Arthur C. Clarke wrote engrossing novels which will definitely get your students thinking about physics and math. Look for:
Rendezvous with Rama and The Fountains of Paradise.
I would appreciate Assange and what he does more if Wikileaks wasn't simply about the US. There are other governments which could use his form of activism.
I've always wonder about this but I'm not a PHD. Antimatter on a Feynman diagram looks like matter moving backwards through time.
In support of this, I think, entropy in a closed system of antimatter would work backwards. Tend towards order.
Anyone know if this is BS or not? Is this a worthy experiment?
The entire process as a whole needs to be taken into account to determine whether a energy source is clean and or effecient. How much energy does it require to obtain it, refine it, ship it can be just as important as how clean it is when you burn it.
Damn straight hydrogen is clean when you burn it. But how much crap did you dump into the atmosphere when you processed it?
3M already produces a nonconductive fluid. The Semiconductor industry has been using them to test devices for years. They're called perfluorocarbon fluids. I saw a similar demonstration with a TV and a fish tank years ago. Rumor has it that there were fish swimming in the tank too...but I've never seen that. There are different fluids with different boiling points up to 150 C that I know of. I do not know what the Heat Capacity of either fluid is but is a necessary parameter.
Here's where you need to nut up and step up. This stuff cost $200 a pound, and evaporates faster than you can blink.
Re:Uhh guys...this has been done before
on
X-43A Hits Mach 7
·
· Score: 1
Pretty cool....
Yeah I'd say a tad unlikey since it only had enough fuel to burn for 10 sec.
Re:Uhh guys...this has been done before
on
X-43A Hits Mach 7
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Nope, X-43 did not accelerate from Mach 5 to Mach
7. The booster carried it all the way up to that speed. The x-43 got ignition going at mach 7 which is an incredible feat.
When you read into the article that it accelerated from mach 5 to 7 it was the fault of crappy reporting.
Re:But at that speed...
on
X-43A Hits Mach 7
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I don't know if there is an independant peer review of their data but from their web site
University of Queensland Hyshot Program
Nasa's own press release doesn't say that they broke any records....
Either way Kudos to NASA....maybe now we'll get cheaper access to space
Doh.....I'm gonna get flamed. I read more closely.
Orbital mechanics tells us that the velocity of an orbiting object is dependent on the mass of the object you're orbiting, and the distance you are from the surface.
The mass of the Earth determines the Acceleration
due to Gravity; and thus the orbit for a given velocity. He's correct and i am a dumbass!
Somewhat cool story.....was way back
in the early days when the Russians were putting Sputnik in orbit. The US officials asked the rocket scientists if they could tell how much mass the Soviets could launch in orbit. Alas, Werner had to dissappoint the senators.
Uhh guys...this has been done before
on
X-43A Hits Mach 7
·
· Score: 5, Informative
From cnn
It is the first time a supersonic-combustion ramjet, or scramjet, which uses air for fuel, had traveled so fast, flight engineer Lawrence Huebner told reporters.
The University of Queensland Launched the HYSHOT
in July 2002. It Hit Mach 7.6.
The first people who did this
If the rate of production of Hydrogen atoms is sufficient then you could create a very powerful rocket. Or at least supplement current chemical rockets. Combining hydrogen releases a hell of a lot more energy than combining H2 + O2. The reason they're not doing now is because of storage problems. Anybody know if this could work?
Absolutely: Spaceflight is dangerous. There will always be accidents in the industry. The idea is to reduce the dangers to more acceptable risks. There was also a spectacular accident in the X-15 program. This was a manned ground based test firing. I've seen the video on the discovery channel but couldn't find any links. The engine exploded and blew the cockpit forward. Somehow, Scott Crossfield surivived.
Perhaps NASA should start looking at new designs with potentially fatal flaws. Have they not been using this design for something like 15-20 years now?
I agree, but maybe they should wait until they have a plan with somehting really revolutionary on the table. Perhaps in ten years they could build a scramjet thing with much greater capacity.
