heavy to tip over on landing?

    The tiny legs do look worrisome. I don't think there's much that can be done with this design though.

    Maybe we're just used to seeing big spread out legs on F9. That things needs to be stable on a swaying barge though. As longs as SS has a stable and flat ground to land on it probably won't be a problem.

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted

    6 hours ago, Shpaget said:

    Standard concrete wouldn't work on Moon, due to water boiling away, but... google time...

    I am wrong. Apparently vacuum concrete is a thing:

    https://civiltoday.com/civil-engineering-materials/concrete/27-vacuum-concrete-definition-advantages

    but... 

    Half an hour of setting time would be too fast. Do we have any concrete specialists here? What cement like vacuum resistant concoction can we pour on Moon to fix the surface?

    Tbh, by 'concrete' I meant anything that's hardened. If compressed regolith works I'm fine with that too.

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted · Edited by Wjolcz

    2 minutes ago, RealKerbal3x said:

    Those auxiliary radial engines on Lunar Starship got me thinking. They've obviously thought about plume-regolith interaction, so I wonder if those engines will eventually make their way onto the regular Starship design. They'd certainly be beneficial for Mars landing, though they might need a thrust increase as they're probably designed for lunar gravity.

    Or just land the first Mars Starship with a concrete-making robot that builds a pad for the next one. Ok, maybe not on the first one, but I'm pretty sure you get my point.

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted · Edited by Wjolcz

    51 minutes ago, tater said:

    They've already said that CRS missions will all use a Dragon 2 Cargo variant (no LES, I think). They are not reusing Crew Dragon for CRS.

    Whaaaaaaaaaaaa...? I must've missed that. What if "just empty the fuel tanks" is the cargo variant?

    Btw, pretty sure the tweet storm is just an outcome of a wild party. He has at least 2 reasons to party hard right now.

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted · Edited by Wjolcz

    4 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

    So this is interesting...


    Great, big, high mounted lights do make a certain amount of sense, and I recall Musk saying earlier the plan was to hoverslam and then (slowly) drop the last few meters. Hmmm....

    ...tho personally I’m hoping for ice cream dispensers now...

    They are not lights and he knows it. He's just going all "PLEASE LOOK AT ME PLEEEAAAAASEEEEEE!" again.

    You would be flying that thing with a radar. Or rather it would be flying itself.

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted

    9 minutes ago, Ultimate Steve said:

    It allows for a greater chance of Artemis continuing beyond the first few missions. Having an asset out there that multiple companies and countries are using makes Artemis a lot more difficult to cancel. It certainly becomes a lot less crucial if Starship pans out, but if it doesn't then I would still classify it as very important from a political standpoint, if not an engineering standpoint.

    Ok. But you could just dock two starships together and call it a station.

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted · Edited by Wjolcz

    2 hours ago, Dragon01 said:

    The Starship you're all imagining is a paper rocket.

    So were reusable boosters five years ago. We are not imagining anything. We are watching a rocket design change a lot. You know one thing that didn't change? The National Launch System. Or rather Ares. Or rather SLS. Oh, wait. It did change: got less capable and more expensive. Now it needs its own objectives because it's not going to launch Mars-bound ships anymore.

    2 hours ago, Dragon01 said:

    Why would Starship tiles not require disassembling and detailed inspection after every flight? 

    Because they are not The Space Shuttle Jigsaw Puzzle™ and can be mass produced. If they are mass produced then they are cheap. If they are cheap all you need to do is to replace the bad one with a good one without inspecting the old one.

    IIRC Shuttles' tiles weren't inspected until some major disaster happened? I might be wrong though.

    Fair point, I guess. We will see after the first orbital flight and reentry.

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted · Edited by Wjolcz

    10 minutes ago, SOXBLOX said:

    What would we launch with it?

    Nothing. It's impossible.

    10 minutes ago, SOXBLOX said:

    Does it have any use?

    No.

    10 minutes ago, SOXBLOX said:

    I mean, I'm all for colonizing space, but this isn't the way to go, in my opinion.

    You're right. What is it then?

×
×
  • Create New...