AngelLestat

Ok, the news is just about a new thermal coating that helps to building here on earth to reflect all sun radiating heat and dump inside heat due to radiation (which can not be absorbed by the atmospehre) to the space, using the space lack of heat as a heatsink. Long time ago, I was stumbling with ways to improve the efficiency of a Venus floating habitat, to see if it may become at some point in the future into a sustainable economy. The main issues was: 1- How to get water without spent much energy. 2- Depending habitat height (55km, 52km, 48km), how to deal with heat or the extra amount of lifting gas needed. The water issue is hard to solve, small habitats would not have any problem, but if you want to produce things in a cheap way you always need water and sulfure acid as resource, sulfure acid is not a big problem there, but water it is. The second issue depends on the habitat size, in the a relation between the surface envelope material needed vs the lifting gas volume needed. The envelope is more expensive, but this only apply if the habitat is small. You can see the ratio of volume vs surface. For a small outpost: 33-1 Small city: 330-1 Big City: 3300-1 So to avoid lifting gas in a big city, you need to lower height, if you lower height the external temperature increase and you can not have passive cooling, you need to spent energy to deal with heat. I did some graph about this before to see if there was a way deal with this problem in a efficient way. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/71519-Cloud-cities?p=1013460&viewfull=1#post1013460 http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/71519-Cloud-cities?p=1033925&viewfull=1#post1033925 But now this news tech may help a bit to deal with this. http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/november/radiative-cooling-mirror-112614.html Also if you have a lot of these habitats in venus, you are helping to cool the atmosphere. What are your thoghts? It may help? Maybe with some tweaks in the metamaterial to cross the different components from the venus atmosphere.

It all depends of the amount of water that you want to sent to venus, just to transform all the co2 there is not need so much water (I guess) but if you want more even if you drop all asteroids in the solar system that is not even close the amount of water that earth has. And I guess that is more difficult try to locate, visit, and transport each asteroid than just go for a big body and do it all in once. If you dont have problem rising venus temperature when you deliver water (which can take a lot to cold down, to start the biologic transformation process) , then you can go to Iapetus, and use your proppelent engine to deliver water particles from saturn orbit to venus. Without moving iapetus. Maybe there is a way to slow down those particles before their enter in the atmosphere. Solar wind maybe... No matter how efficient is our method of choice, something that is clear, this would consume an imaginable amout of energy, something that with still dont know any possible technology or energy source to do it. For example: What is more efficient? Move the mass of an ocean from one part of the solar system to another, or just move the entire earth popullation to a close star system?

But you need a lot of energy to move those asteroids, besides crash asteroids in venus atmosphere would only help to rise its temperature even more. If you dont want just terraform the atmosphere and you want seas. The best candidate is Iapetus (Saturns´moon), it has 1400 km diameter, and is 3/4 water (this is a little more than all the water in earth). If you have an imaginary system that gives you a lot of energy, you can use the same water of iapetus as proppelent to move it in a big time lapse (with huge orbit math patchs, gravity assitance from titan plus use saturn as Oberth effect, etc) then you can trasport iapetus with several different gravity assistance from jupiter to Venus. Once in venus orbit (I know... a lot of miracles needed), you use the same propulsion system to deliver water to the atmosphere at retrograde, so all water particles lose its orbital speed and fall to the planet, this particles would cool down before touch the atmosphere reducings its temperature in the process. Then you just need a bio organism floating in the atmosphere converting all the co2 into oxygen, then the carbon falls to the surface. That is how you get rid of the 98% of the atmosphere, what remains is something very similar to earth (amount of carbon, water and all other gasses). The remaning problem is venus rotation, I dont know if there is a way to use iapetus to change that without producing heat. This will solve the magnetic shield problem that allows the hydrogen to escape. About Venus - Sun distance is not a problem, depending the amouunt of atmosphere and components which you end it, you can have a low greenhouse effect to mimic the earth temperatures. The 1/4 of iapetus moon remaning, can help as shadow.

You are talking of the sulfer cycle. Which one of its steps is h2so4, but I already take into account that in my estimation. In fact I said 15000km3, but I was wrong, that number was for earth, Venus has close to 10000 km3 of water. This include the water that is combined with SO2. Venus atmosphere is 100 times our atmosphere. So earth has almost 10000 ppm, and venus has 40 to 60 ppm (as last studies show). But a big part of that amount is concentrate in the venus clouds at 50 km height. This make it easier to people live there, but this amount of water is not enoght to transform all the CO2 which Venus has. Any atmosphere terraformation would need a lot more hydrogen.