In order to develop scramjets, NASA needs to ressurect the X-15 program. Hypersonic flight . With newer materials and newer rockets, they could go higher and faster than ever before. The X-15 reached 62.5 miles and the pilots even got their Astronaut wings. If that 62.5 mi altitude sounds familiar, it should. That's what you need to win the X-prize. It did close to 200 missions in 9 years and nowhere near the cost of the shuttle program. The X-15 would make a perfect platform to test designs. As a matter of fact it flew one mission with a mock scramjet aboard.
Flame me if I'm wrong. But isn't there a pressure component added by the X-rays generating Ignition in a fusion Bomb? I mean aside from the neutrons hitting the LiH. I thought it was more than just a heating thing.
Aren't you Americans going to have to let out your drug victims - that is, the people in prison - so they can earn the tax needed to buy all this stuff?
I don't HaVe A dRuG ProBLem
Oh, and if you're talking to Americans, you better spell it LEGALIZING.
uk has their own drug program for this
"The plane would be geostationary so would be moving at quite some speed. Significantly faster than the American plane."
From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3016082.stm "At the peak altitude, Zephyr should be making three circuits every two minutes, travelling at a speed of 70 metres per second (155 mph)."
Yes the Zephyr is significantly faster than the Helios which reaches astounding speeds of 30 MPH. However, none of this makes gravity any less significant. Please clarify your statement. After all F=GMm/R^2 where GM/R^2 is commonly refered to as the acceleration due to gravity.
That's actually a good idea. It would be great to study cosmic rays and you would probably need to send a guy up in a balloon....or the ISS to do it. But, cosmic ray collisions are somewhat rare and definitely unpredictable. Plus the equipment used to study this stuff is HUGE; photomultipliers, magnets, power sources...etc. These experiments generate millions of collisions that take months to study. Even then, what they're looking for is a rare event. An interesting side note. Apollo astronauts reported occasionally seeing light flashes when they closed their eyes. Everyone scoffed. Turns out they were actually "seeing" cosmic rays.
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mir_lights_0 30416.html
Slashdot Mirror
Loved that book.. Very well written
Arthur C. Clarke wrote engrossing novels which will definitely get your students thinking about physics and math. Look for: Rendezvous with Rama and The Fountains of Paradise.
I would appreciate Assange and what he does more if Wikileaks wasn't simply about the US. There are other governments which could use his form of activism.
I've always wonder about this but I'm not a PHD. Antimatter on a Feynman diagram looks like matter moving backwards through time. In support of this, I think, entropy in a closed system of antimatter would work backwards. Tend towards order. Anyone know if this is BS or not? Is this a worthy experiment?
The entire process as a whole needs to be taken into account to determine whether a energy source is clean and or effecient. How much energy does it require to obtain it, refine it, ship it can be just as important as how clean it is when you burn it. Damn straight hydrogen is clean when you burn it. But how much crap did you dump into the atmosphere when you processed it?
3M already produces a nonconductive fluid. The Semiconductor industry has been using them to test devices for years. They're called perfluorocarbon fluids. I saw a similar demonstration with a TV and a fish tank years ago. Rumor has it that there were fish swimming in the tank too...but I've never seen that. There are different fluids with different boiling points up to 150 C that I know of. I do not know what the Heat Capacity of either fluid is but is a necessary parameter. Here's where you need to nut up and step up. This stuff cost $200 a pound, and evaporates faster than you can blink.
Pretty cool.... Yeah I'd say a tad unlikey since it only had enough fuel to burn for 10 sec.
Nope, X-43 did not accelerate from Mach 5 to Mach 7. The booster carried it all the way up to that speed. The x-43 got ignition going at mach 7 which is an incredible feat. When you read into the article that it accelerated from mach 5 to 7 it was the fault of crappy reporting.
