Author Topic: New Forum Sections  (Read 49557 times)

Offline mtakala24

Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #40 on: 09/16/2015 09:35 PM »
Now when BO has gone public with its plans, we'll have to carefully monitor if/when there is enough BO threads (launch site dev + NSF "spies", testing, launches) to make it a section of its own.

Online Chris Bergin

Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #41 on: 09/16/2015 09:56 PM »
Now when BO has gone public with its plans, we'll have to carefully monitor if/when there is enough BO threads (launch site dev + NSF "spies", testing, launches) to make it a section of its own.

I was just today saying to one member who asked about this that we'll have a discussion at the weekend on section names, so we'll have a think here now and work out the plan at the weekend.

Remember, needs to be at least 30 threads for a standalone section.

Offline nadreck

Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #42 on: 09/16/2015 10:04 PM »
Personally I would rather see 3 commercial sections where we have the two now:

Commercial General
Commercial Sub Orbital (crewed or not)
Commercial HSF to LEO and beyond

I think we have come to the point that the Nasa Commercial Crew program does not need its own segment, but that with 4 real players planning commercial craft that will carry people and that those four already have a number of posts in the Commercial Crew section then keeping them there is easiest but renaming it makes sense.
It is all well and good to quote those things that made it past your confirmation bias that other people wrote, but this is a discussion board damnit! Let us know what you think! And why!

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27025
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 6914
  • Likes Given: 4879
Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #43 on: 11/11/2015 06:25 PM »
A "new physics" section for advanced concepts relying on phenomenon not compatible with the conventional understanding of physics. EM Drive, in particular, has basically swallowed up the Advanced Concepts section.

Examples:
EM Drive
Woodward Effect
Low Energy Nuclear Reactions
E-Cat

Heck, just an "EM Drive" section would be sufficient. I just checked, and that single EM Drive thread accounts for 10 of the last 40 most recent forum posts (and that includes L2 topics, not just general forum). And this isn't some random outlier.

If a single thread is responsible for 25% of forum posts, then it probably deserves its own section. That would probably make it easier to make new EM Drive threads without them being lost, thus allowing the topic to be easier to digest for newcomers. It may not have quite 30 threads so far, but it certainly has its share of the forum's attention. And if you include all the LENR/E-Cat/Woodward Effect threads, you may do get to 30 threads.
« Last Edit: 11/11/2015 07:31 PM by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27025
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 6914
  • Likes Given: 4879
Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #44 on: 11/11/2015 07:22 PM »
I just checked. There are at least 30 threads that deal with "new physics" type concepts (almost all some sort of propellantless propulsion), plus about a dozen more about FTL communication or travel, which violate causality in a way I think most physicists would consider "new physics" if ever demonstrated. If you want a list, I can provide it. I looked through about 26 out of 38 pages of Advanced concepts thread titles. The density of "new physics" threads seems to be increasing as time goes on (rarer around 2010 than now), which I think is partly due to many of the conventional topics getting their own forum section.

So I think that "New Physics" is certainly a worthwhile section, given there are a good 40 threads with New Physics-like topics (and probably a bunch more that were deleted), and it accounts for 25% of the forum posts as of late.

Topics you'd want to include:
FTL, including transmission of classical information faster than light using quantum entanglement, warp drives, wormholes, etc.
Propellantless propulsion relying on new physics (i.e. either violating conservation of momentum or pushing against the ether or distant stars or quantum soop, etc)
Anti-gravity
cold fusion
etc.
« Last Edit: 11/11/2015 07:27 PM by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Online Chris Bergin

Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #45 on: 11/11/2015 08:11 PM »
Yeah, that sounds like an idea. The alternative was something for EM Drive only, but that would be totally at odds to the site's overall menu list.

