The answer to what you did ask, at least for the glass + heating, is pretty easy to answer: (148E6 / 85) * s = 480 hours. Less than a month.
Nice calculations, but there's a few more factors to consider. Every place on Earth gets an average of 12 hours sunlight a day. Even discounting the reduced light available when it's not high-noon that's still gonna take 40 days. It you're using non-tracking mountings and you take account of average cloud cover, the payback time would stretch out to somewhere closer to 6 months. Still not bad imfo.
It's something I was thinking about a long time ago.
If you could make a spherical geodesic frame out of carbon fiber, or some other super strong and light composite. Then you stretch a lightweight gasproof skin over it and extract the air through a valve. If a vacuum ballon with a 2 meter diameter could be made that weighed less than 5kg, it would float on air. The materials to do this weren't available before, but graphene might change that.
I dunno exactly what use it would be, but I'm sure the Vatican could find applications for it.
Hydrogen and Oxygen are also used as rocket fuels/oxidisers. Why isn't anybody suggesting that the water ice found by Phoenix is a result of terrestrial contamination?
The Soyuz rocket has been launched over 1700 times, according to this wikipedia page. I don't think that's completely accurate, I think that's counting the R-7 and all its derivatives. About half of that number would be my guess for the current Soyuz design.
There have been a few variations of the Soyuz manned spacecraft as technology has improved. The current version can support a 3 person crew for 30 days. When docked to a space station it can survive for 6 months in space and safely re-enter with a crew. The 98th manned Soyuz was launched in October last year. There have been 2 flights where the crew died, the very first flight when 1 cosmonaut died, and a flight in 1971 when 3 cosmonauts died. AFAIK there hasn't been a fatality on a Soyuz mission in almost 37 years.
Not counting Enterprise, because it never went to space, the shuttles have flown 121 times. There have been 2 fatal flights with 7 people killed each time. Counting Apollo 1 NASA have lost 17 astronauts in it's history but still haven't had anyone killed in space.
And I'm sure there are thousands of people more qualified than me that would too. The current plans to send a team of people and return them to Earth have a team size of 5 or 6 people and a stay of about 18 months. If you remove the equipment needed for the return journey, the same size mission can support 20-24 people for 18 months. If the team size is reduced to 1 person you could send enough supplies to last for 30-36 years. That's plenty of time to find some way of extending it by building a greenhouse or whatever.
It's not accurate to compare the Biosphere 2 project with this mission. The biggest problem with Biosphere 2 is that concrete was used in the construction and it absorbs oxygen for years after it is first poured. I'm sure that the work done on the In-Situ Resource Utilisation by Bob Zubrin and others would be the preferred approach for this mission. google ISRU and you'll get plenty of info on that.
Bill Stone is currently planning something similar. If you've never heard of Bill Stone and you're interested in space exploration you have to watch this presentation by him at TED. Bill Stone at TED.
Wow, you should write an article for Science detailing the orbits of these stars you found around the Sun. If it's rejected by the editors maybe you could get the Vatican to publish it.
Why did you chose to compare Iraq with Germany and Japan? There are hundreds of examples of occupied countries that fought back against their invaders. The case of France in WW2 when the resistance movement was a very important factor in weakening Germany. Several African and South American countries resisted European invaders for centuries. The Irish revolted against English occupation for 800 years until they got an independent government. You can't just cherrypick a couple of examples from a sample space of hundreds and try to build a cohesive argument on it. Like it or not, Saddam seems to have kept Iraq reasonably stable compared to the mess that Bush and Cheney are making of it.
"There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare" - Sun Tzu
I noticed you didn't include http://permanent.com/ in your list. IMHO it is quite a good site concerning space colonisation. I have no affiliation with the site btw.
