The Astronomy Thread

iannis

Musty Nester
31,351
17,656
Do you understand that when a delta-V map says it takes 9400 m/s of delta-V to go from Earth's surface to LEO, that figure remains constant regardless of what you're trying to get from the surface into LEO?
True, but with a dense fuel it takes less raw mass to reach it. The whole rocket problem thing.

Probably isn't practical. If it were, they'd be doing it.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Gavinmad

Mr. Poopybutthole
42,370
50,410
Yeah I do now, I admit I'm a bit over my head in this conversation, but I also have read enough popsci written by people that do know that they're talking about to know that people a lot smarter thank chuk also think his idea is possible in current year. You're talking about it as if it's infeasible.

Whose idea? Chuk is just vomiting random nonsense.

True, but with a dense fuel it takes less raw mass to reach it. The whole rocket problem thing.

Probably isn't practical. If it were, they'd be doing it.

You seem to be caught somewhere between delta V and specific impulse.
 

Chukzombi

Millie's Staff Member
71,688
212,905
Yeah I do now, I admit I'm a bit over my head in this conversation, but I also have read enough popsci written by people that do know that they're talking about to know that people a lot smarter thank chuk also think his idea is possible in current year. You're talking about it as if it's infeasible.
gavin is just doing his "you're an idiot" shtick. if he had said what i said and i said a fuel satellite was a space bomb and that its impossible for a small rocket ship to leave the low gravity atmosphere of Mars, his recycled insults would still be the same.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Gavinmad

Mr. Poopybutthole
42,370
50,410
gavin is just doing his "you're an idiot" shtick. if he had said what i said and i said a fuel satellite was a space bomb and that its impossible for a small rocket ship to leave the low gravity atmosphere of Mars, his recycled insults would still be the same.

Again, you're just vomiting random nonsense which you so frequently do.
 

Cybsled

Avatar of War Slayer
16,450
12,097
So you want to send TWO ships to Mars, one of them a flying bomb, and you want the first ship to be capable of launching from the surface into a perfectly matched orbit with the flying bomb, dock, refuel, detach, and burn back for earth orbit and do the vast majority of this precise series of actions entirely by itself due to the communications lag between here and Mars.

You can potentially just manufacture the fuel on Mars.

Elon Musk wants to collect fuel on Mars to send spaceships back to Earth
 
  • 1Like
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 1 users

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,853
137,951
It would be much easier if they didn't plan on coming back, just have a continious mission to add more people and infrastructure for like 30 years, it's gonna take forever to buildup bases there.

you can come back when you build the systems it would take to make the return trip
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

MusicForFish

Ultra Maga Instinct
<Prior Amod>
31,867
125,062
Yall thinking about this mars back and forth wrong.
Antigrav.
You transmute (insert special element here) into a higher element creating gravity waves and plasma. Think about how gravity waves affect things. Now consider what happens when you generate your own and keep them contained. The plasma can power your electrical systems, providing movement, thrust, whatever. The gravity waves keep you aloft in earths atmosphere with barely any power use.

That's not even getting into the previous generation of electromagnetic antigrav from the early 80s which you can see in small demos in idiots basements all over youtube.

 
  • 3Like
  • 1WTF
Reactions: 3 users

Oldbased

> Than U
27,715
65,107
I can't believe you didn't enjoy getting to hear two literal rocket scientists debating space travel.
They flat out ignored my supreme space force facts in that. I hadn't even got to the large wooden badger and city sized slingshots part yet.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1Worf
Reactions: 1 users

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
45,422
73,489
Yall thinking about this mars back and forth wrong.
Antigrav.
You transmute (insert special element here) into a higher element creating gravity waves and plasma. Think about how gravity waves affect things. Now consider what happens when you generate your own and keep them contained. The plasma can power your electrical systems, providing movement, thrust, whatever. The gravity waves keep you aloft in earths atmosphere with barely any power use.

That's not even getting into the previous generation of electromagnetic antigrav from the early 80s which you can see in small demos in idiots basements all over youtube.

Cool ion lifter MusicForFish MusicForFish , want to bring it to a vacuum chamber and watch it do nothing?

 
  • 1Like
  • 1Worf
Reactions: 1 users

Oldbased

> Than U
27,715
65,107
So, if the average person is 68,000 calories of energy and fence sitters are on average 30% over that figure then we end up with 88,400 calories of energy per person.
Now burning fat people is not 100% efficient so let's go with 50% meaning at thrust we have 44,200 calories. Now a gallon of gas is roughly 31 million calories of energy meaning we need many fence sitters to generate thrust at all.
44,200 calories is roughly 51.4 kilowatt hours of power so we cannot use fence sitters as a fuel source of thrust. We can however power the module itself with 51.4 Kh of energy meaning that fence sitter becomes the crappy music player, coffee maker and toilet flusher of the space capsule.
As for thrust, we are looking into possibly installing fart grabbing wall dragons as a option.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2Worf
Reactions: 3 users

iannis

Musty Nester
31,351
17,656
Yall thinking about this mars back and forth wrong.
Antigrav.
You transmute (insert special element here) into a higher element creating gravity waves and plasma. Think about how gravity waves affect things. Now consider what happens when you generate your own and keep them contained. The plasma can power your electrical systems, providing movement, thrust, whatever. The gravity waves keep you aloft in earths atmosphere with barely any power use.

That's not even getting into the previous generation of electromagnetic antigrav from the early 80s which you can see in small demos in idiots basements all over youtube.


Gravity waves were just observationally confirmed like... last year though, right? And plasma is extremely difficult to manipulate (hence the dream of fusion being, for now, pipe).

I'm not saying you're wrong! But isn't that basically theoretical? Slightly less theoretical than the EM Drive... but on that order. You're talking about Fusion AND the manipulation of the graviton in conjunction.

If we get fusion though we don't have to worry about squat. A gallon of dirty water would be enough energy to get you into orbit. Well it depends on how big the fusion apparatus is obviously, but it's of that magnitude. Solidfuel chemical rockets are caveman tier at that point.

And the fusion apparatuses probably won't be -that- big. They can fit in normal little office buildings at least. You're not looking at some artifact as big as a hardon collider.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users

MusicForFish

Ultra Maga Instinct
<Prior Amod>
31,867
125,062
I'm @ work but off soon. Will add to that silly thing I posted.

Tuco Tuco
Blah blah blah. Never said that method was for space. Also said that method is from the 80s. Derp.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Mudcrush Durtfeet

Hungry Ogre
2,428
-758
Gravity waves were just observationally confirmed like... last year though, right? And plasma is extremely difficult to manipulate (hence the dream of fusion being, for now, pipe).

I'm not saying you're wrong! But isn't that basically theoretical? Slightly less theoretical than the EM Drive... but on that order. You're talking about Fusion AND the manipulation of the graviton in conjunction.

If we get fusion though we don't have to worry about squat. A gallon of dirty water would be enough energy to get you into orbit. Well it depends on how big the fusion apparatus is obviously, but it's of that magnitude. Solidfuel chemical rockets are caveman tier at that point.

And the fusion apparatuses probably won't be -that- big. They can fit in normal little office buildings at least. You're not looking at some artifact as big as a hardon collider.

How do you know that? No one has yet made something using nuclear fusion for power generation that is actually usable. Such a thing seems to be decades away, if not longer. :-(
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users