I'll go with your suggestion (when I get time) ;D

Offline Skyrocket

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2075
  • Frankfurt am Main, Germany
  • Liked: 272
  • Likes Given: 65
Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #46 on: 12/14/2015 09:55 AM »
I like to suggest to introduce a own subforum for suborbital launches.
Clustering them all in a single thread (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=11281) inside the "Other Launchers (Korean, Brazilian etc.)"-subforum is rather confusing and makes discussions on a individual mission or sounding rocket really hard to follow. And there are a lot of interesting suborbital missions and vehicles to discuss.

I would suggest to place it inside the "International Space Flight (ESA, Russia, China and others)" section, so that suborbital launches of all countries can be discussed there together.

Offline Skyrocket

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2075
  • Frankfurt am Main, Germany
  • Liked: 272
  • Likes Given: 65
Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #47 on: 12/14/2015 10:17 AM »
I like to suggest to introduce a own subforum for suborbital launches.
Clustering them all in a single thread (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=11281) inside the "Other Launchers (Korean, Brazilian etc.)"-subforum is rather confusing and makes discussions on a individual mission or sounding rocket really hard to follow. And there are a lot of interesting suborbital missions and vehicles to discuss.

I would suggest to place it inside the "International Space Flight (ESA, Russia, China and others)" section, so that suborbital launches of all countries can be discussed there together.

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #48 on: 12/14/2015 11:46 AM »
I like to suggest to introduce a own subforum for suborbital launches.
Clustering them all in a single thread (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=11281) inside the "Other Launchers (Korean, Brazilian etc.)"-subforum is rather confusing and makes discussions on a individual mission or sounding rocket really hard to follow. And there are a lot of interesting suborbital missions and vehicles to discuss.

I would suggest to place it inside the "International Space Flight (ESA, Russia, China and others)" section, so that suborbital launches of all countries can be discussed there together.
Might be good place for the small orbital LVs (<=1000kg).

Online Chris Bergin

Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #49 on: 12/14/2015 01:26 PM »
I like to suggest to introduce a own subforum for suborbital launches.
Clustering them all in a single thread (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=11281) inside the "Other Launchers (Korean, Brazilian etc.)"-subforum is rather confusing and makes discussions on a individual mission or sounding rocket really hard to follow. And there are a lot of interesting suborbital missions and vehicles to discuss.

I would suggest to place it inside the "International Space Flight (ESA, Russia, China and others)" section, so that suborbital launches of all countries can be discussed there together.

Copy that.

So a good idea to would be to start some suborbital standalone mission threads from now onwards, so we have a collection to move into the standalone section.

Offline Skyrocket

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2075
  • Frankfurt am Main, Germany
  • Liked: 272
  • Likes Given: 65
Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #50 on: 12/14/2015 01:39 PM »
I like to suggest to introduce a own subforum for suborbital launches.
Clustering them all in a single thread (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=11281) inside the "Other Launchers (Korean, Brazilian etc.)"-subforum is rather confusing and makes discussions on a individual mission or sounding rocket really hard to follow. And there are a lot of interesting suborbital missions and vehicles to discuss.

I would suggest to place it inside the "International Space Flight (ESA, Russia, China and others)" section, so that suborbital launches of all countries can be discussed there together.

Copy that.

So a good idea to would be to start some suborbital standalone mission threads from now onwards, so we have a collection to move into the standalone section.

Thanks! Perhaps it would be a good idea, to leave an official note at the end of the generic Suborbital thread, that now suborbital mission threads should be started as stand alone threads and not to be added to the generic suborbital thread.


Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
  • UK
  • Liked: 1321
  • Likes Given: 168
Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #52 on: 12/14/2015 03:18 PM »

I like to suggest to introduce a own subforum for suborbital launches.
Clustering them all in a single thread (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=11281) inside the "Other Launchers (Korean, Brazilian etc.)"-subforum is rather confusing and makes discussions on a individual mission or sounding rocket really hard to follow. And there are a lot of interesting suborbital missions and vehicles to discuss.

