magnemoe
-
Posts
12,923 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by magnemoe
-
-
21 minutes ago, Superfluous J said:
So it's brighter than it was! HYPE
(yes I know why this is different)
I was thinking about that comic then writing the above
-
17 minutes ago, K^2 said:
I have no idea what you're talking about. It's the perfect amount of data.
Draws a straight line on graph paper through points labeled (1866, 2) and (1946, 3) with intensity normally reserved for cutting red or blue wires.
For some reason drawing an line between two points always give an straight line if using an ruler
I would expect it to be couple of % variation because of weather on the large star.
-
5 hours ago, kerbiloid said:
Crab Nebula
Associated with the SN_1054 superstar, offically lighted in 1054.
1. European sources from XV century.
Mwahah! They recalled it 400 years later?
2. Japanese document from XIII century, and not named Islamic document.
Mwahah! It took just 200 years to recall what happened.
3. Amerindian pictograms of unclear origin, let alone dates.
Just no comments.
So, actually, the only source telling about the superbright star in the sky, is a Chinese elder scroll (more precisely - 52th volume of the chronology, including the emperors riding flying dragons, and rebel armies of 2 million peasants).
Looks, like actually we have absolutely no information on the Crab Nebula birth date, but have a building of related astronomical calculation, based on this thought-out 1054 year.
P.S.
The most tragic part.This object from kinda 1054 was used for calibration in astronomy, and as a key point in chronology.
I see two things here, the supernova and the nebula. Chinese documented the supernova, did the Islamic and Japanese describe an nebula or an supernova.
Europeans was late and might only discover it after telescopes?
And the Chinese source sound a bit weird, more of an over the top action movie.
But why is it tragic is used for calibration, except that the nebula would expand. -
On 5/26/2024 at 12:58 PM, DDE said:
Depends on the design of NTR's fuel elements, but solid-core engines generally don't leak radioactivity and I don't think helium can be neutron-activated...
So the biggest damage will come from the carbon footprint of natural gas extracted to scavenge this much helium from it.
An reusable NTR rocket has two main problem, first is radiation after use it would make servicing it very hard. People was thinking of nuclear powered planes during the cold war. You could shield the crew of an bomber but not all around.
Same issue with an rocket on ground.
Second is accidents an failed landing will be an nasty mess at the best case. -
On 5/23/2024 at 7:06 PM, kerbiloid said:
The entire mathematics is based on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archimedean_property, and then is step by step developed into its horrible magnificence.
It takes four best years of life in the university.The entire theoretical physics is derived from the Hamiltonian mechanics, pure math.
Only the experimental physics is volatile to some extent.
And various paraphysics are, like chemistry.
And the parachemistry, called biology.
So, the science building just looks like a circus, but is a concrete barrack inside.
I see the problem as way larger in less hard sciences like physiology or economic, here dogma can establish and thrive, health is the larges arena for pseudoscience with anything from overblown trends to homeopathy who makes no sense at all.
And in technology, why do people try to design SSTO? Only way it makes sense today is to fool investors with cool technology. But it has been so many designs who has been actively worked on. -
7 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:
Hmm, the only thing I question about this is why empires didn't arise in the Pacific Northwest of the United States, when the aforementioned Tualatin Kalapuya people who used to live where I now am lived seasonally in (albeit) permanent structures made of cedar wood. Further up north of course the tribes in Washington had their longhouses.
Tribes in both Oregon and Washington would catch salmon, process it, and then store it, but due to their culture of providing basic needs for each other, theft was not as common as in Europe.
On the other hand, fishing and smoking or drying salmon was a labor intensive process. But the chiefs in Washington and British Columbia had no real political power over the wider populace, because the average person understood that another person had no real right or ability to order them around. They did not possess an army or police force and thus couldn't force people that way either. What the chiefs were able to convince others to do was go out and capture slaves to do the processing and fishing for the tribe.
