You've gotta be kidding. There are countless issues that should be taken with this post.
The fastest propulsion system proposed that we're fairly sure would work is Orion,
Wrong. There are many propulsion concepts which, while beyond present technology, are well within the realm of known physics, such as a fusion rocket or an antimatter drive or a bussard ramjet.
which uses a chain of mini atomic bombs to get to 10% of c.
I have no idea where you got that number. I suspect that you just pulled it out of your ass. Chances are, nuclear pulse propulsion could get nowhere near that speed. 10% of c is 30,000 kilometers per second. As a rough estimate, you'd need about 120,000 kilograms of plutonium to accelerate a 1,000 kilogram pod to that speed, assuming 100% efficiency. You'd be lucky to get 2% efficiency...
Don't even think about trying to build it with todays technology.
Yeah, right. They almost built it in the '60s. They did build (as in completed and flew) scale models using chemical explosives. We know how to make nukes. Nothing spectacular.
Anything else is currently just fantasy.
Why, because nuclear fusion doesn't exist? Hell, we have fusion bombs right now, which are superior to the fission propulsion you're talking about.
Civilization has always been bogus
on
Sid Meier on Civ III
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
I mean, really. Nuclear missiles don't destroy cities; they only kill one unit.
The whole "taxes/science/luxuries" balance makes no sense at all.
Everyone moves so damn slow; in the early game, it takes a warrior forty years to walk one freaking space! Even in modern times, it takes an airplane years to circle the world. IRL it would take days.
In fact, the entire premise is pretty screwed up. Seven different civilizations appear simultaneously in 4,000 BC. Every time one is killed, a new one instantaneously pops up.
Not to mention all the bogus leaders. Alexander the Great of the Greeks, Cleopatra of the Egyptians.
For that matter, what the hell is up with that "SETI Program" wonder? I'd think that an ALIEN CIVILIZATION would affect the game quite a bit more than that...
Liebniz and Newton did not invent calculus! They merely discovered it.
Besides, your statement makes no sense. I have no idea who invented, say, the CRT. Does that mean I don't appreciate having one?
If we're going to get an energy surplus out of this, we're definately not using plain old hydrogen for fusion. At least, not for a LONG time. Fusion reactors today use a mix of deuterium and tritium, two isotopes of hydrogen. Tritium is quite radioactive, so the inside of the tokamak will also become radioactive. Sooner or later it has to be discarded.
I'm not complaining. A little bit of radiation never hurt anybody, if you ask me;) But your statement that it's perfectly clean is wrong.
There seems to be this great misconception that we need nanotechnology in order to really conquer space. The truth is that we need nanotechnology to conquer space if we insist on doing it with such wussy launch vehicles.
Have you ever heard of Project Orion? The idea was to get a ship into space by exploding a bunch of nukes beneath it, ("nuclear pulse propulsion") thus pushing it up. Fission reactions are about 60 times more powerful than the most powerful chemical reactions, so the Orion ship was designed less like a stack of rockets and more like a battleship. It was never built because of a treaty in 1963 which made the use of nukes above ground illegal.
Of course, an even better idea would be fusion pulse propulsion, using hydrogen bombs.
I've made many projectile weapons out of Construx, actually... including bows, crossbows, catapults, dart guns, pistols (semi-automatic), gatlings (fully automatic)...
Solar sails aren't all that good anyway. Sure, you don't need to bring any fuel, but they'd take forever to accelerate, and wouldn't work as well when they're farther from the sun! If you want a real efficient drive, nuclear pulse propulsion is the way to go. Exploding nuclear bombs behind the spaceship to push it forward, basically.
When somebody says that we should go to Tau Ceti, do you think they mean that we should fly up and try to land on the star?
Same thing here. What's meant is that we should send people to Jupiter's moons.
The Apollo moon samples were also quarantined and the chances of finding living material on the moon was very remote.
Actually, that has nothing to do with the possibility of there being life on the moon. The Apollo moon samples were quarantined to prevent them from being exposed to Oxygen and disintegrating.
Re:It's only ENTERTAINMENT!
on
Voyager Eulogy
·
· Score: 1
Science: technological in nature... spaceships, time machines, cyborgs etc..
That's not science. That's technology.
Science is a process of creating and testing ideas to attempt to learn how the universe operates. It has absolutely nothing to do with spaceships, time machines, or cyborgs.
Slashdot Mirror
Wrong. No force at all is required to move 1 pound 1 foot in 1 second. Force is about acceleration.
And the pound is the unit of force. The slug is the unit of mass.
You've gotta be kidding. There are countless issues that should be taken with this post.
The fastest propulsion system proposed that we're fairly sure would work is Orion,
Wrong. There are many propulsion concepts which, while beyond present technology, are well within the realm of known physics, such as a fusion rocket or an antimatter drive or a bussard ramjet.
which uses a chain of mini atomic bombs to get to 10% of c.