I would suggest to place it inside the "International Space Flight (ESA, Russia, China and others)" section, so that suborbital launches of all countries can be discussed there together.

Copy that.

So a good idea to would be to start some suborbital standalone mission threads from now onwards, so we have a collection to move into the standalone section.

Thanks! Perhaps it would be a good idea, to leave an official note at the end of the generic Suborbital thread, that now suborbital mission threads should be started as stand alone threads and not to be added to the generic suborbital thread.

Are you going to differentiate military suborbital flights from civilian ones.

Offline Skyrocket

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2075
  • Frankfurt am Main, Germany
  • Liked: 272
  • Likes Given: 65
Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #53 on: 12/14/2015 03:42 PM »

I like to suggest to introduce a own subforum for suborbital launches.
Clustering them all in a single thread (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=11281) inside the "Other Launchers (Korean, Brazilian etc.)"-subforum is rather confusing and makes discussions on a individual mission or sounding rocket really hard to follow. And there are a lot of interesting suborbital missions and vehicles to discuss.

I would suggest to place it inside the "International Space Flight (ESA, Russia, China and others)" section, so that suborbital launches of all countries can be discussed there together.

Copy that.

So a good idea to would be to start some suborbital standalone mission threads from now onwards, so we have a collection to move into the standalone section.

Thanks! Perhaps it would be a good idea, to leave an official note at the end of the generic Suborbital thread, that now suborbital mission threads should be started as stand alone threads and not to be added to the generic suborbital thread.

Are you going to differentiate military suborbital flights from civilian ones.

Might be useful, as the purpose of military missile flights and scientific sounding rockets is quite different.
« Last Edit: 12/14/2015 03:44 PM by Skyrocket »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
  • UK
  • Liked: 1321
  • Likes Given: 168
Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #54 on: 12/14/2015 03:55 PM »


I like to suggest to introduce a own subforum for suborbital launches.
Clustering them all in a single thread (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=11281) inside the "Other Launchers (Korean, Brazilian etc.)"-subforum is rather confusing and makes discussions on a individual mission or sounding rocket really hard to follow. And there are a lot of interesting suborbital missions and vehicles to discuss.

I would suggest to place it inside the "International Space Flight (ESA, Russia, China and others)" section, so that suborbital launches of all countries can be discussed there together.

Copy that.

So a good idea to would be to start some suborbital standalone mission threads from now onwards, so we have a collection to move into the standalone section.

Thanks! Perhaps it would be a good idea, to leave an official note at the end of the generic Suborbital thread, that now suborbital mission threads should be started as stand alone threads and not to be added to the generic suborbital thread.

Are you going to differentiate military suborbital flights from civilian ones.

Might be useful, as the purpose of military missile flights and scientific sounding rockets is quite different.

Yes but are you going to lump all the military tests together or divide them by country and are you then going to divide them again between if their a related nuclear missile test or a hypersonic boost glide test for example?

Offline the_other_Doug

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2490
  • Minneapolis, MN
  • Liked: 1519
  • Likes Given: 2687
Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #55 on: 12/18/2015 12:19 PM »
I'm beginning to think that the discussions of electromagnetic propulsion models ought not be in a section labeled "New Physics."  We're getting a new flood of amateur, non-physicists coming in and posting their own refutations to General Relativity, along with pages and pages of cut-and-paste illustrations that would do any second-grader proud.  And that have all of the basis in actual physics and mathematics that you would expect of most second-graders.

In other words, nutters trying to insist that, of course, everyone else has been wrong.  And they, with their quite self-obvious Soap Bubble Physics, in which the behavior of the soap bubbles observed as they move when one expels gas in the bathtub, can explain how Einstein was wrong and FTL is quit easy to accomplish, and how they should be honored for their great cosmological insights.

Or worse, we're getting people with some physics backgrounds who have gone off into the hinterlands and can't get their theories taken seriously by other members of their field, so they come here, presenting line after line of dense math equations that are meaningless to all but three or four people who read this forum, and then demand that we either accept their theory or tell them why it's wrong -- when, again, the amateurs (and even the professional engineers) on this forum are in no way capable of even following their equations, much less discussing or refuting them.