However, the chief was not a king or emperor in the same way as seen in Europe. An off hand, off the top of my head speculation would be that European and Middle Eastern religions often resulted in strongmen being able to claim they derived their power from god, whereas such ideas were rare in North America (at least what became Canada and the US).
Might be an lack of benefit of large scale organization. River valleys and deltas was civilization starters as large scale irrigation infrastructure paid off big time. Writing is also important if you get large enough or the power structure become less stable.
Now with better technology you will get large scale benefit because of it but this would be closer to industrialization even if Romans and Chinese benefited from it like rapidly raising armies of well equipped forces.
Rome kept building fleets until they won the Punic wars. -
7 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:
The San people are at least 20,000 years old. Their historical range spans much of southern Africa, where numerous predators live. The reason we don't really see them battling lions and leopards is likely because they were forced off their land by European colonial officials.
I'm pretty sure it's incorrect that prehistoric people deliberately left animal populations to recover. After all, in the Americas they hunted large mammals like mastodons and giant sloths to extinction. That said, I don't have direct evidence to back it up.
Except it was not the Europeans who drove San off their original land, it was other Africans before European colonization, farmers and herders displaced them. European then repeated the process again against Africans to some degree.
And they probably knew that you should not over hunt an area for small games or dig up all the plants in it but the huge migratory herds was another thing.
its very likely say ice age hunter gatherer was much less nomadic than more modern ones like San who are restricted to areas not suited for farming.
And its population density dependent after all the diseases in America killed off most of the population after Europeans arrived many people in North America switched to hunter gatherers as it was room for it and its less work.
Farming in America was also more an pain because no good draft animals and less efficient crops than Eurasia. -
22 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:
How were the apples called in the Scandinavian sagas? Iirc, Idunn had some.
I can remember the einheries eating fried pork, but can't recall the potato garnish (much better than just pork).
P.S.
Found three articles, but can't realize which word is "apple".https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idunn
https://nn.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gudinna_Idunn
https://is.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iðunn_(norræn_goðafræði)
P.P.S.
Maybe it was a kenning?"Apple" = "an Idunn's golden potato"
No idea but the viking had apples even found as grave goods.
Imagine this worked out might be that the attitude an location was not good for apples, pretty close to the tree limit so they only knew them from trade.
Then you had the priests advocating for potatoes to farmers and they might become know as apples locally., -
4 hours ago, kerbiloid said:
That's rather strange, as the apples definitely were familiar long before the potato.
In XIX cent. Russia one of then-new potato nickname was "devil's apple".
Makes to find the center of symmetry.
Agree, its weird. and its not like potatoes is new either.
-
53 minutes ago, Codraroll said:
There are definitely a lot of names out there that sound innocuous in their native language, but turn out to be a nasty word or even a slur in foreign languages. After all, a rule of thumb of emytology is that the shortest words in a language have been around for a long time, there are very many languages, and there are only so many sounds to combine short words from, so by necessity, some of the words that describe names in one language describe ... other things in other languages.
Examples of common Norwegian names that sound bad in English include:
- Bård (pronounced like "bored")
- Simen (pronounced like "semen")
- Odd (and due to the quirks of language, it is fully possible to be named Odd Person)
- Line (not a nasty word, but foreigners will pronounce it like in English, which is nowhere close to the Norwegian pronounciation)
- Asmund (names that begin with the prefix "ass-" tend not to work well overseas)
Additionally, due to wildly differing dialects in Norway, there are names that used to work well in one part of the country but turned out rather ... unlucky in others. The name "Bergsvend", which literally translates to "mining apprentice", was common around the Røros area, but less common nowadays as it is pronounced exactly like "Poop friend" in the Oslo dialect. Likewise, the name "Analius" (I really wonder if that will make it through the forum censorship) dropped drastically in usage once people began to realise what those first four letters mean.
I also knew a girl of Vietnamese descent who had her last name changed from "Do" to "Då" (same pronounciation), because "Do" means "toilet" in Norwegian.
As an Norwegian I agree about these, and Analius was not uncommon 100 years ago.
Just having æøå in your name was an hassle, probably less now today with unicode.