I don't know if there is an independant peer review of their data but from their web site University of Queensland Hyshot Program Nasa's own press release doesn't say that they broke any records.... Either way Kudos to NASA....maybe now we'll get cheaper access to space
Doh.....I'm gonna get flamed. I read more closely. Orbital mechanics tells us that the velocity of an orbiting object is dependent on the mass of the object you're orbiting, and the distance you are from the surface. The mass of the Earth determines the Acceleration due to Gravity; and thus the orbit for a given velocity. He's correct and i am a dumbass!
Somewhat cool story.....was way back in the early days when the Russians were putting Sputnik in orbit. The US officials asked the rocket scientists if they could tell how much mass the Soviets could launch in orbit. Alas, Werner had to dissappoint the senators.
From cnn It is the first time a supersonic-combustion ramjet, or scramjet, which uses air for fuel, had traveled so fast, flight engineer Lawrence Huebner told reporters. The University of Queensland Launched the HYSHOT in July 2002. It Hit Mach 7.6. The first people who did this
That's right.....mass always cancels out of the equations. It's Radius and valocity that determine orbit.
If the rate of production of Hydrogen atoms is sufficient then you could create a very powerful rocket. Or at least supplement current chemical rockets. Combining hydrogen releases a hell of a lot more energy than combining H2 + O2. The reason they're not doing now is because of storage problems. Anybody know if this could work?
There's even a way to manufacture hardware on a peer to peer basis. It's called Hardster. Check it out! Download your own hardware from the net
Absolutely: Spaceflight is dangerous. There will always be accidents in the industry. The idea is to reduce the dangers to more acceptable risks. There was also a spectacular accident in the X-15 program. This was a manned ground based test firing. I've seen the video on the discovery channel but couldn't find any links. The engine exploded and blew the cockpit forward. Somehow, Scott Crossfield surivived.
In order to develop scramjets, NASA needs to ressurect the X-15 program. Hypersonic flight . With newer materials and newer rockets, they could go higher and faster than ever before. The X-15 reached 62.5 miles and the pilots even got their Astronaut wings. If that 62.5 mi altitude sounds familiar, it should. That's what you need to win the X-prize. It did close to 200 missions in 9 years and nowhere near the cost of the shuttle program. The X-15 would make a perfect platform to test designs. As a matter of fact it flew one mission with a mock scramjet aboard.
You could furl the sail and use planets to slingshot the puppy home...or change course....or whatever.
Flame me if I'm wrong. But isn't there a pressure component added by the X-rays generating Ignition in a fusion Bomb? I mean aside from the neutrons hitting the LiH. I thought it was more than just a heating thing.
Aren't you Americans going to have to let out your drug victims - that is, the people in prison - so they can earn the tax needed to buy all this stuff? I don't HaVe A dRuG ProBLem Oh, and if you're talking to Americans, you better spell it LEGALIZING. uk has their own drug program for this
Here ya go man... http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/ptech/07/01/arms.usa. reut/index.html
Just an interesting article. A manned mission went almost as deep. http://popularmechanics.com/science/extreme_machin es/2003/5/submarine/index2.phtml
"The plane would be geostationary so would be moving at quite some speed. Significantly faster than the American plane."
From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3016082.stm "At the peak altitude, Zephyr should be making three circuits every two minutes, travelling at a speed of 70 metres per second (155 mph)."
Yes the Zephyr is significantly faster than the Helios which reaches astounding speeds of 30 MPH.
However, none of this makes gravity any less significant. Please clarify your statement. After all
F=GMm/R^2 where GM/R^2 is commonly refered to as the acceleration due to gravity.
Isn't all this american bashing a little off topic.
That's actually a good idea. It would be great to study cosmic rays and you would probably need to send a guy up in a balloon....or the ISS to do it. But, cosmic ray collisions are somewhat rare and definitely unpredictable. Plus the equipment used to study this stuff is HUGE; photomultipliers, magnets, power sources...etc. These experiments generate millions of collisions that take months to study. Even then, what they're looking for is a rare event. An interesting side note. Apollo astronauts reported occasionally seeing light flashes when they closed their eyes. Everyone scoffed. Turns out they were actually "seeing" cosmic rays. http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mir_lights_0 30416.html