First, IMHO this is not the right place to discuss refutations to General Relativity, serious or not.  Second, I think the phrase "New Physics" is attracting nutters who think that's what we do want to discuss here.

As far as I'm concerned, the discussions of EM drive physics, which I do follow somewhat, have to do with trying to reproduce and understand effects that have been reported by serious scientists -- you know, the kind with physics degrees.  Which is valid.  They are not here to try and invent "New Physics" that attempt to circumvent the lightspeed limit, or violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

I'm thinking that maybe the EM drive section should be renamed something like "Electromagnetic Propulsion Related to Spaceflight" or something like that.  Just to keep the nutters from thinking that this is a place on the Internet where they can expound on their nutter views.  Otherwise, it's like starting up a section labeled "Space Exploration Hoaxes," with the intent of debunking the nutter conspiracy theories out there, but which actually attracts the nutters who think it's a place to expound on such theories.

I know I'm sort of treading a fine line, here -- but the simple inclusion of discussion of controversial EM drive experiments is what puts the forum on that fine line.  As long as we're going to do that (and I do think that's valid), we need to do something to set the expectation amongst new posters that we're not here for them to show us the dissertation they've written up in their blog and had "debated" on other nutter-friendly websites which, they claim, demonstrate that all prior physics are wrong.  Maybe removing the term "New Physics" would help, since that seems to be the proximate cause of the new attraction.
-Doug  (With my shield, not yet upon it)

Offline DMeader

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 953
  • Liked: 98
  • Likes Given: 47
Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #56 on: 12/18/2015 12:35 PM »
We're getting a new flood of amateur, non-physicists coming in and posting their own refutations to General Relativity, along with pages and pages of cut-and-paste illustrations that would do any second-grader proud.  And that have all of the basis in actual physics and mathematics that you would expect of most second-graders.

Or worse, we're getting people with some physics backgrounds who have gone off into the hinterlands and can't get their theories taken seriously by other members of their field, so they come here, presenting line after line of dense math equations that are meaningless to all but three or four people who read this forum, and then demand that we either accept their theory or tell them why it's wrong -- when, again, the amateurs (and even the professional engineers) on this forum are in no way capable of even following their equations, much less discussing or refuting them.

Agree. In fact, I've come to avoid the entire "Advanced Concepts" section for those very reasons.

Offline NovaSilisko

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1828
  • Liked: 1435
  • Likes Given: 1305
Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #57 on: 01/01/2016 02:46 AM »
Recently I've been wondering if the special forum section for MSL is really still needed. There are only sporadic posts in there on the update thread and they get even rarer as you go to the other threads. Maybe it would be better to just have all the posts there moved into the Space Science forum. Or maybe a reorganization of the robotic spaceflight section in general. "Robotic exploration of the moon" "Robotic exploration of mars" "Robotic exploration of the outer planets", and so on. May be getting too detailed, but just a thought.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
  • UK
  • Liked: 1321
  • Likes Given: 168
Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #58 on: 01/01/2016 08:43 AM »

Recently I've been wondering if the special forum section for MSL is really still needed. There are only sporadic posts in there on the update thread and they get even rarer as you go to the other threads. Maybe it would be better to just have all the posts there moved into the Space Science forum. Or maybe a reorganization of the robotic spaceflight section in general. "Robotic exploration of the moon" "Robotic exploration of mars" "Robotic exploration of the outer planets", and so on. May be getting too detailed, but just a thought.

I second this there is no real reason now to have a separate MSL section with the paucity of updates.

Online Chris Bergin

Re: New Forum Sections
« Reply #59 on: 01/01/2016 12:00 PM »
I think we could move all the Mars robotic threads into there and make it a more general section for those threads?

Tags: