|
Post by Enderminion on Oct 25, 2017 13:13:03 GMT
a stream of gram sized slugs moving 50,000m/s reletive to the orbit will not be stopped by active means Those projectiles, if not aiming at any object in the Solar System, will simply fly out into interstellar space, unlikely to hit anything. no they won't, they would have to be going 72km/s for that (IIRC)
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Oct 25, 2017 13:18:01 GMT
Those projectiles, if not aiming at any object in the Solar System, will simply fly out into interstellar space, unlikely to hit anything. no they won't, they would have to be going 72km/s for that (IIRC) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_velocity#List_of_escape_velocitiesIt seems that if you're shooting prograde they will certainly left, but if you shoot retrograde when you're in the deeper part of the well of the Sol system then it may either enter a retrograde elliptical orbit or just fucks down into the Sun.
|
|
|
Post by matterbeam on Oct 25, 2017 14:15:38 GMT
a stream of gram sized slugs moving 50,000m/s reletive to the orbit will not be stopped by active means Those projectiles, if not aiming at any object in the Solar System, will simply fly out into interstellar space, unlikely to hit anything. Escape velocity from the Sun is about 60km/s...
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Oct 25, 2017 14:27:02 GMT
Those projectiles, if not aiming at any object in the Solar System, will simply fly out into interstellar space, unlikely to hit anything. Escape velocity from the Sun is about 60km/s... Uh, from where? The surface of the sun itself?
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Oct 25, 2017 14:36:32 GMT
Those projectiles, if not aiming at any object in the Solar System, will simply fly out into interstellar space, unlikely to hit anything. Escape velocity from the Sun is about 60km/s... And mercury for example already moves 48km/s relative to the sun.
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Oct 25, 2017 14:39:13 GMT
A good thing is 50 km/s is well over escape velocity of most planets in the Solar System. When you're out of the planet SOI, chances of collision became abyssal.
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Oct 25, 2017 14:41:36 GMT
Escape velocity from the Sun is about 60km/s... Uh, from where? The surface of the sun itself? 617.5km/s from its surface, probably not.
|
|
|
Post by 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖒𝖈𝖍𝖆𝖈𝖑𝖊 on Nov 4, 2017 20:03:20 GMT
Here's some fridge horror I've noticed: what happens to the cannon rounds that miss their targets and what does that mean for the people living on the planet below?! Space debris hauls ass already on an average of seven meters per second, but those puppies could do some extreme damage at that speed! So does this mean that a few colonies have been lost after a major space battle? Wasn't there a note in the campaign about nuking one of the moons to the point it was uninhabitable? that happened to earth and that's why it looks so barren. also, vesta overkill has references to the enemy nuking the crap out of earth if you fail the mission so yeah
|
|
|
Post by dichebach on Nov 6, 2017 4:17:52 GMT
I'm guessing that nearly every human alive in the game must be living either (a) in a space station; or (b) in an underground "city." In order for the human race to not go extinct, the vast majority of habitations where people live will need to be spinning at a rate appropriate to their diameter to achieve a reasonable centrifugal force to approximate 1 g. This means that, (pulling some numbers out of thin air, since the game itself doesn't seem to have done anything remotely more accurate): if a single human occupant requires something like 27 m^3 (which is what the Harmony module on ISS actually affords its four residents)--and discounting the volume for everything else involved in sustaining human life in space or on a harsh inhospitable planet like Mars--on Earth, it may require hundreds or more times that much volume for a permanent habitation in space. The old O'Neill cylinder design was on the order of 8km in diameter and 30km long, which works out to be something like 1300 km^2 inside, which is putatively enough space to house millions. The O'Neill cylinder was designed to have large glass strips that ran down the full length of the cylinder to allow in sunlight. I have no idea how nonsensical this is in terms of the potential to construct sufficiently strong panes of that size which are strong enough and offer enough radiation protection. This aspect of the design (along with the way the landscape was arranged) would suggest that communities in the lowest gravity settings would project "outward" from the surface of the nearby asteroid or planet a bit like skyscrapers. It may be that spheres or torus shapes are more efficient for many celestial bodies, and for planets and moons with substantial enough gravity (Mars is the only one I know of that has much gravity) then simply underground (or domed) cities where citizens simply have to spend enough time "working out" in a gravity simulator might prevail.
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Nov 6, 2017 6:03:34 GMT
I'm guessing that nearly every human alive in the game must be living either (a) in a space station; or (b) in an underground "city." In order for the human race to not go extinct, the vast majority of habitations where people live will need to be spinning at a rate appropriate to their diameter to achieve a reasonable centrifugal force to approximate 1 g. This means that, (pulling some numbers out of thin air, since the game itself doesn't seem to have done anything remotely more accurate): if a single human occupant requires something like 27 m^3 (which is what the Harmony module on ISS actually affords its four residents)--and discounting the volume for everything else involved in sustaining human life in space or on a harsh inhospitable planet like Mars--on Earth, it may require hundreds or more times that much volume for a permanent habitation in space. The old O'Neill cylinder design was on the order of 8km in diameter and 30km long, which works out to be something like 1300 km^2 inside, which is putatively enough space to house millions. The O'Neill cylinder was designed to have large glass strips that ran down the full length of the cylinder to allow in sunlight. I have no idea how nonsensical this is in terms of the potential to construct sufficiently strong panes of that size which are strong enough and offer enough radiation protection. This aspect of the design (along with the way the landscape was arranged) would suggest that communities in the lowest gravity settings would project "outward" from the surface of the nearby asteroid or planet a bit like skyscrapers. It may be that spheres or torus shapes are more efficient for many celestial bodies, and for planets and moons with substantial enough gravity (Mars is the only one I know of that has much gravity) then simply underground (or domed) cities where citizens simply have to spend enough time "working out" in a gravity simulator might prevail. Acrylic glass with graphene might help. The O'Neil cylinder often was proposed with an outer shell to protect the ship from lethal radiation and micrometeorites, in event of a solar storm you could just rotate your window away from the source, or more likely you just use gigantic magnetic fields around your station. Gammas might present an inherent danger though.
