AngelLestat

First, that is the wrong way to approach the problem, It would be very confusing, because we need to focus in the energy sources, and this might looks like the ground is a high energy source, which is not, it's just trapped heat. The biggest energy source is the sun, and only reach 10% to the surface, so yeah, you might have convection heat, but what it does tells us? Not much.. IR frequencies can escape even from surface without touch the atmosphere, of course just a bit amount.. but it can. Then you add a little amount by convection which in upper stages will provide extra radiation, so instead make that step you just focus in input and output radiation, and thats it. like this graph: Anual Energy Budget Venus. Also, atmosphere does not escape from the planet, that is why is insolated from the convection point. Only radiation comes out. Similar to the car. Yeah, what can tell us just the co2 data from 3 or 4 locations on earth that might have some measurement errors from long long time ago? Vs all the data (millons of different sources) that we have today? Even with all the data we have today is really hard to follow all the energetic process in earth, what amount is kinetic energy on wind and sea, what amount is absorbed by oceans and at which deeps? Plus many other factors. The best thing that scientist may do now, is try to collect more data and improve our climate models until we get better predictions that match data collected.

The problem that RTG will add substantial weight for not a great amount of energy.. You need to transmit data, move around, cooling, etc. I will look more seriously how to use the kinetic energy of the wind to move the rover and produce energy. This may reduce the overall weight by a lot, but it will need more research, because is a lot more easy to put a RTG inside and move on. We have 5km/h to 10km/h wind at surface, with a density of 64kg/m3. This is not the best to extract energy from it, but is great to move your prove around. I imagine a prove with variable density (that can expand and contract it self), two main parts, one that can deploy and touch the ground (also act as anchor) to make experiments, and the other to float around generating power, and reducing its density in case it wants to move to other location. Like this concept but very different: You can not choose very well where to go, but you can explore bigger distances without get stuck around rocks or lava. PB666: I dont understand, you are talking of a open cycle? But what happens when your water is out?

If you want to study the energetic process of an object, first you need to establish which are your energetic inputs and outputs. For Venus or Earth you have only 3 inputs and 1 output. Inputs: -Sun heat transfer by radiation -radioctive decay from heavy elements which mostly are located in the core. -remaining heat since earth formation. Output: -Heat transfer by radiation to space. Inputs and outputs should be in equilibrium (due how old is the earth) But in earth, the heat transfer by radiactive decay is very low, if the sun disappear, the amount of heat radiated to space from earth will be very low, even lower is the remaning heat since earth formation. So we can ignore it, In venus might be a bit higher due heavy elements, but I guess it can be ignored too. Now we establish our inputs and sources, we can see that oceans and grounds only act as capacitors, they absorb heat and then release it at night. But you dont gain or lose heat due this, unless your greenhouse gases increase, so oceans trap more heat for a time (inputs are higher than outputs) until it reach equlibrium, if we make co2 values to go back to normal from one day to the other, it may take 30 years to cool again to normal temperatures, because the ocean will provide that heat (outputs higher than input) until reach equilibrium. Summarizing all that in easiest ways to understand: Both are greenhouse gases, they let more heat pass, but they reflect the heat that tries to escape from earth, so the temperature rise (earth absorbs more heat) until it reach a new equilibrium between energy receive and radiated to space. But planets are also close systems from the convection point of view, atmosphere does not escape to space.. (when it does, is negligible) They only transfer heat by radiation to space. In the car example is similar, you have the Sun as input, and the car outputs are conductive (this is a extra output that should not be there if we want a good comparison, so it should be even hotter) and radiating heat. So yeah, the car example works perfect.. Why you think is called the greenhouse effect? Greenhouses can keep tropical plants in cold places, but once it reach the equilibrium, then energy input is equal to output, the only difference is that inside the greenhouse temperature is higher. Yeah.. that is the same that happens in venus, it only reach a 10% of sunlight to the surface.. This does not prevent to reach 450 celcius degree, because heat can not escape. Just make the experiment that I told you, try to leave some air between each layer of plastic so you dont lose all the heat by conduction. It needs to be sealed. But gravity by it self is not given energy in jupiter.. Is potential energy the source of that heat. As I said before, if you compress a gas, you release heat, but once the compression is over, then you dont produce more heat. Jupiter is still in shrinking process, so the gas lose potential energy (it was at a higher altitud, then the height is reduce), so that is the source of heat. You can not get energy from nothing, that is why gravity by it self does not produce energy. Lets analize all energy inputs and outputs from jupiter: Inputs: Sun radiation, radiactive decay, potential energy shrinking process, gas and asteroids that fall in jupiter from space which add kinetic and potential energy, heat remaning since jupiter formation, tidal energy by their moons (this reduce the kinetic energy of the bodies). Outputs: heat radiated to the space, tidal energy, magnetic fields absorbed by its moons. You mean those graph that show estimations of co2 thousands or millons years ago?We know very little about other greenhouses gases at those times or earth conditions vs other types of energy sources as sun, or different cycles on earth. There are thousands or chemical process that might have something to do with that, more in the past we look, more heat remaning from earth formation was, the same for radiactive decay, more asteroids falling to earth, different types of water solubility.. One thing is trying to understand today earth conditions with all accurate data from all sources and make predictions with that, than use just co2 estimations from long long time ago.