We did this discussion so many times before, but venus is so interesting that always come back. What you mean by terraforming the atmosphere? You want terraform all the atmosphere or just a layer? For example at 50km height venus atmosphere has similar temperature and pressure than earth at ground level. Also is a lot easier to float there and has many other benefics that can not be found in any other place in the solar system. So with a long process you can live up there and expell oxigen, it will take a lot but you can make the atmosphere at 50km more comfy. But it will never would be as earth because there is a element missing. "Hydrogen". Venus has 15000 km3 of water in its atmosphere. That is more than earth, but is 90 times more dense. So is too dry. And that is all the hidrogen that you can find. About the Von Neumann machines would also face the same problem.. There is not hidrogen.

great news, thanks airlock.

As many said, it all comes down to time and size. With more time, the chances to divert an asteroid grows exponentially, but with more size, the chance to fail also grows exponentially. A little difference in diameter means a huge difference in mass. There is no better book to remind me this than "The light o other days" from Arthur Clarke & Stephen Baxter. Here there is a little extract of that chapter. http://www.ebook2u.org/sf/Clarke09/30330.html The books main topic is about a new technology which makes microscopic wormholes, but it also talks about the discovery of an asteroid so big, than even with 500 years to the impact, there is no foreseeable technology which can avoid the collision if that happens.

But someone can explain with detail how is achieve? Lightning may have its own frequency that can go from 0 to 100khz. But this is a electromagnetic wave. Not a mechanical wave which result in sound. The mechanical wave is produced by the shockwave produced when the air is heated and expands explosively. But the questions are: 1: The sound depends of the electric arc long, or the intermitence between each arc. (I would said the second) 2: How do you make discharges to the air instead to earth, or how do you close the circuit? 3: What do you need to make multiple arcs from a single tesla coil each one following its own sound frequency? Or maybe the sound is generated by a speacker and the electric arcs only follow the air disturbances?

ah ok, a huge mistake with the dreamchase, for a moment I thought that this was the boing version in that previous competition. I forget that boing had the capsule model.

Oh, I dint see that there was another clone thread a lot older than mine. Well if they keep the mission secret, I imagine they was not doing nothing good up there... The thing that still can not understand is what advantage this design has against dragon2? The farings to enclose those wings are so big that the aerodynamic lost is a lot. Being able to land without fuel is not enoght to give any ballance to the competition. Maybe thanks to the wings the heat shield may stand more trips. I dont know.

Top secret X-37B spaceplane breaks orbital endurance record. The nature and objective of the mission is still secret. source: http://www.gizmag.com/otv-3-x-37b-landing/34312/

the light pollution can be mitigated with appropriate luminaire and avoid over-ilumination. That is something that soon or later all countries needs to start to pay attention. Be able to see the stars, save energy and avoid mess with ecosystems are some of the beneficts that needs to encourage us to choose carefully what luminaires we buy, also to push authorities to do the same.

That always was my stance too. In my opinion, understand why the speed of light is as it is; holds the greatest secret of the universe. Its true form.

To Darnok, magnemoe, kulebron and all other clueless people on this topic. The debate about global warming is over. Now the only debate is about if it would rise 3 or 7 degress to the end of century. Of course when I talk of debate, I mean between the scientific community. Not between paid politicians and the shoemaker from the corner. Why this is more important than other ecologic problems? Because it would extinguish many species, kill a lot of people, change a lot of ecosystems and would cost a huge amount of money (which the world does not have) just to deal with the consequences. Now.. stop ignoring all the evidence presented because if you kept this idea and you are wrong, it means that you will spread the ignorance to other people who doesn´t know much. And one way to stop this fast, is with conscientization.

OMG, to those that still denied global warming please look the video that Albert VDS is showing, it has all the data very well resume in 6 min. The problem is that you are too lazy to research your own opinions and check if they are right. But you dont have any trouble to spend time defending that kind of crap. That is the main reason why humanity is doom. People who don't question their own ideas because is more easy to choose a stream and follow it. Nice video, but omits the real consequences that this may have. For example if temperature rise only 3 degress, the chain reaction of global warming became a lot harded to stop, because in that point the co2 would be only a tiny effect in the big picture. A lot of extra sunlight would be absorb instead reflected, a lot of methane would be released to the atmosphere, more water vapour and many others effects would make all this harded to stop it. The local weather would change in many places, so this mean a good area for cultivation may cease to be, this mean that a city can not sustain by it self, people needs to be relocated, also infrastructure, this mean extra money would be needed in a world where it can not feed their current grow in popullation.

its already estimate (with the last studies) that temperature would rise 5 degress to the end of century. That is a lot more than previous estimations. That would trigger a chain of events that would put all species (us include) on our knees. I really dont know if we can do something to stop it.

