Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10 Next
So what’s the consensus of opinion on here, do we now expect it to be de-orbited this year?
Had a moment of confusion.  It isn't anti-matter in its real state I think that provides reverse time communication but rather anti-matter in the vacuum state.  The annihilated form of it.  I think it may provide the reverse time communication to collapse states.  I think its that reverse time that provides the bridge that links quantum states. 

For instance light as a wave passes through two slits.  The wave pattern predicts the appearance of the photon but once the photon appears all the energy of the photon is concentrated at the point of absorption.  Its almost like the reverse time operator goes back in time and focuses the energy at that exact location. 

Creating electron-positron pairs in the vacuum in a quantum states of superposition.  Its like they were created out of the vacuum but the vacuum has not determined their exact orientation yet, upon interaction the vacuum uses the anti-matter in the vacuum state or the virtual stuff, to determine the final state of the other quantum entangled particle.  The wormhole bridge between the two. 

Tunneling for instance.  A particle bangs on a barrier and it has a vacuum wave associated with the particle so particle-wave hybrid.  Compound that the vacuum has inherent vacuum energy fluctuations if the particle's vacuum waves passes through the barrier then based on the quantum vacuum energy fluctuation there is a chance the far part of the wave will receive enough energy to re-create the particle on the other side of the barrier.  When the particle is created on the other side of the barrier it induces reverse time operators that annihilate the particles previous position via negative energy and the particle exists at its new position. 

I suspect that the nature of Quantum reality is fundamentally related to the vacuum and negative energy, reverse time operators.  Even Richard Feynman diagrams I have been told have reverse time operations. 

Another example is an electron in orbit around an atom.  As it falls in it encounters vacuum polarized electron positron pairs via the atoms electric field.  As it falls in it emits energy and it trapped around the atom in a wave state.  I think it exist purely as a vacuum fluctuation.  The electron looks like a cloud because it is a cloud of vacuum fluctuation.  It isn't actually whizzing around the nucleus so hence no radiation. 

Even radioactive decay.  If the distribution of proton and neutrons isn't right this may create points around the nucleus that have electric fields in excess increasing the chance via vacuum fluctuations of particle creation outside the nucleus?  Haven't really thought this last one through much but seems plausible. 
Also, they need to know exactly how the engines work (fuel consumption and acceleration). Probably they also did some attitude variation tests and ballistic coefficient calculation for the actual configuration.
SpaceX BFR - Earth to Deep Space / Re: Elon The Boring Company
« Last post by AncientU on Today at 02:04 PM »
Any kind of induction charging while still or moving is unlikely, Elon's not a fan on account of the inefficiency of it.

Most likely when the battery gets low, the pod will be automatically routed out of service and then either perform some kind of battery swap with some sort of automated system or simply charge with a supercharger style connection (but one that doesn't require a human to plug in).

The supercharger method will be easier to implement I suspect, though I wouldn't entirely rule out a battery swapping system (depends on whether having extra pods for the supercharging method is more expensive than implementing the battery swap system on fewer pods, I imagine).

With rush hours nicely concentrated in AM and PM, a large number of vehicles would be off line anyway (over night and midday) and available for charging.  With several hundred miles (500km) per charge, a daily recharge should be sufficient.  These vehicles will be pulled off line anyway, so might as well charge at their holding areas.  Swapping batteries has fallen by the wayside as battery tech has advanced.
Q&A Section / Orion capsule question
« Last post by mobile1 on Today at 01:52 PM »
NASA built the Orion capsule.  For what will it be used?
But they have de-orbited the similar-size Tianzhou.

Not the same I expect as hands on experience with an actual station.
Push back to July confirmed:
Pakistan to launch RSS in July
PakTES-1A, an indigenously developed 285 kg Remote Sensing Satellite (RSS) of Pakistan will be launched at 610 km sun-synchronous orbit in July 2018
The text under the mock-up says Jiuquan not Taiyuan
SpaceX BFR - Earth to Deep Space / Re: Building BFR
« Last post by wannamoonbase on Today at 01:16 PM »
And you just know that 9 m is just a temporary step back from 12 m... 

Boeing invests in tooling to run a production line for decades.  SpaceX in 10 years will have moved on from BFR to the RBFR.

I thought 9 meters was a result of sticking with existing facilities in Hawthorne.

Since they are building new at the port I thought they may change the diameter.  But they've ordered (at least some) tooling.

My point is they have spent 10 years or so on the F9 to get to the B5 which just started flying.  The 9 meter BFR may take that long as well to get to the performance advertised.

I'm expecting BFR development to be similar to F9 in that they will build, fly, learn, re-design and repeat.  The first BFRs may be heavy, inefficient not capable of going to Mars, but able to replace the F9/FH. 

Last thing SpaceX will want is a development program that takes as long as SLS.  Elon will want progress and want to see it flying.
But they have de-orbited the similar-size Tianzhou.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10 Next