a_skeleton_03
<Banned>
- 29,948
- 29,763
CubeSat in the NewsI have an idea, maybe I'm old fashioned... strap a small one onto an inexpensive test satellite and send that fucker into orbit and see where it goes.
CubeSat in the NewsI have an idea, maybe I'm old fashioned... strap a small one onto an inexpensive test satellite and send that fucker into orbit and see where it goes.
That's one of the goals but they are pretty far from being able to do that for a variety of reasons, least of which is that it wouldn't be more conclusive than the tests they have now.I have an idea, maybe I'm old fashioned... strap a small one onto an inexpensive test satellite and send that fucker into orbit and see where it goes.
Yep, but that's the nature of popscience. Faux-science publications latch onto anything interesting and sell it as something it's not. And unscrupulous researchers looking for funding oversell their ideas (Which is what I think the EMDrive inventor, Shawyer, has been trying to do for a decade).I kinda want to clarify my position on the em drive. I'm not against it being a thing. What I'mreallyagainst was the immediate cries of it breaking the known laws of physics, being propellantless and so forth.
There very well may be something there. And if it takes us back to the drawing board as far as physics is concerned? I will be fucking ecstatic. But, much like a UFO, because we don't know what it is yet, we can't go around making claims as to what it is. That's doing science completely backasswards.
Who here is claiming it verifiably breaks the laws of physics? I seem the most likely candidate, but I hold the position that it is not yet verified.I kinda want to clarify my position on the em drive. I'm not against it being a thing. What I'mreallyagainst was the immediate cries of it breaking the known laws of physics, being propellantless and so forth.
There very well may be something there. And if it takes us back to the drawing board as far as physics is concerned? I will be fucking ecstatic. But, much like a UFO, because we don't know what it is yet, we can't go around making claims as to what it is. That's doing science completely backasswards.
When it comes to the em drive I think we're in agreement on something in the science thread, for once. (We're probably in agreement on a lot of things when it doesn't come to QM... and climate change... okay, probably lots of other stuff, too, but still.)Who here is claiming it verifiably breaks the laws of physics? I seem the most likely candidate, but I hold the position that it is not yet verified.
Russia reveals giant nuclear torpedo in state TV 'leak' - BBC NewsThe "oceanic multi-purpose Status-6 system" is designed to "destroy important economic installations of the enemy in coastal areas and cause guaranteed devastating damage to the country's territory by creating wide areas of radioactive contamination, rendering them unusable for military, economic or other activity for a long time"
On the diagram the giant torpedo's range is given as "up to 10,000km" (6,200 miles) and depth of trajectory is "up to 1,000m" (3,300ft)...
Just before the torpedo diagram came into view in the state TV report, Mr Putin could be heard telling the generals that the US and its Nato allies were forging ahead with a global anti-missile defence system "unfortunately ignoring our concerns and our offers of co-operation".
These aren't for taking out ships, they are for striking naval bases and coastal cities from thousands of miles away. The speculation is that these are cobalt warheads to deal out lethal, long-lasting radiation.I'm kind of amazed that those don't already exist.
I bet they already exist. ICBM's exist. We do have nuclear powered submarines which are capable of launching missiles. You would think that, if they can make them small enough, they'd be capable of launching missiles with a nuclear payload. A torpedo is nothing but an underwater missile. But I guess you don't really need a nuke to destroy an aircraft carrier.
However, you would only need 1 nuke where you would need quite a very few conventional torpedoes. So I bet they already exist.
This is just them saying, "we can still maybe get you even if you have strong missile defense, so don't think about approaching our borders, yankees!"Giant nuclear torpedoes are on the drawing board, hopefully not coming our way soon.
Russia reveals giant nuclear torpedo in state TV 'leak' - BBC News