I have no idea where you got that number. I suspect that you just pulled it out of your ass. Chances are, nuclear pulse propulsion could get nowhere near that speed. 10% of c is 30,000 kilometers per second. As a rough estimate, you'd need about 120,000 kilograms of plutonium to accelerate a 1,000 kilogram pod to that speed, assuming 100% efficiency. You'd be lucky to get 2% efficiency...
Don't even think about trying to build it with todays technology.
Yeah, right. They almost built it in the '60s. They did build (as in completed and flew) scale models using chemical explosives. We know how to make nukes. Nothing spectacular.
Anything else is currently just fantasy.
Why, because nuclear fusion doesn't exist? Hell, we have fusion bombs right now, which are superior to the fission propulsion you're talking about.
I mean, really. Nuclear missiles don't destroy cities; they only kill one unit.
The whole "taxes/science/luxuries" balance makes no sense at all.
Everyone moves so damn slow; in the early game, it takes a warrior forty years to walk one freaking space! Even in modern times, it takes an airplane years to circle the world. IRL it would take days.
In fact, the entire premise is pretty screwed up. Seven different civilizations appear simultaneously in 4,000 BC. Every time one is killed, a new one instantaneously pops up.
Not to mention all the bogus leaders. Alexander the Great of the Greeks, Cleopatra of the Egyptians.
For that matter, what the hell is up with that "SETI Program" wonder? I'd think that an ALIEN CIVILIZATION would affect the game quite a bit more than that...
with the greatest value in humanity being life.
;)
I think you mean oil.
Liebniz and Newton did not invent calculus! They merely discovered it.
Besides, your statement makes no sense. I have no idea who invented, say, the CRT. Does that mean I don't appreciate having one?
Sine isn't opposite over adjacent. That's tangent.
Sine is opposite over hypoteneuse.
Perhaps you mean:
weight of bike: 267.54 N
They're not red. They only look that way because of our relative velocities.
The Star Trek warp core is powered by antimatter, not fusion ;)
Wrong.
;) But your statement that it's perfectly clean is wrong.
If we're going to get an energy surplus out of this, we're definately not using plain old hydrogen for fusion. At least, not for a LONG time. Fusion reactors today use a mix of deuterium and tritium, two isotopes of hydrogen. Tritium is quite radioactive, so the inside of the tokamak will also become radioactive. Sooner or later it has to be discarded.
I'm not complaining. A little bit of radiation never hurt anybody, if you ask me
I have a large collection and I play with them every now and then. I have a working gatling gun that I made with Construx.
I wish there had been something like Mindstorms with Construx. I'd be able to do tons of cool stuff with that...
There seems to be this great misconception that we need nanotechnology in order to really conquer space. The truth is that we need nanotechnology to conquer space if we insist on doing it with such wussy launch vehicles.
Have you ever heard of Project Orion? The idea was to get a ship into space by exploding a bunch of nukes beneath it, ("nuclear pulse propulsion") thus pushing it up. Fission reactions are about 60 times more powerful than the most powerful chemical reactions, so the Orion ship was designed less like a stack of rockets and more like a battleship. It was never built because of a treaty in 1963 which made the use of nukes above ground illegal.
Of course, an even better idea would be fusion pulse propulsion, using hydrogen bombs.
I've made many projectile weapons out of Construx, actually... including bows, crossbows, catapults, dart guns, pistols (semi-automatic), gatlings (fully automatic)...
How do you exchange "willingness to use replicated weapons"?
It seems to me that the currency would be energy, which can't be replicated.
But what if they use an artificial gravity generator?
No such thing.
The Bandersnatch is a single-celled organism, and it's much larger than a human being :)
The original olympics did have mental events.
Solar sails aren't all that good anyway. Sure, you don't need to bring any fuel, but they'd take forever to accelerate, and wouldn't work as well when they're farther from the sun! If you want a real efficient drive, nuclear pulse propulsion is the way to go. Exploding nuclear bombs behind the spaceship to push it forward, basically.
Too bad it's illegal.
The half-life of tritium is 12 years.
No, the law is that you can't use nuclear pulse propulsion... even though it's such a damn great idea.
Mars is 0.38G, and the moon is 0.16G. D-uhh.
When somebody says that we should go to Tau Ceti, do you think they mean that we should fly up and try to land on the star? Same thing here. What's meant is that we should send people to Jupiter's moons.
Actually, that has nothing to do with the possibility of there being life on the moon. The Apollo moon samples were quarantined to prevent them from being exposed to Oxygen and disintegrating.
Science: technological in nature... spaceships, time machines, cyborgs etc.. That's not science. That's technology. Science is a process of creating and testing ideas to attempt to learn how the universe operates. It has absolutely nothing to do with spaceships, time machines, or cyborgs.
...when the hell are they gonna make some new RLVs? The shuttles are ancient.