Rubbish. Red Alert 2 was not cracked. Even 10 years after release. I have 2 copies of Red Alert 2 and 2 copies of Yuris Revenge on the shelf right beside me here and I played it regularly for years after its release. There was a nocd crack available for it, but it didn't work. It appeared to work for the first 5 minutes of the game, then all your units blew up. That was a clever move on the part of Westwood. This 'story' that you 'heard' is highly suspect because Red Alert 2 is the only game I know of that never had a working nocd crack.
I bought a box of 42 75W cfls and gave them away to people for xmas. There were a few people that thought I was weird, but at least 30 people thought it was a brilliant idea, and some of them are gonna do the same thing next year. On average those presents are gonna save about 500W for the next 6 years. That's about 26 MWh. Not too bad for a 140 euro investment.
You're correct. There is nothing wrong with using big dumb boosters. It's even better if you can use the same ones that have flown on the shuttle for 25 years. They're wonderful rockets. There's no need to waste years designing slightly more powerful ones.
I'm guessing you didn't follow either of the links I posted. The Direct Launcher proposal re-uses much more of the STS hardware than Ares I and V.
There is a well-written article which describes a lot of fundamental flaws in the approach that NASA is taking here.
Converting a 4-segment SRB into a 5-segment SRB involves a lot more than adding an extra piece. The shape of the combustion area must be modified significantly. This adds years of testing to the process, negating the advantages of trying to re-use STS-based technology.
I've been watching this very closely since before NASA officially announced the project. I firmly believe that Ares I and V are in trouble. This article isn't the first that has claimed there are big problems with using a single 5-segment SRB.
I submitted an article about the formation of a grass roots effort to fix the project before it goes any further in the wrong direction. Check out the Direct Launcher website. The project claims to have several NASA staff as founding members but they are remaining anonymous for now. They have prepared a study detailing the flaws in the current Ares designs and also propose a simpler alternative launcher more closely based on existing shuttle technology.
hehe, I have a no-frills Nokia 1100 which has a LED torch and I can also use it as a bottle-opener. It's got lots of scratches from the bottle caps but it only cost me 30 euro 2 years ago, so what the hell. I also used it as a makeshift hammer a couple of times and it still works perfectly.
I didn't do the math, but your numbers are close to my instinctive guess. Even at 600km/h during descent it will take 10 minutes to get back to terra firma and I'd advise slowing the rocket down a bit during the last few kms. The article said the entire trip would take 10 minutes, which I'm 99% sure is incorrect. That was the point of my post btw.
nope, what i meant was it starts off stationary, comes very close to stopping fully at the highest point (there might be some lateral movement), and stops at the end of the trip.
That doesn't sound correct. Spaceship One needed to reach a max speed of 3,518 km/h (mach 3.09) to get to the 100km mark. To cover 200km (up and down) in 10 minutes this vehicle would average 1,200 km/h and would be stationary 3 times en route.
I'm sure there are people on/. that have had working hard drives for 7, 8, hell 10 years+
14 years. The first drive I ever installed Linux on (a 340MB WD Caviar) is still in use as the/boot partition on one of my fileservers. In some respects it's a waste of electricity, but I'm interested to see how long it goes for before it dies. It made some clicky noises about 6 years ago but then they stopped and I've never had data corruption on it.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. China and India are investing heavily in nuclear and hydro power. European countries are installing thousands of wind-generators every year. It's true that China still burns a lot of coal, and maybe Europe isn't quite up to target with the Kyoto objectives, but things are improving.
The sooner the US economy collapses and the rest of the world doesn't have to cover for your wanton decadence, the better things will be for 95% of the world's population. How did I know you're from the US? Coz your post stinks of the attitude I've encountered in too many of your fellow countrymen. And that's how I'm assuming you got modded Informative.
Slashdot Mirror
The answer to what you did ask, at least for the glass + heating, is pretty easy to answer:
(148E6 / 85) * s = 480 hours. Less than a month.
Nice calculations, but there's a few more factors to consider. Every place on Earth gets an average of 12 hours sunlight a day. Even discounting the reduced light available when it's not high-noon that's still gonna take 40 days. It you're using non-tracking mountings and you take account of average cloud cover, the payback time would stretch out to somewhere closer to 6 months. Still not bad imfo.
johno
It's something I was thinking about a long time ago.
