Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10 Next
2
ISS Section / Re: Schedule of ISS flight events (part 2) [Updates Only]
« Last post by Salo on Today at 12:46 am »
https://x.com/cbs_spacenews/status/1791568629864988707
Quote
William Harwood @cbs_spacenews
A5/Starliner CFT: It's official; NASA says launch of Boeing's hard-luck Starliner crew ferry ship atop a ULA Atlas 5 rocket has been retargeted for May 25 at 3:09pm EDT (1909 UTC), four days later than had been planned to allow more time for ongoing analysis of a small-but-persistent helium leak in the spacecraft's propulsion pressurization system
3
Other US Launchers / Re: US Launch Schedule
« Last post by Salo on Today at 12:45 am »
https://x.com/cbs_spacenews/status/1791568629864988707
Quote
William Harwood @cbs_spacenews
A5/Starliner CFT: It's official; NASA says launch of Boeing's hard-luck Starliner crew ferry ship atop a ULA Atlas 5 rocket has been retargeted for May 25 at 3:09pm EDT (1909 UTC), four days later than had been planned to allow more time for ongoing analysis of a small-but-persistent helium leak in the spacecraft's propulsion pressurization system
4
Other US Launchers / Re: US Launch Schedule
« Last post by Salo on Today at 12:43 am »
https://x.com/planet4589/status/1791627825713201643
Quote
Jonathan McDowell @planet4589
LAUNCH at 0032 May 18 of Starlink Group 6-59 (23 satellites) from Canaveral pad 40.
5
meekGee, I realise that you don't think an exponential model the right one. You've explained your reasoning repeatedly, in this and other threads.

Could you just accept that not everyone agrees with you, and ignore posts that refer to that model (or use that word)?
I'm not the one that restarted it...
7
I'm arguing that more locations with less cargo at each is better.

This is exploration, not city building.
A permanent outpost that houses a handful of people at most in the foreseeable future is not exactly building a city. 

Look what it takes to maintain ISS.  Thats "a handful of people".

This certainly qualifies it as a city, in my opinion.  It has people, permanent facilities and infrastructure.


Here is  the problem. Apollo was built for an extremely short stay(no more than 3 days) with an extremely small crew(two) traveling to LLO within a few a few hours and with landing sites only around the equator of the moon. Repeating this forever will never advance space travel. Humanity needs to be able to do more in space, stay longer and do so with less cost.

The current program demands landers that do more of that.(and perhaps we can commercialize the getting to the gateway part to reduce costs).

More time on surface equals more massive power supplies(need solar and battery), more food clothes, equipment and water and thus you are going to need landers able to do this.

8
Historical Spaceflight / Re: MOL discussion
« Last post by Blackstar on Today at 12:12 am »
Fun with acronyms:

MODS Military Orbital Development Station
SLOMAR Satellite Logistics Operations Maintenance and Repair
MTSS Military Test Space Station
SMART Satellite Maintenance and Repair Techniques
MORL Manned Orbiting Research Lab
MSS Manned Strategic Station
MOSA Manned Orbiting Stations and Alternatives

10
Matter and antimatter are positive energy in a sense because they are both missing energy from the quantum vacuum.  When ever you create matter using energy from the quantum vacuum you create equal amounts of matter and anti matter.  So where is all the antimatter in the universe is a big mystery because when ever we create it equal amounts appear.  I'm not going to focus on why just that equal amounts are created when creating matter/antimatter normally. 
They are not "missing from the quantum vacuum" that phase is nonsense. These words have meaning, and the meaning has nothing to do with the assertions you assign to them.

Once you know this you know where ever matter exists anti matter is missing.  The location of the matter is missing anti matter.  Now imagine the missing energy.  There is a quantum well there.  A Fourier sum of all the frequencies that approximate that well dont sum perfectly and so the well gets deeper as it approaches the matter. 
This is simply false. Anti-matter isn't any more missing where matter is, than from a pure vacuum with no matter in it. Nothing is missing in either case, anti-matter is simply just not there.

In my opinion this is a well of missing energy or low potential.  Gravity is a low potential.  The nucleous of matter polarizes the quantum vacuum. The concentrated electric field makes electron positron pairs appear and disapear more vigorously.  Where we get our electeon clouds from.  Not actually an orbiting electron, becomes a nonunique electron falling in. 

So you already have a matter, antimatter soup which I believe is space time in my opinion.  Some may disagree.
This isn't an opinion from you, it is a factually wrong statement. The parts of this that are not wrong are literal gibberish where you are just putting random words together while ignoring what they mean. There are mathematically rigorous things that particle physicists calculate. You are ignoring all of that to assert nonsense that contradicts reality.

So your positive energy of matter exhibits itself as negative energy in the quantum vacuum or space time.  Time slows down, coordinate speed of light slows down, length decreases. 
It does not. There is no negative energy involved at all.

So your negative energy is the opposite of matter.  Your negative energy to make an Alcubierre drive  is positive energy in space time or the quantum vacuum.  A soliton wave of positive energy in space time/quantum vacuum would speed up the coordinate speed of light, time and increase length. Startrek ship elongating. Edit: actually this just counteracts the tendency of time to slow down with relativistic effects for fast moving objects.  No more age differences or twin paradox when properly engineered.
Your edit here shows just how divorced all of your statements are from reality. The so-called "twin paradox" is not actually a paradox or something to solve or make go away. It is a fact that one "twin" undergoes accelerations, and the other does not, so the one that undergoes acceleration is younger when he returns to his sibling. Experiments on relativity have been performed confirming that these things work as expected. By predicting these effects to disappear you are saying your claims do not match reality.

We already transfer energy between matter and space time.  Ligo and Virgo do it to detect gravity waves.  The light changes in frequency causing phase shifts.  You couldn't detect a gravity wave if there were no energy exchange.  The black holes wouldn't lose energy when they merge  if they didn't give up energy to space time.

The energy requirements can be significantly reduced by efficiently transferring energy to space time but as it is they don't really know how ... yet.  I bet I have an idea though, we probably have bigger issues on our hands than manipulating space time these days.
The energy requirements can't be changed, energy/momentum ratio for massless particles, whether light or gravitational waves is equal to the speed of light. Negative energy if it existed would have many more practical applications than trying to get enough of it to build an Alcubierre drive, the things it would enable are nearly paradoxical, so certainly not something we should expect to exist in reality.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10 Next
Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0