Gavinmad
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 43,962
- 52,738
Eat a dick you worthless lickspittle.
- 3
- 1
The Astronomy Thread
- Thread starter Araxen
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Eat a dick you worthless lickspittle.
iannis
Musty Nester
- 31,351
- 17,657
I don't know it for sure. It's a bald assumption based on all the testing and research (the legitimate testing, not that itallian dude who carries around a magic fusion box) is being done in facilities about that big. I'm assuming there's a reason they're trying to do it at that size. Partially because that's all the money they can get, but partially because they believe it can be accomplished at that size. Maybe it can't! But they try to control plasma flows with magnets (FUCKING MAGNETS!). It is hard to see, immediately, why making that bigger would make a difference. I would think if anything you'd want to make it as small as possible, if only for proof of concept. Then after you've shown it's possible you start working on how to make it practical.
The nuclear reactor part of nuclear power plants aren't all that big either. Where they start to get huge is in the regulation and conversion into usable electricity and all the stuff you have to do to make sure that reaction is contained and safe to work with. That's a hell of a fire you're stoking.
There's a tiny nuclear power plan in the basement of a building at a nearby university. A useful thing to have when you're training nuclear engineers. Not very widely publicised but i've seen it. Well, actually it may not be there anymore... it's been quite a few years and I lost touch with those guys. But there was one there, at the very least. And it was enough to power the entire building.
Last edited:
- 2
khorum
Murder Apologist
- 24,338
- 81,363
Every time I log on it's like a fun minigame going back and figuring out why you're mad this time.
- 6
- 2
Gavinmad
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 43,962
- 52,738
This time it's arthritis, and Tuco is a complete tool anyway.
- 1
The running joke is that net fusion is always a decade or two away, because there has always been somebody saying that pretty much since like the 50's. Would love to see it become a reality, but not going to hold out hope for seeing it soon.
And IF it does become a reality, who knows how long after that until it could actually be miniaturized to be used on spaceships. Its a myth that fusion doesn't produce any waste at all. The neutrons produced in the reaction will turn the materials of the fusion chamber radioactive, and make them brittle over time. Relatively short half-lives, but basically you need to replace the materials of the fusion chamber every so often and properly dispose of them. This is a problem that is not often discussed in public circles when looking at fusion because being able to create sustained net-plus reactions is the initial huge hurdle that needs to be solved, but its another looming problem yet to be solved for fusion. And potentially much more difficult to solve when you're talking about trying to put a reactor on a ship.
And IF it does become a reality, who knows how long after that until it could actually be miniaturized to be used on spaceships. Its a myth that fusion doesn't produce any waste at all. The neutrons produced in the reaction will turn the materials of the fusion chamber radioactive, and make them brittle over time. Relatively short half-lives, but basically you need to replace the materials of the fusion chamber every so often and properly dispose of them. This is a problem that is not often discussed in public circles when looking at fusion because being able to create sustained net-plus reactions is the initial huge hurdle that needs to be solved, but its another looming problem yet to be solved for fusion. And potentially much more difficult to solve when you're talking about trying to put a reactor on a ship.
- 3
Chukzombi
Millie's Staff Member
- 73,188
- 214,514
if it worked for Matt Damon then it should work in real life. rocket leaves earth, rocket refuels at fuel satellite orbiting earth. rocket flies to mars. rocket refuels at fuel satellite orbiting mars. rocket lands, rocket launches back up. refuels again and heads on home!
- 1
khorum
Murder Apologist
- 24,338
- 81,363
Like I told you the vast majority of the fuel is actually spent getting to orbit. Since the gravity on Mars is only .37g, it would subsequently take much less fuel to get back to Mars orbit.
As for travelling from earth orbit to Mars orbit, that won't take much fuel at all since we'll be using some variety of TIE-fighter star wars engines. The engines that drove the DAWN spacecraft to its asteroid only used 937 pounds of fuel to achieve more overall thrust over its entire mission than the 200-ton Delta2 rocket that got it into orbit. For Mars we could use a similar NASA engine or maybe the VASIMR plasma engine which promises to get from Earth to Mars orbit in 39 days but uses only electricity generated by a nuclear reactor, which wouldn't be that heavy at all. Some people will whine about the VASIMR because some jackoff didn't want NASA spending money on it, but fuck them.
The fuel to get from the surface of Mars to Mars orbit could even be GENERATED on Mars ahead of time.
As for travelling from earth orbit to Mars orbit, that won't take much fuel at all since we'll be using some variety of TIE-fighter star wars engines. The engines that drove the DAWN spacecraft to its asteroid only used 937 pounds of fuel to achieve more overall thrust over its entire mission than the 200-ton Delta2 rocket that got it into orbit. For Mars we could use a similar NASA engine or maybe the VASIMR plasma engine which promises to get from Earth to Mars orbit in 39 days but uses only electricity generated by a nuclear reactor, which wouldn't be that heavy at all. Some people will whine about the VASIMR because some jackoff didn't want NASA spending money on it, but fuck them.
The fuel to get from the surface of Mars to Mars orbit could even be GENERATED on Mars ahead of time.
- 4
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 48,070
- 83,063
- 35,283
- 138,415
this is how I felt when I saw there were a bunch of new posts in this thread and discovered it was just you andChukzombi failing to convey and understand meaningful information
What in the fuck, how did that dude not get his neck snapped.
- 1
Chukzombi
Millie's Staff Member
- 73,188
- 214,514
this is how I felt when I saw there were a bunch of new posts in this thread and discovered it was just you and
we cant always talk about the physics of sending a wooden car bumper to Mars.
- 1
- 1
Araxen
Golden Baronet of the Realm
- 10,560
- 7,994
My decision to put Astrocreep on ignore years ago pays dividends every day still.
- 1
- 1
Gavinmad
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 43,962
- 52,738
Chukzombi
Millie's Staff Member
- 73,188
- 214,514
Mudcrush Durtfeet
Hungry Ogre
- 2,428
- -757
Fusion power has been 'coming in not TOO long since I was a kid. Like 40 years ago. We aren't close yet, after 40 years, from what I can tell when I go look at the subject on Wikipedia and elsewhere.
Last edited:
- 2
Big Phoenix
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 46,869
- 100,195
There have been multiple mission designs involving manned missions to Mars. We would have been walking on Mars not long after Apollo ending if that moron Nixon didnt scrap the project in favor of the idiotic Space Shuttle.
Space Transportation System - Wikipedia
Constellation program - Wikipedia
Nuclear rockets are what we need if we ever want to send a human past the moon. Monumental mistake that we never used NERVA after perfecting the technology.
NERVA - Wikipedia
Space Transportation System - Wikipedia
Constellation program - Wikipedia
Nuclear rockets are what we need if we ever want to send a human past the moon. Monumental mistake that we never used NERVA after perfecting the technology.
NERVA - Wikipedia
- 3
Mudcrush Durtfeet
Hungry Ogre
- 2,428
- -757
The cost was huge and it was not perfected, they didn't ever build something you could actually put in a rocket. It's hard to find that out, most articles don't really mention that part. I remember finding this for someone (you?) some time ago.
Anywho, we could get there with chemical rockets, and there's a good chance that we will and a small chance that it will be within 5 years.
Anywho, we could get there with chemical rockets, and there's a good chance that we will and a small chance that it will be within 5 years.
- 1
