For leaving it idle for years, LEO is not good enough. There is still too much drag from the atmosphere there: in a matter of weeks or months (depending on altitude) it will fall back to earth. Those orbits are unstable and satellites need power to stay there.
Also the cannon as suggested would only get the spacecraft to the correct altitude, and rocket engines are still a necessity to get it to orbit.
I agree, which is why I didn't say LEO, but 'a stable orbit'. This method still gets you most of the way there much more cheaply than any other method we've currently got.
I've heard it argued by folks who sounded like they knew their stuff that it's much cheaper to do it by dragging in asteroids (maybe one with a cubic mile of ice in it) than to shoot it up from earth. I admit, I haven't seen the numbers.
Considering we just hit the Moon to try to figure out how much water ice is there, it seems unlikely that we have any good ideas on which asteroids have water ice in them, much less the ability to bring them to where we need them (yet). That's more the type of project I'd expect a few decades _after_ we do what this project is talking about. All in good time, my friend...
You'll need conventional lift to get the tools up into space to build an orbital mining facility. This air-gun can be used to lift all the materials that those tools will use to build the mining facility and fuel for the crafts that will go get the asteroids and coax them back. But once that's done, we ought not need the air gun nearly as much or at all.
Depends on what you're planning, really. If your goal is to actually spread the human race out from Earth, this could be used long-term. Just keep sending up loads of water and compressed air, etc., for however long you can afford to do so. Keep the stuff in a stable orbit and just leave it there for however long you need (years, no problem, really). Once you're ready to use it (in LEO, at a Lagrange point, on the Moon, Mars, etc), move it to where you need it, as the most costly part of getting it into orbit has already been done.
That's one of the biggest problems with the U.S. space programs, the lack of long-term thinking and planning (and funding for a long-term strategy).
If you RTA (yes I know, not likely), you'll see that they acknowledge this issue, their intent is to use this for robust cargo only (rocket fuel is given as an example, not e.g. satellites or humans)
Send up consumables, for sure. Fuel, water, compressed air, freeze-dried food, etc. Even if just used for that, this is not a bad plan. There's no rule that says you have to use only ONE method to get stuff off-planet.
It is 2009. We are almost have 15 years of mass customer acceptance of the Web Browser. Why isn't the web at least at World of Warcraft level of graphics? Crysis level of graphics? Able to run super-pi? quickly?
Current versions of non-IE browsers have VERY fast JS, and WebGL has been added to dev versions of both Firefox and WebKit. Yes, this has taken WAY too long, but we're within sight of a whole new Web experience. HTML5/Canvas/Video/SVG, etc., will make it 'a whole new paradigm'. Except for IE users, of course. Even the Web needs an equivalent to white trash cousins, I guess.
And since I like to understand people when I do talk to them - and vice versa - I usually use a landline for that.) I got a used iPhone EDGE with the cheapest Pick Your Plan rate, and even still my "remaining balance" creeps higher and higher every month, as I'm forced to buy voice minutes that I have no use for, just to get the data that I want and use throughout the day and evening. Or better yet: dump the phony distinction between voice and data
Or even better than that - dump AT&T and go with a carrier that has decent call quality. This will unfortunately vary region to region. I'm in the Seattle area, and Sprint has worked best for me. I've tried all the major carriers here so far except for T-Mo. I'm on Sprint now, but may return to Verizon when my contract runs out next quarter, depending on who has the best Android phone experience, once all that shakes out with the new phones coming up.
Add to that the fact that Google (apparently) tends to run their data centers "hot" compared to what is commonly accepted, and use significantly cheaper components, and you've got a good explanation for why their error count is as high as it is.
Yeah, but let's look at the more common situation - a home. Variable temperatures, most likely QUITE variable power quality, low-quality PSU, and almost certaily no UPS to make up for it. Add that to low-quality commodity components (mobo & RAM).
I'd not be surprised to find the problem much more prevalent in non-datacenter environments.
Switching to high-quality memory, PSU & UPS has made my systems unbelievably reliable the last several years. YMMV, but I doubt by much.
