Author Topic: 'The Expanse' on SyFy - First trailer for new space opera show  (Read 126792 times)

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
Another episode, another high point of the season.  :)

Without spilling any spoilers, the show has now firmly entered "Act II" of the overall story. (which can be seen as having 3 acts) This makes me even happier that Amazon has picked up the show. They now have a good chance of telling their whole story in 7 seasons. (which is what the show-runners have stated their plan is)

----

BTW, how great is it to see ships braking towards their destination. I know it confuses some, but this show is a fun physics lesson for many. Yeah I know the Expanse has some accuracy issues, but when whole fleets spend two episodes braking towards their destination - and it being depicted so nicely (not to mention the final Rocinante maneuver) - that brings a smile to my face.  8)
« Last Edit: 05/31/2018 07:01 am by Lars-J »

Offline deruch

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2422
  • California
  • Liked: 2006
  • Likes Given: 5634
For anyone still on the fence about reading the books, I highly recommend them. 
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline sanman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5970
  • Liked: 1309
  • Likes Given: 8
Yes, the story has certainly crossed a threshold or inflection point with the new situation.

What is the meaning or significance of that final scene?
I could see several possibilities.

Is there a "spoiler policy" on this or the entertainment threads? Personally I just avoid the thread until I watch the episode and I think it would be really interesting to discuss some of the motivations of the various characters and the proto-molecule.

I think that the meaning of Episode 7's final scene has sort of been answered. But what's the verdict on the latest final scene? Is this some kind of Dave Bowman moment?

Offline Ronpur50

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2117
  • Brandon, FL
  • Liked: 1028
  • Likes Given: 1884
For anyone still on the fence about reading the books, I highly recommend them.

I started a month ago!

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
The Expanse met 2001 tonight, it seems.  8)

Offline intrepidpursuit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Orlando, FL
  • Liked: 561
  • Likes Given: 400
The idea of using steam as propulsion on the ships in the expanse (the Tea Kettles) rather than a cold gas thruster or even a chemical rocket engine is interesting. In their world, they have essentially unlimited access to heat energy from their reactors, so can water being converted to super heated steam have better ISP than even compressed nitrogen, much less a reaction engine? I'm pretty sure the physics of them lifting off of planetary bodies with their steam engines doesn't hold water (I'm sorry) but I can forgive that one as an unimportant detail that doesn't even come up in the first book.

I'm curious about the physics though. Has anyone done any math on their super heated steam engine?

EDIT: Water expanding to steam can have a 1:1600 expansion ratio and steam engines have run with as much as 1500 PSI / 10.34MPa. Nitrogen has a 1:696 expansion ratio. So, it seems that with an unlimited heat source and a way to transfer it to water extremely quickly, it could have better ISP than cold gas thrusters and perhaps even better than a Merlin engine (chamber pressure 1410 psi / 9.7MPa). I'm sure there is more to it than these numbers but that seems like pretty shocking performance potential.
« Last Edit: 06/16/2018 06:49 am by intrepidpursuit »

Offline John-H

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 200
  • Liked: 68
  • Likes Given: 218
If you have "enough" heat energy, a steam rocket can have the same exhaust velocity as a liquid hydrogen fueled rocket - the exhaust is just water, after all.

John

Offline nacnud

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2691
  • Liked: 981
  • Likes Given: 347
It's a very old idea in sci fi, back to the 50s if not before.

Offline Pipcard

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 622
  • Liked: 275
  • Likes Given: 130
I'm starting to read Leviathan Wakes now.

Offline Crispy

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1023
  • London
  • Liked: 783
  • Likes Given: 51
After some slackness in previous episodes, the zero-g was really good in the latest one. Also the proper behaviour of objects floating inside a rotating habitat. Great TV as always :)

Offline su27k

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6414
  • Liked: 9098
  • Likes Given: 885
The idea of using steam as propulsion on the ships in the expanse (the Tea Kettles) rather than a cold gas thruster or even a chemical rocket engine is interesting. In their world, they have essentially unlimited access to heat energy from their reactors, so can water being converted to super heated steam have better ISP than even compressed nitrogen, much less a reaction engine? I'm pretty sure the physics of them lifting off of planetary bodies with their steam engines doesn't hold water (I'm sorry) but I can forgive that one as an unimportant detail that doesn't even come up in the first book.

I'm curious about the physics though. Has anyone done any math on their super heated steam engine?

EDIT: Water expanding to steam can have a 1:1600 expansion ratio and steam engines have run with as much as 1500 PSI / 10.34MPa. Nitrogen has a 1:696 expansion ratio. So, it seems that with an unlimited heat source and a way to transfer it to water extremely quickly, it could have better ISP than cold gas thrusters and perhaps even better than a Merlin engine (chamber pressure 1410 psi / 9.7MPa). I'm sure there is more to it than these numbers but that seems like pretty shocking performance potential.