|
|
|
Post by dichebach on Nov 7, 2017 1:22:36 GMT
Really disappointed that I'm half way through my natural lifespan, and we don't seem to be ANY closer to anything like an O'Neill Cylinder or Stanford Torus or Bernal Sphere than when I was born, just as the Apollo program was getting underway.
In fact, now that I think about it, THIS is my main problem with Mr. Musk. No Elon, NOT Mars first! Asteroid mining FIRST! Then Orbital city/colony (where at least some people might be able to be saved in the event of a catastrophe and Earth can provide support while the thing works out the kinks). Then moon base, THEN Mars!
Disappointing that the most inspiring space visionary of our time has this so confused . . . I need to make a billion(s) like Marcus Persson so I can point Elon in the correct direction . . .
|
|
|
Post by treptoplax on Nov 7, 2017 2:02:45 GMT
Really disappointed that I'm half way through my natural lifespan, and we don't seem to be ANY closer to anything like an O'Neill Cylinder or Stanford Torus or Bernal Sphere than when I was born, just as the Apollo program was getting underway. In fact, now that I think about it, THIS is my main problem with Mr. Musk. No Elon, NOT Mars first! Asteroid mining FIRST! Then Orbital city/colony (where at least some people might be able to be saved in the event of a catastrophe and Earth can provide support while the thing works out the kinks). Then moon base, THEN Mars! Disappointing that the most inspiring space visionary of our time has this so confused . . . I need to make a billion(s) like Marcus Persson so I can point Elon in the correct direction . . . Well, if it makes you feel any better I think Jeff Bezos may agree, and he just sold a billion $ of Amazon stock...
|
|
|
Post by dichebach on Nov 7, 2017 2:54:25 GMT
Hmmm, the Bezosphere. Has a ring to it!
|
|
|
Post by 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖒𝖈𝖍𝖆𝖈𝖑𝖊 on Nov 7, 2017 6:55:07 GMT
I'm guessing that nearly every human alive in the game must be living either (a) in a space station; or (b) in an underground "city." In order for the human race to not go extinct, the vast majority of habitations where people live will need to be spinning at a rate appropriate to their diameter to achieve a reasonable centrifugal force to approximate 1 g. This means that, (pulling some numbers out of thin air, since the game itself doesn't seem to have done anything remotely more accurate): if a single human occupant requires something like 27 m^3 (which is what the Harmony module on ISS actually affords its four residents)--and discounting the volume for everything else involved in sustaining human life in space or on a harsh inhospitable planet like Mars--on Earth, it may require hundreds or more times that much volume for a permanent habitation in space. The old O'Neill cylinder design was on the order of 8km in diameter and 30km long, which works out to be something like 1300 km^2 inside, which is putatively enough space to house millions. The O'Neill cylinder was designed to have large glass strips that ran down the full length of the cylinder to allow in sunlight. I have no idea how nonsensical this is in terms of the potential to construct sufficiently strong panes of that size which are strong enough and offer enough radiation protection. This aspect of the design (along with the way the landscape was arranged) would suggest that communities in the lowest gravity settings would project "outward" from the surface of the nearby asteroid or planet a bit like skyscrapers. It may be that spheres or torus shapes are more efficient for many celestial bodies, and for planets and moons with substantial enough gravity (Mars is the only one I know of that has much gravity) then simply underground (or domed) cities where citizens simply have to spend enough time "working out" in a gravity simulator might prevail. the strips of glass would not have to be super radiation resistant at all. all of the farming could be done hydroponically and automatically, requiring no humans to be in the outer layers of the ship they could also be pressurised with only 10 psi, which some plants can live in.
|
|
|
Post by 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖒𝖈𝖍𝖆𝖈𝖑𝖊 on Nov 7, 2017 6:56:54 GMT
Really disappointed that I'm half way through my natural lifespan, and we don't seem to be ANY closer to anything like an O'Neill Cylinder or Stanford Torus or Bernal Sphere than when I was born, just as the Apollo program was getting underway. In fact, now that I think about it, THIS is my main problem with Mr. Musk. No Elon, NOT Mars first! Asteroid mining FIRST! Then Orbital city/colony (where at least some people might be able to be saved in the event of a catastrophe and Earth can provide support while the thing works out the kinks). Then moon base, THEN Mars! Disappointing that the most inspiring space visionary of our time has this so confused . . . I need to make a billion(s) like Marcus Persson so I can point Elon in the correct direction . . . Well, if it makes you feel any better I think Jeff Bezos may agree, and he just sold a billion $ of Amazon stock... holy crap... one FREAKING HOLE and all the air in that thing would be gone in a few hours... the whipple shielding would have to be ridiclous to prevent anything from happening...
|
|