If you could make a spherical geodesic frame out of carbon fiber, or some other super strong and light composite. Then you stretch a lightweight gasproof skin over it and extract the air through a valve. If a vacuum ballon with a 2 meter diameter could be made that weighed less than 5kg, it would float on air. The materials to do this weren't available before, but graphene might change that.
I dunno exactly what use it would be, but I'm sure the Vatican could find applications for it.
johno
Hydrogen and Oxygen are also used as rocket fuels/oxidisers. Why isn't anybody suggesting that the water ice found by Phoenix is a result of terrestrial contamination?
Nope, we can't see them because they're dark. They could be making up 90% of the universe and we'd never know. Oh wait...
And don't forget you have to launch 8-9 Soyuz rockets to waste as much money as 1 shuttle flight. :)
johno
The Soyuz rocket has been launched over 1700 times, according to this wikipedia page. I don't think that's completely accurate, I think that's counting the R-7 and all its derivatives. About half of that number would be my guess for the current Soyuz design.
There have been a few variations of the Soyuz manned spacecraft as technology has improved. The current version can support a 3 person crew for 30 days. When docked to a space station it can survive for 6 months in space and safely re-enter with a crew. The 98th manned Soyuz was launched in October last year. There have been 2 flights where the crew died, the very first flight when 1 cosmonaut died, and a flight in 1971 when 3 cosmonauts died. AFAIK there hasn't been a fatality on a Soyuz mission in almost 37 years.
Not counting Enterprise, because it never went to space, the shuttles have flown 121 times. There have been 2 fatal flights with 7 people killed each time. Counting Apollo 1 NASA have lost 17 astronauts in it's history but still haven't had anyone killed in space.
johno
And I'm sure there are thousands of people more qualified than me that would too. The current plans to send a team of people and return them to Earth have a team size of 5 or 6 people and a stay of about 18 months. If you remove the equipment needed for the return journey, the same size mission can support 20-24 people for 18 months. If the team size is reduced to 1 person you could send enough supplies to last for 30-36 years. That's plenty of time to find some way of extending it by building a greenhouse or whatever.
It's not accurate to compare the Biosphere 2 project with this mission. The biggest problem with Biosphere 2 is that concrete was used in the construction and it absorbs oxygen for years after it is first poured. I'm sure that the work done on the In-Situ Resource Utilisation by Bob Zubrin and others would be the preferred approach for this mission. google ISRU and you'll get plenty of info on that.
Bill Stone is currently planning something similar. If you've never heard of Bill Stone and you're interested in space exploration you have to watch this presentation by him at TED. Bill Stone at TED.
johno
Wow, you should write an article for Science detailing the orbits of these stars you found around the Sun. If it's rejected by the editors maybe you could get the Vatican to publish it.
I think gymnasiums would be able to run all their lighting and a few other devices if they installed exercise machines that had built in dynamos.
Why did you chose to compare Iraq with Germany and Japan? There are hundreds of examples of occupied countries that fought back against their invaders. The case of France in WW2 when the resistance movement was a very important factor in weakening Germany. Several African and South American countries resisted European invaders for centuries. The Irish revolted against English occupation for 800 years until they got an independent government. You can't just cherrypick a couple of examples from a sample space of hundreds and try to build a cohesive argument on it. Like it or not, Saddam seems to have kept Iraq reasonably stable compared to the mess that Bush and Cheney are making of it.
"There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare" - Sun Tzu
I noticed you didn't include http://permanent.com/ in your list. IMHO it is quite a good site concerning space colonisation. I have no affiliation with the site btw.
Rubbish. Red Alert 2 was not cracked. Even 10 years after release. I have 2 copies of Red Alert 2 and 2 copies of Yuris Revenge on the shelf right beside me here and I played it regularly for years after its release. There was a nocd crack available for it, but it didn't work. It appeared to work for the first 5 minutes of the game, then all your units blew up. That was a clever move on the part of Westwood.