You still have stuff who translates poorly, either to bad worlds or to negative words like slow or unreliable.
And dialects, my favorite one was visiting the mountainous areas of central Norway there my mother had an friend. Serving some meatballs and I was asked if I wanted apples, I said I take them after the meal.
But in their dialect apple was potato and sweet apple was apple. Literally translated. -
22 hours ago, darthgently said:
Given the mechanical and thermal stresses such a relatively weak structure appears to go through and the tolerances it must meet to mate with SS, I wonder how many cycles they could realistically get out of it. Still, probably more than one and would seem better to bring it back and scrap it than to hurl it away
I would not call it weak, it has to support upper stage trough maxQ including bending forces.
But it faces two thermal shocks, first is separation, after upper stage goes to full trust its not longer required to be structural, it then faces the heating during reentry from an suborbital trajectory.
Yes the protective cover over the top of first stage take more of an pounding during separation is not structural, just to protect first stage an be an weather covering for the top systems at other times.
But, down the line they will want to reuse it. My guess is that they will make it more of pipes like the Russian hot staging segment as easier to protect or cool but they will anyway have extra drag on the top, but it might be so different the current design does not matter? -
1 hour ago, darthgently said:
The DSN handles way more than VGR1&2. Rovers on Mars for example. Solar probes, course corrections for this and that. I've tended to assume"deep space" in the DSN context means beyond the Earth-Moon system, not halfway to Arrakis
This, now I kind of suspect future missions will move more over to use lasers as the bandwidth intense links, suspect lasers will also be better at long distance communication. But this pretty much require receivers in space or bad weather can block you off.
But you probably just need one satellite looking at mars to receive the signals from multiple probes there same for other planets. -
6 hours ago, Spaceception said:
https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1793998848584794574
https://www.spacex.com/updates/#flight-3-report
Still jettisoning the hotstage ring. This has to be a temporary thing, right? Can't be fully reusable if you're intentionally discarding hardware.
https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=starship-flight-4
S29 will be attempting a flip and burn (mentioned in the flight timeline), not just a splashdown. Higher confidence in reentry?
Did flight 2 jettison the hot stage ring? Yes it add drag to the top, but any simulated landing would be useless without is as it will be present on later landings and catch attempt.
-
9 hours ago, Flavio hc16 said:
" Reusability is just a Gimmick"
An obvious good idea if you had the launch numbers. You need to launch 100 times for it making sense. It also has to be cheap, not like the space shuttle.
-
4 hours ago, Exploro said:
As of the end of last month, the Hubble was considered to be in good health. Three gryos are functional, though one of the three produced erroneous readings that caused the spacecraft to enter safe mode at least twice, once in April and again last November. According to source, the Hubble could be made to operate running on one of the healthier gyros for pointing operation with the second healthy gyro to serve as back up.
One option might be an dock and boost, perhaps leaving an small independent module with secondary retraction wheels to take the load off the primary ones.
Had an idea for an shuttle mod for starship, as in smaller crew space, larger cargo bay and multiple arms, designed for repairs, upgrades and recovery of satellites out to earths L points. -
Just watched this and the caption at 13:43 makes it. Now this is an real thing Soviet got to the nuke fast because they know it works and had lots of spies.
Now it was one sci-fi short then they rebuild after an catastrophe, captain held an speech saying they was up to the ancestors tech level and then activate warp drive
-
6 hours ago, tater said:
Literally everything in economics is theoretical, might as well be phrenology.
India and Luxembourg have about the same Geni score—that tells us exactly nothing about which country would be better to live in—Bangladesh is slightly lower than Switzerland. Like most simple, calculated metrics comparing populations... nonsense.
As for a private mission vs a NASA mission, all that matters is when they actually need to do something vs deorbiting—they clearly have some time, it's not like it needs to happen next year. Within that context of the actual WHEN, the next question to ask is if NASA has a plan for creating the capability they would prefer to service it. We all know the answer to that is there is no plan, they have no vehicle at all being worked on. If they decide to build such a vehicle tomorrow, we're talking about what, mid 2030s before it's around (smack in the middle of the stated end of life range). There's a 0% chance of them funding a crewed tug with a robot arm, airlock, etc, in the foreseeable future, so yeah, Hubble hits end of life with no servicing that way, ever.