I dont use the windows 8 personally, but I had my hands on it many time , I am agree with you. Microsoft never wroke their fate rule about versions.. good, bad, good, bad, good, bad.... since first windows version to now. (maybe for that they called 10, because they know that if this is good, there is not chance to make another good version later for its real 10) What I really hate from W7, is that it takes like 7 min to reboot. But well, there is not so many options lateley with OS. Take a look on Unix with their recent bash exploit.

if you can terraform a planet, then send all animals to there is easy.

this is the approach that in real life seems more usefull of all: http://aeroscraft.com/technology-copy/4580412172

This looks nice. I dint test it yet (no much time to play KSP lately), but I wonder how you calculate lift? You said that you fix the gas temperature to 20c, how this work before and what was the problem? I would love to see a blimp and hot air ballons mod with close aproximations to the real behavior (taking into account the limited atmospheric data avariable in the game). I guess there is not need of many mathematical formulas to calculate lift taking into account (type of gas used, gas-atmosphere temperature difference, gas temperature change depending outside atmosphere temperature or a electric/nuclear/combustion burner. Which takes me to the next question, why you give special names to the lifting gasses? (Combustrogen and Liftium) It does not matter where is located the Kerbol System, helium or hydrogen are the same elements in the whole universe. The Kerbal language it does not matter either, because all parts in the game stock are in english. If you use the same names, maybe we can use in the future similar resources found in other mods (with some cfg modifications). Also by changing the names of the lifting gasses you are removing the educational trait that this may add.

The G force resistence depends on the exposure time. Maybe you find that between 9g-10sec, 6g-25sec, 3g-2min, 1.5g-15min, 1.2g-2days are all similar in resilience. For example people may think that mars gravity of 0,3g may not present any risk to our health, but depends on time, maybe that G in 10 years ends being mortal. Or with serious consecuences in a young person development.

Maybe they may predict what happens with the space time curvature in this region, but they still did not predict what happens with matter or pop out particles right there? Or what it would be the effect of the energy densities needed that your ship must generate to produce these curvature walls? I mean, how much physsical space the "generator" needs to produce a thiner or a heavier wall? What if a thinner wall finds problems reaching luminical speeds or a thicker wall find similar problems but not from the space-time bubble physsics limitations, but rather of the generator perspective? About the QFT Finazzi point, I guess it does not matter how thicker is our wall, when you reach luminical speeds, the backward and forward walls look, respectively, like the horizon of a black hole and of a white hole. There are some problems which arise, one is with radiation, the other is with the stability of the bubble. Something is sure, you would need new tools to solve all these complex calculations. That might count too, but I was talking about the Gambini and Pullin theoretical exercise about black holes using quamtum loop gravity. To accomplish this calculation they needed to exclude matter behavior or other aspects to reduce their frame of study.Of course a warp bubble with thicker walls is different than QLG studies in the environs of a GR singularity. But I guess there is still many aspects which are completely ignore in the study of Alcubierre Metrics. By the way, good explanation about the time event causes and perspectives.

Depends what you might call a "stable orbit". Somethings that you can last 100 years or billion years?

But I am not saying that what is inside the bubble is traveling faster than light in that local coordinate system across fabric of space, My question is about "the bubble", that field of gravity tensors in the limit of the bubble (sorry, I dont know how to name it properly) Is this not different? Finazzi and pals using QFT show that the renormalised stress-energy tensor which should be well-behaved under normal circumstances. But in the front wall of Alcubierre’s bubble travelling at superluminal speeds, the renormalised stress-energy tensor grows exponentially. That strongly implies that such a bubble would be unstable. I dont understand either how the space-time is affected in the limit of the bubble and what effects could produce. For example we know that a black hole distort so much the space-time fabric, that is not conclusive yet if a universe with their own time and space can emerge from this process. I think there is still a lot to research about what effect produce this bubble and how interacts with each particle that it finds or appear in that moment. So i still believe that we are talking about two very different effects. And 1 does not validate 2. Thanks for the reminder (you explained before, for that reason I ask you again) about why is local.

Nothing travels faster than light that we have proof about, the issue here is that space is being created (expands) between the 2 objects, of course this effect increases with the distance. The light speed is considered local because in the first Einstein theory; which proff this, does not mention nothing about the space-time fabric (shape); is this right? From our previous discussion I never understand why you use this "apparent effect" as proff that FTL is possible. I dont find any correlation between both. 1-Here, space is emerging between the 2 objects, this effect does not carry any information. 2- In FTL, ok you are "expanding and contracting" space in front and behind you, but that "bubble" that you create is moving at FTL across this same space time fabric, something that is not hapening in the first example. So I dont see how example 1 validates example 2. Please correct me if I am wrong, but is not true that alcubierre metrics find some problems in the survival of the bubble reaching light speed?