Cuz without the VT ability in the CPU, it ain't gonna work, is my understanding. A lot of companies who cheaped out and bought lower-end CPU machines are going to be unpleasantly surprised if they need this ability.:(
I know as a dev, I'm going to have to request an upgrade to a machine that's compatabile with Windows XP mode. *sigh*
Put this in the center of the roads, and power your electric vehicle without a huge battery bank required. Even more efficient because you won't have to be using electricity to haul around 500kg (or however much) of batteries.
Wow, you _really_ missed the point of my post to an impressive degree. Congratulations. If you think I was saying or implying that MSE is a great product, you're driving on the wrong side of the road.
You probably don't remember when Microsoft came out with their own antivirus package as part of DOS 6, do you?
Nope, I was an OS/2 user at the time. Having just come off the Amiga platform (and the Apple 2 platform before that), I was ready for a new doomed-to-market-failure OS.:)
IE 5 WAS, at the time was released. I think you forget how amazingly horrid browsers were, back then. Also, the Tucker Automobile. It was so far ahead of the competition, the big three got it killed.
Methinks perhaps you don't realise IE5 wasn't the first version of IE, and hasn't been the current version for over a decade. Dude, get with the times.
Slashdot Mirror
The internet is full of one-dimensional idiots.
I don't get your point.
Yeah, until I hit the Turbo(tm) button! 11^16, baby! 11, because that's one more, isn't it?
Then it's finally time for One Dimension Per Child.
I do hope you mean one _extra_ dimension per child.
Have you ever seen a good OpenBSD flamewar?
Umm ... no?
For leaving it idle for years, LEO is not good enough. There is still too much drag from the atmosphere there: in a matter of weeks or months (depending on altitude) it will fall back to earth. Those orbits are unstable and satellites need power to stay there.
Also the cannon as suggested would only get the spacecraft to the correct altitude, and rocket engines are still a necessity to get it to orbit.
I agree, which is why I didn't say LEO, but 'a stable orbit'. This method still gets you most of the way there much more cheaply than any other method we've currently got.
I've heard it argued by folks who sounded like they knew their stuff that it's much cheaper to do it by dragging in asteroids (maybe one with a cubic mile of ice in it) than to shoot it up from earth. I admit, I haven't seen the numbers.
Considering we just hit the Moon to try to figure out how much water ice is there, it seems unlikely that we have any good ideas on which asteroids have water ice in them, much less the ability to bring them to where we need them (yet). That's more the type of project I'd expect a few decades _after_ we do what this project is talking about. All in good time, my friend...
You'll need conventional lift to get the tools up into space to build an orbital mining facility. This air-gun can be used to lift all the materials that those tools will use to build the mining facility and fuel for the crafts that will go get the asteroids and coax them back. But once that's done, we ought not need the air gun nearly as much or at all.
Depends on what you're planning, really. If your goal is to actually spread the human race out from Earth, this could be used long-term. Just keep sending up loads of water and compressed air, etc., for however long you can afford to do so. Keep the stuff in a stable orbit and just leave it there for however long you need (years, no problem, really). Once you're ready to use it (in LEO, at a Lagrange point, on the Moon, Mars, etc), move it to where you need it, as the most costly part of getting it into orbit has already been done.
That's one of the biggest problems with the U.S. space programs, the lack of long-term thinking and planning (and funding for a long-term strategy).
If you RTA (yes I know, not likely), you'll see that they acknowledge this issue, their intent is to use this for robust cargo only (rocket fuel is given as an example, not e.g. satellites or humans)
Send up consumables, for sure. Fuel, water, compressed air, freeze-dried food, etc. Even if just used for that, this is not a bad plan. There's no rule that says you have to use only ONE method to get stuff off-planet.
. . . and this "Sucker" you refer to is also known as "Congress?"
Two definitions of 'sucker' I know of as far as Washington, D.C. goes:
1) Anyone voting Republican who isn't rich
2) Anyone voting Democrat expecting actual liberal change.
It is 2009. We are almost have 15 years of mass customer acceptance of the Web Browser. Why isn't the web at least at World of Warcraft level of graphics? Crysis level of graphics? Able to run super-pi? quickly?
