That's wildly underestimated. It's probably closer to 5 minutes for an average tank, including all the overhead. Also, there's no reason why charging a battery should never be improved to less than 15 minutes. Additionally, people can charge their batteries at home, at work, or in public parking lots.
The beauty of electricity is that it can be generated in a number of different ways. Even though the majority is now generated by coal and gas doesn't mean it has to stay that way.
Reality: IF our species wants a chance at long term survival, we MUST leave this rock. Its not optional, its required.
It's not clear that a fragile colony on a much more challenging rock would actually be the most effective way to increase chances for long term survival. Looking at the actual threats for survival, and addressing those would be a better way. That is, assuming enough people care about the nebulous concept of "our species" to be willing to invest great sums of money.
The question is not if space programs produce useful spin-off products. The question is whether space programs are more effective at this than other programs. Bell labs never went into space, but they still generated an impressive list of products.
With a brand new rocket, you risk faulty assembly. With a used one you risk wear and tear. Hard to say which one is better. It all depends on the other parameters that you're not saying.
If your exhaust leaves at 0.999999c it doesn't need a whole lot of rest mass.
Doesn't matter. Mass is mass. You can take 1 gram of propellant, and accelerate it until it has 1 kg relativistic mass, but that requires conversion of 1 kg of fuel mass -> energy. In that case, you might as well have used the fuel itself as propellant.
I'm assuming a propulsion system where fuel mass is a negligible fraction of the total vehicle mass
You seem to be forgetting about the propellant. Also, there's the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation. Plus you need the same amount of propellent for slowing down at the destination, which means that propellant mass = C * exp(exp(payload mass)).
My ISP (in EU) has been doing IPv6 experiments for years, and some time ago, they rolled it out as a standard. Every connection now uses dual IPv4 / IPv6. I never had to do anything on my side. It just works.
Slashdot Mirror
So where's the list of the future leap seconds so I can make sure my code will handle them ?
Of course, there's a better way. Just ignore the small error until it adds up to an hour, and then skip a DST transition.
Filling up a car now takes about a minute.
That's wildly underestimated. It's probably closer to 5 minutes for an average tank, including all the overhead. Also, there's no reason why charging a battery should never be improved to less than 15 minutes. Additionally, people can charge their batteries at home, at work, or in public parking lots.
The beauty of electricity is that it can be generated in a number of different ways. Even though the majority is now generated by coal and gas doesn't mean it has to stay that way.
you'd be waiting about a day or so for a spot to open at a Supercharger station.
Because we can't extend the capacity of charger stations beyond what we have now ?
After they wear down, you just recycle them into new batteries.
What is also a larger mystery, is why a company with the resources of Toyota clearly knows hydrogen can and will work
Microsoft thought that Bob would work.
a fact that will never be true of electric charging stations.
What is the basis for this wild claim ?
The good news is actually that they won't have the budget for useless human exploration of space.
Reality: IF our species wants a chance at long term survival, we MUST leave this rock. Its not optional, its required.
It's not clear that a fragile colony on a much more challenging rock would actually be the most effective way to increase chances for long term survival. Looking at the actual threats for survival, and addressing those would be a better way. That is, assuming enough people care about the nebulous concept of "our species" to be willing to invest great sums of money.
So they can travel to the better neighborhoods and bite the rich kids.
The question is not if space programs produce useful spin-off products. The question is whether space programs are more effective at this than other programs. Bell labs never went into space, but they still generated an impressive list of products.
Yes, it's unbelievable that something, somewhere goes wrong.
With a brand new rocket, you risk faulty assembly. With a used one you risk wear and tear. Hard to say which one is better. It all depends on the other parameters that you're not saying.
So you think someones going to hack your wifi when they could just instead just chuck a rock through a window and climb in
One of these things makes a lot of noise, the other one makes you look like you own the place.
Reuse of the shuttle took several months of costly refurbishing for each launch, though.
Could also be the result of companies trying to tune their web pages for search results.
Apparently, movie studios have no interest in more paying customers.
The TFA is right. Anthropomorphizing is always bad.
And yet, you anthropomorphize the article.
but what if there's another explanation
Then we'll consider it.
If your exhaust leaves at 0.999999c it doesn't need a whole lot of rest mass.
Doesn't matter. Mass is mass. You can take 1 gram of propellant, and accelerate it until it has 1 kg relativistic mass, but that requires conversion of 1 kg of fuel mass -> energy. In that case, you might as well have used the fuel itself as propellant.
I'm assuming a propulsion system where fuel mass is a negligible fraction of the total vehicle mass
You seem to be forgetting about the propellant. Also, there's the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation. Plus you need the same amount of propellent for slowing down at the destination, which means that propellant mass = C * exp(exp(payload mass)).
My ISP (in EU) has been doing IPv6 experiments for years, and some time ago, they rolled it out as a standard. Every connection now uses dual IPv4 / IPv6. I never had to do anything on my side. It just works.
If we cover the Earth in greenhouses, we don't need to colonize another planet. We can just keep stacking greenhouses.
Oceans are a net carbon sink.