Page 7 of 7 [ 103 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Borg_I2
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 22 Aug 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 4

23 Aug 2011, 8:30 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Wow, tag teaming, so reminiscent of the earlier usage of the NathanA and other accounts. Well, at least for now ye aren't using pictures of me and my wife.


Our sattelites are transmitting your information to us.

You will be assimilated.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

23 Aug 2011, 9:38 am

simon_says wrote:
ISS won't sink until at least 2020 and possibly as long as 2028. That's a stable market for the development of commercial space.

.


Yes and most of it is unmanned stuff.

ruveyn



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

23 Aug 2011, 9:40 am

androbot2084 wrote:
Arthur C. Clarke said that until we have nuclear propulsion the space age hasn't even begun.


Yoda says "do not your breath hold until nuclear propulsion have we, else blue turn you will"

ruveyn



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

23 Aug 2011, 9:44 am

androbot2084 wrote:
Nuclear Pulse Propulsion can harness fusion energy with today's existing technology and is practical for even interstellar expeditions. Also a nuclear pulse PACER power plant can harness fusion power with today's technology.


So why hasn't it?

ruveyn



androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

23 Aug 2011, 10:47 am

Nuclear Pulse Propulsion violates the nuclear test ban treaty.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

23 Aug 2011, 10:50 am

androbot2084 wrote:
Nuclear Pulse Propulsion violates the nuclear test ban treaty.


The technology does not exist. It is exists only in theory and prototype. And it is done with fission bombs not fusion bombs which is why it is banned. Too much radiation is spewed out. The only place where an A-bomb propelled space ship is practical is in orbit. It has to built in orbit with pieces lifted up by conventional chemical rockets or high power cannons.

Except for sunlight and its derivatives fusion power is nowhere in sight.

ruveyn



androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

23 Aug 2011, 11:26 am

The biggest objection to Nuclear Pulse Propulsion was that the atomic explosion would blow up the ship. However a model rocket was built and propelled using conventional explosives and this proved that the ship would not blow up. After seeing the movie footage many of the NASA scientists including Werner Von Brahn became instant believers.

As far as fission versus fusion yes the interplanetary nuclear pulse propulsion rocket would have used fission bombs. But the rocket was scaled up so that interstellar travel would be possible. The intersteller version contained 300,000 hydrogen bombs with the explosive fire power of 300 billion tons of TNT. It could travel at 60 million miles per hour and could reach the nearest star in 50 years. Price tag was only 1.5 Trillion dollars which is cheaper than the war in Iraq and a small price to pay to get rid of the worlds nuclear arsenal.