Isn't this just an electrothermal thruster with water as propellant? I think we already have these, for example: http://deepspaceindustries.com/comet/

Offline Jeff Lerner

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 617
  • Toronto, Canada
  • Liked: 270
  • Likes Given: 240
Just watched last week's episode....don't think what I'm about to ask is a spoiler but if you hsvnt seen the episode stop reading now.


In the sick bay after the sudden stop, the "Preacher" questions one of the medical staff about why they aren't operating on the wounded..she mentions that they have lots of sutures...the medical person then answers by questioning the "Preacher's" zero g experience...he goes on to explain that they can't operate in zero g because blood doesn't settle  and won't allow  surgery to be successful...kind of implied that those njured requiring surgery were likely to die.....or something to that effect...I may not have heard correctly..

My question is, is this right .?...how would a crew on their way to Mars deal with an injured astronaut requiring surgery in zero g?


Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15265
  • Liked: 7773
  • Likes Given: 2
zero g experience...he goes on to explain that they can't operate in zero g because blood doesn't settle  and won't allow  surgery to be successful...kind of implied that those njured requiring surgery were likely to die.....or something to that effect...


He referred to internal bleeding.

But having the Behemoth spin up and offer it as a hospital ship was an interesting twist. Now the Belters are humanitarians saving the lives of their adversaries.

Offline sanman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5970
  • Liked: 1309
  • Likes Given: 8
Related to this, we saw a certain character with a spinal injury feel relief when transitioning from artificial-G environment to zero-G environment. So that made me wonder - would zero-G be an ideal way to put someone into traction if they had an injured back, or femur, or shoulder, etc - in order to remove stress/loads from them?

Offline Pipcard

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 622
  • Liked: 275
  • Likes Given: 130
Amazing season finale, very glad that this did not mark the end of the show.

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15265
  • Liked: 7773
  • Likes Given: 2
Amazing season finale, very glad that this did not mark the end of the show.

It was very good.

It is worth rewatching again simply for how some of the characters changed during the two episodes. Note in particular Amos. His arc is subtle, but it's there. And as we learned in the first season, he recognizes that he has no moral compass, so he tries to follow people who he recognizes do have a moral compass.

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
Great season finale indeed. So happy the show is renewed!  8) This completes book 3, and it makes sense that they hurried to finish it up this season, as it left the show plausible closing point should it have been cancelled. (as it was) But now we get to see the next book(s) adapted which will be cool.

Offline MickQ

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 864
  • Australia.
  • Liked: 185
  • Likes Given: 623
I am currently half way thru book 5.  Man, there is SO much more coming.

I really hope that whoever takes on the task can live up to the standard so far. 

The bar has been set very high.

Offline KelvinZero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4286
  • Liked: 887
  • Likes Given: 201
Im only half way through season two.. Im preferring it to season 1.

One vague criticism. The graphics is very pretty, yet somehow I feel it does not give a feel of the immensity of these objects. I can't put my finger on exactly why. I think I have spotted a combination of things. Camera angles are very close in even when on the surface, few quiet panoramas just to set the scene. Also the pretty initial credits have fast camera movements and Augmented reality graphics around planetary bodies giving the impression of them being contained in an aquarium and the camera looking in from the outside. Wanderers, 2001, 2010 gave much more impression of scale.

(edit: actually about halfway though season 2 I think the "nice expansive scene setting" improved. I had just seen some early scenes set on Ganymede that somehow looked small.. but when the crew returned there were some nice shots.. and come to think of it a world with cryovolcanism that looked like  Enceladus.. not sure which jupiter moon that was meant to be.. come to think of it, a lot of shots looked sort of small, like you could play pinball around the moons without drives. Im sure any trip like that would take days, not hours or even less as depicted. It looked sped up.)

Actually, that would be an interesting way for "fast" travel around the solarsystem without an epstein drive.. what about a "fast drug" that slows you down and makes time pass more quickly? You could even see a sort of "warp effect" where moons rush towards you, then slow down as the drug returns you to normal speed. It would be a bit like you were manipulating inertia.
« Last Edit: 11/14/2018 07:20 am by KelvinZero »

Offline Dalhousie

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2761
  • Liked: 773
  • Likes Given: 1126
.

My question is, is this right .?...how would a crew on their way to Mars deal with an injured astronaut requiring surgery in zero g?

You would avoid those sort of injuries.  Since we have accumulated over 60 crew years in space to date without such injuries or even the need for invasive surgery, I suggest the risk is low
Apologies in advance for any lack of civility - it's unintended

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1