Yeah, it happens to me all the time, but your english is better and you explained in a different way. So is always good had different approaches.

You are mixing concepts here. In a close system, if you increase the temperature, the gas expand, if it cant, the pressure rise. The temperature in a gas depends on the average kinetic energy of each molecule in the gas, but it does not have nothing to do with pressure. No, because they let sunlight pass, but when touch ground or sea, is emitted at a different IR frequency which bounce against co2, methane, water vapor, and other greenhouse gases. The contrary happens with sulfuric acid, it reflect the sunlight and let pass IR frequencies from lower layers of venus, so the heat escape. But venus has 98% of co2 too, so these two effect fight each other. One plan to fight global warming here on earth is to spray sulfuric acid to our atmosphere, just with a tiny amount it will be enoght to decrease the temperature.. But of course, even a tiny amount might have bad secundary effect that we may not know about it. If that it would be true, we will be able to harvester energy just with 1 static machine using gravity..´ Gravity is a field, you get work only moving through the field, if you rise you get potential energy, if you let it drop you gain kinetic energy. But if you are static, nothing happens. Atmospheres are static, they move only because the sun provides energy.. not the gravity field. No, you never enter in a car which was under the sun? If you increase the glasses layers, you will see that the temperature keeps rising by each layer. The same with plastic sheets , if you have 1 big plastic piece (like this) in your house, take a thermometer, and put it in the sun, then cover it with 1 layer of plastic, then with 3, then with 6. Lets see what happens. The fabrics they use does not act as greenhouse effect, and you cover the skin from sun burns. Also the climate is dry, so if you drink extra water, you cool your self by sweating in a more efective way. Yeah, is the same shown there

Yeah there is some misconceptions about why venus is hot.. When you compress a gas, you are producing work, this procedure has some energy loses in form of heat. But if you let it cool, then you have big pressure without heat. The venus case is different. We can imagine like if we have different blankets by height, which each one represent 1 bar of atmosphere and it allow through a big % of light. Imagine that you are in a bed under 90 blankets vs 1 blanket, there are kinda transparent and you are under the sun. Is not exactly like that but might help to understand. That is why we always compare jupiter-earth-saturn-venus temperature at equal pressure. These are the temperatures that planets should have at 1 bar without greenhouse effect: These are the real temperatures they have, take a look at 1 bar:

If is not coded to get the advantage of quamtum logic then not.. of course. The same that an app coded for 32 bits will not get the memory advantages of 64 bits systems with more than 4gb. But if the game is designed under quantum logic then it can be much faster. The problem is that everyone is still very inmature with quantum logic. To understand binary logic and algorithms to exploit that, may take you at least 5 years of study (for a basic level), but to understand the new possibilities and algorithms for quantum computers (in case you just need to read them and not invent them) in may take your life time or more. Because that is how quantum computers work. But this does not mean that you dont know what it will be the outcome when you make the software.. this only means that you can not intercept/observe that process without change the outcome.

What WedgeAntilles wants to said when he mentions that venus is twice as hot than earth, is because he takes 1 bar of pressure in both places.. If you want to compare temperatures of different planets, you need to do it at equal pressure. Venus at 50km height which is 1 bar aprox, it has 67 to 80 celcius degree. Which is more than twice earth temperature. But we need to take into account at least 5 big factors here: 1-Extra solar radiation. 2-Very reflective clouds of SO4 that are above this height, this counter the extra solar radiation, they are good to reflect sun light but they let escape long waves that comes from the layers below. 3-Atmosphere mix 98% co2, this help to trap more heat. 4-Convective heat that may come from lower layers.. 5-Extra heat that comes from evaporation (is very dry, so this is not a big effect) 4-5: depends on how temperature was measure it. Not sure if I forgeting something. I am not a expert. But I can said one thing with certain.. Not even experts can make good calculations to compare venus with the earth, because the information that we have from venus is very limited, our models does not make very good predictions in venus, because our climate models are not complete yet. So it will not help in nothing to compare with venus to reach conclusions in this discussion. Venus is important to understand much better the greenhouse effect and improve all our predictions here on earth. But well, our climate models may have some flaws, but they make better predictions here on earth, so we should focus with the things we got.

ok. I will take your word. Thanks for the clarification.

you can not fill the universe, also there is not point in that, but you can have millions for each star in case the probes has not limits. Also you can not reach all, the universe is expanding faster than light and there is always more from what we see. But it can be very bad for the life of all close galaxies. Of course another intelligence can create a new type of Von Neumann probes just to eliminate these Von Neumann probes. But as I said, maybe nothing of that has a point when we (or an AI) reach the that tech level... the singularity.. Nothing can be predicted beyond that point, there is not logic path, because it will not be our logic as we know it.

Few years or months after we reach the singularity (which may be trigger by a hard IA birth). BUt not sure if it will have any point at that point.

Moho does not have atmosphere in the game, the same that its real twin mercury (10−14 bar.) Be depleted of hydrogen or water in earth/kerbin is impossible. Just the earth atmosphere has 15000km3 of water. So you may said... I need to go to mercury, how I come back if I dont want to carry the fuel needed for that? Then we can talk taken the issue more seriously. If another issue is how to harvester (I cant think in a logic circustance) big quantities of hydrogen from gas giants, then I would choose neptune or uranus. So the gravity well is not so hard to overcome.

From what I read, wormhole are only possible with exotic matter, and none of those configurations are stable. Maybe is the same thing that you wanna said.

welcome to the forum.. I see that you are new here.. But your plot and logic to do all this has no sense at all. The method has not sense either, but maybe I dint understand it, also I want to know the goal of this question.. Is for a mod, or a new suggestion for the game? not sure Or is a science question of how to get hydrogen from moho?

There is something of true behind all this, it will be very inneficient if we need to carry few kg of platinum in a dragon capsule or any other capsule to protect the cargo from reentry and provide a guided soft land... why for?? There is not humans in there, there are just metals. But.. you can not just drop them either.. depending the purity or mix of the platinum cargo, can be break it in the reentry or just put someone in danger when it reach land. Also as I said before, if this thing falls free from the sky, anybody can claim it. So it needs a middle solution.. what occurs to me to fix this is a bag system with thermal cover and tiny parachutes with a tracking beacon and a sound alarm that will activate before touch the ground. In this case you rise 10 of this reentry bags, you cover 10 ton of material, and then you recover the bag (which may be reusable or not). The parachute does not need to be big, meanwhile the final speed may be 12 m/s. These bags can be shooted from orbit, if your ship is tight to the asteroid, it will not be a big change of orbital speed for something as massive as an asteroid. You can recover that deltav using a nuclear thermal engine shooting any gas or compound different than platinum from the asteroid. So I guess it can be many efficient ways to do it if we just think a little about that.

Thanks, I dint know this technique. So this thing does not need gearbox for what I can see, its like hydbrid electric engines which can provide a lot of torque, so they save energy in transmission and they add regenerative brake. Not sure how much of the heat is used or if it has some extra besides insulation. I wonder if this only has sense in large vehicles or it can be used at any scale.

Thanks, I am one of those.. ------------------------------------------------ This by the other way, may allow a little jump in the Moore's Law, this was wandering in the news lately, but is the first time that I saw it well explained in this video: It will come out in few months. The 3D XPoint is currently in production at Intel Micron Flash Technologies, and the makers say that the technology will have a wide range of applications including machine learning, immersive 8K gaming, fraud detection, genetic analysis, disease tracking, and social media. http://www.gizmag.com/intel-micron-memory-breakthrough/38664/

which increase the weight and reduce the overall efficiency. Air cars does not have a future.. when batteries will become cheaper (that it will be in 1 or 2 year only), it will be pointless even in india.

Its clear that is not the best if we are looking efficiency, but this in India seems to be usefull, because the cars can be very cheap (more than gasoline cars). But it will work for lightweight city cars, simple, whithout any luxury, which makes the works done.. It has many drawbacks but it works whithin its niche. There are also other techniques to use air as energy storage without so much energy lost. Take a look to this company: http://www.lightsail.com/

Where do you hear that? The raptor engine is for the new type of massive launcher that is in current design. Not for the falcon9 or falcon heavy. neither the second stage.

lately, computers have almost the same power of recognition that us. Of course the best captcha recognition learning algorithm are owned by google or other search engines and they are secret. In fact, now the best test to detect bots from humans, is also a self learning algorithm, which if is not sure, start to add tests or questions. https://youtu.be/MnT1xgZgkpk?t=4m7s Ok this guy in the video, has the best answer of how to survive to an IA. His idea is brillant. The only problem, that IA may choose to ignore its goal.

the alarm sounds and you wake up...

I personally hate 9 engines by core stage, because in my KSP falcon heavy imitation, implies a lot of lag XD

As you mention, one of the biggest reasons is that to land an emptly stage back on earth, you need very little thrust, you can not set the thrust so low with single big engines, from my understanding is not only hard, is super hard. In this case, only the center core engine ignites to land.

So you are mention that they should forgot of reusability and redundancy? Also not sure how the pogo is increase by the number of engines.. you have some link to provide?