Current versions of non-IE browsers have VERY fast JS, and WebGL has been added to dev versions of both Firefox and WebKit. Yes, this has taken WAY too long, but we're within sight of a whole new Web experience. HTML5/Canvas/Video/SVG, etc., will make it 'a whole new paradigm'. Except for IE users, of course. Even the Web needs an equivalent to white trash cousins, I guess.
And since I like to understand people when I do talk to them - and vice versa - I usually use a landline for that.) I got a used iPhone EDGE with the cheapest Pick Your Plan rate, and even still my "remaining balance" creeps higher and higher every month, as I'm forced to buy voice minutes that I have no use for, just to get the data that I want and use throughout the day and evening. Or better yet: dump the phony distinction between voice and data
Or even better than that - dump AT&T and go with a carrier that has decent call quality. This will unfortunately vary region to region. I'm in the Seattle area, and Sprint has worked best for me. I've tried all the major carriers here so far except for T-Mo. I'm on Sprint now, but may return to Verizon when my contract runs out next quarter, depending on who has the best Android phone experience, once all that shakes out with the new phones coming up.
Coming from someone whose ID is Tumbleweed?
You bet. Arizona's so bad the plants evolved to get outta there!
No, you'll have to move to Arizona. Sorry.
I'd rather use Windows 3.1 than live in Arizona.
It's about 0.0000001 times the size of Wales.
That's no help. Humpback Wales or Dr. Who Wales?
Now many UPSs also include a Power Conditioner, but a UPS is not a power conditioner.
True, but the power conditioning is what's going to improve the life of your system, most likely, not the battery backup.
The vast majority of people have laptop's now which come with a built in UPS.
I doubt the battery system of a laptop does any undervoltage or power spike protection. A UPS is more than a battery.
Add to that the fact that Google (apparently) tends to run their data centers "hot" compared to what is commonly accepted, and use significantly cheaper components, and you've got a good explanation for why their error count is as high as it is.
Yeah, but let's look at the more common situation - a home. Variable temperatures, most likely QUITE variable power quality, low-quality PSU, and almost certaily no UPS to make up for it. Add that to low-quality commodity components (mobo & RAM).
I'd not be surprised to find the problem much more prevalent in non-datacenter environments.
Switching to high-quality memory, PSU & UPS has made my systems unbelievably reliable the last several years. YMMV, but I doubt by much.
I want my monkey-man!
Cuz without the VT ability in the CPU, it ain't gonna work, is my understanding. A lot of companies who cheaped out and bought lower-end CPU machines are going to be unpleasantly surprised if they need this ability. :(
I know as a dev, I'm going to have to request an upgrade to a machine that's compatabile with Windows XP mode. *sigh*
Unobtanium. It's about damned time!
Put this in the center of the roads, and power your electric vehicle without a huge battery bank required. Even more efficient because you won't have to be using electricity to haul around 500kg (or however much) of batteries.
Someday.
Tesla would be proud.
Wow, you _really_ missed the point of my post to an impressive degree. Congratulations. If you think I was saying or implying that MSE is a great product, you're driving on the wrong side of the road.
You probably don't remember when Microsoft came out with their own antivirus package as part of DOS 6, do you?
Nope, I was an OS/2 user at the time. Having just come off the Amiga platform (and the Apple 2 platform before that), I was ready for a new doomed-to-market-failure OS. :)
IE 5 WAS, at the time was released. I think you forget how amazingly horrid browsers were, back then. Also, the Tucker Automobile. It was so far ahead of the competition, the big three got it killed.
Methinks perhaps you don't realise IE5 wasn't the first version of IE, and hasn't been the current version for over a decade. Dude, get with the times.
I still prefer Spry Mosaic, myself. :)
And what, use a fresh drive image every time you boot up the virtual machine?
Works for me. Of course, all I use a VM for these days is testing my work with IE6/XP, IE7/XP, etc. :)
Step one: install Linux
Step two: install your favorite virtualization product
Step three: run Windows in the VM. NEVER let it run the hardware.
Meh. I prefer free-range operating systems.