Where the balance point is—risk to future observations lost from a failed service mission vs lost observations due to unpredictable end of life (eqp failures, etc, not just orbital decay)—I have no idea. Someone there could probably ballpark t and say it's worth the risk to send a service mission in 2032 (made up date) and beyond, but not before. NASA could also simply fund their OWN Dragon mission, perhaps adding an orbital module to the trunk with an arm? <shrug> This would likely add billions, obviously.
Wealth inequality is heavy screwed by tax rules, its often an benefit to have debt for tax reasons so you buy apartments and rent out in Switzerland and lots of places in Europe.
Norwegians started to get an breeding season because of kindergarten entry rules but birth wards was not set up for this.
And the obvious Freefall reference http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff2900/fc02843.htm -
14 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:
One chute didn't open, but the ship had insurance, and the prayers of the insurance agency have put it softly on ground.
As I understand one chute is backup, landing will be rougher but fine if one fails. Reason to have 3-4 of them
-
11 minutes ago, darthgently said:
...and F9 booster 1062 sets new bar at 21 landings
Just like night landings on carriers is routine today.
-
On 5/16/2024 at 5:51 PM, darthgently said:
Spider silk is better anyway. Lost your job? Learn to herd and milk spiders
Hint: Larger spiders are easier to milk
-
2 hours ago, darthgently said:
Probably similar to what a USN pilot deals with every time they drop a tailhook onto an aircraft carrier deck in high seas
Agree, one crazy part about aircraft carrier landing is that you go full throttle on touchdown. That is so you can take off if you miss all the hooks.
More crazy back during WW 2 and before angled flight deck you often had planes parked on the front part of the deck so if you miss the hooks you will crash into them. Granted propeller planes landed much slower but still.
US operated two training aircraft carriers on the great lakes, they used paddle wheel and was coal fired
It was cut down passenger / party / cruise ships like many ferries in Europe is today used for training carrier landings. -
6 hours ago, StrandedonEarth said:
If it works autonomously, not needing human control…
My thought too, placing is done remotely or perhaps at site lining up things and shipyards had far more powerful cranes 50 years ago.
Catching will be automated. -
6 hours ago, The Aziz said:
Despite the layoffs of unknown size, and overall panic, there are no signs of work stoppage. Work slowdown, yes, halt, no.
Worse case they are using the time from calling out firing to they leaving to do the patch and perhaps an rushed colony update.
Often companies pay out and fire people at once so they don't do damage, but don't think is an issue here as they have current version. -
7 hours ago, AckSed said:
Is it possible for a space program to be endearing?
I say to you that JP Aerospace is that space program. This is Grandad's garden shed hobby run on a shoestring, with a notable focus on practical testing and taking small steps towards a big goal. So far they've sustained themselves by launching 'Pongsats' and other payloads on high-altitude balloons, slowly working out their weird magnetic/electric/chemical engines that they are going to fit to a *deep breath* mile-wide, solar-powered, inflatable VLEO -> LEO launch vehicle that they propose to launch from a honest to goodness high-atmosphere aerostat station:
Instead of saying, "Ohh, this won't work," I take a different tack. Someone has been trying to build this for 40 years, using prototyping and design changes where needed. I don't care how realistic it might be, I just absorb the sense of wonder at seeing someone dream big and actually trying in a reasoned manner.
Well we will live an world of fully reusable heavy lift soon. Not that this technology is pointless but more on staying over an area for long times
The drag would be the killer here I say, low trust work in space not in atmosphere.
Deep Space Network should be in deep space!
in Science & Spaceflight
Posted
Yes, if you include the L1 and L2, can not imagine Web uses it. And then I talked about communication lasers in space they would be in earth orbit.