This 'story' that you 'heard' is highly suspect because Red Alert 2 is the only game I know of that never had a working nocd crack.
I bought a box of 42 75W cfls and gave them away to people for xmas. There were a few people that thought I was weird, but at least 30 people thought it was a brilliant idea, and some of them are gonna do the same thing next year. On average those presents are gonna save about 500W for the next 6 years. That's about 26 MWh. Not too bad for a 140 euro investment.
johno
You're correct. There is nothing wrong with using big dumb boosters. It's even better if you can use the same ones that have flown on the shuttle for 25 years. They're wonderful rockets. There's no need to waste years designing slightly more powerful ones.
I'm guessing you didn't follow either of the links I posted. The Direct Launcher proposal re-uses much more of the STS hardware than Ares I and V.
There is a well-written article which describes a lot of fundamental flaws in the approach that NASA is taking here.
Converting a 4-segment SRB into a 5-segment SRB involves a lot more than adding an extra piece. The shape of the combustion area must be modified significantly. This adds years of testing to the process, negating the advantages of trying to re-use STS-based technology.
An elephant is a horse designed by committee.
I've been watching this very closely since before NASA officially announced the project. I firmly believe that Ares I and V are in trouble. This article isn't the first that has claimed there are big problems with using a single 5-segment SRB.
I submitted an article about the formation of a grass roots effort to fix the project before it goes any further in the wrong direction. Check out the Direct Launcher website. The project claims to have several NASA staff as founding members but they are remaining anonymous for now. They have prepared a study detailing the flaws in the current Ares designs and also propose a simpler alternative launcher more closely based on existing shuttle technology.
hehe, I have a no-frills Nokia 1100 which has a LED torch and I can also use it as a bottle-opener. It's got lots of scratches from the bottle caps but it only cost me 30 euro 2 years ago, so what the hell. I also used it as a makeshift hammer a couple of times and it still works perfectly.
Just like we wanted to put a man on the Moon and orbiters on Mars
Oh, so thats why MCO hit Mars. It was actually supposed to land. Well why didn't somebody say so?
I didn't do the math, but your numbers are close to my instinctive guess. Even at 600km/h during descent it will take 10 minutes to get back to terra firma and I'd advise slowing the rocket down a bit during the last few kms. The article said the entire trip would take 10 minutes, which I'm 99% sure is incorrect. That was the point of my post btw.
not once, but 3 TIMES during the ascent
nope, what i meant was it starts off stationary, comes very close to stopping fully at the highest point (there might be some lateral movement), and stops at the end of the trip.
That doesn't sound correct. Spaceship One needed to reach a max speed of 3,518 km/h (mach 3.09) to get to the 100km mark. To cover 200km (up and down) in 10 minutes this vehicle would average 1,200 km/h and would be stationary 3 times en route.
I'm sure there are people on /. that have had working hard drives for 7, 8, hell 10 years+
/boot partition on one of my fileservers. In some respects it's a waste of electricity, but I'm interested to see how long it goes for before it dies. It made some clicky noises about 6 years ago but then they stopped and I've never had data corruption on it.
14 years. The first drive I ever installed Linux on (a 340MB WD Caviar) is still in use as the
So I'm hungover... But "Supermodel Computes Sun's Corona Dynamics" still didn't sound right to me.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. China and India are investing heavily in nuclear and hydro power. European countries are installing thousands of wind-generators every year. It's true that China still burns a lot of coal, and maybe Europe isn't quite up to target with the Kyoto objectives, but things are improving.
The sooner the US economy collapses and the rest of the world doesn't have to cover for your wanton decadence, the better things will be for 95% of the world's population. How did I know you're from the US? Coz your post stinks of the attitude I've encountered in too many of your fellow countrymen. And that's how I'm assuming you got modded Informative.
The samsung player is listed on dabs.com for 600 pounds sterling.