Aspie eliticism and "Cure NT's"

Post Reply New Topic

A 1 in 10 million chance is such a slim chance that undertaking the project you (Androbot, not Chamomile) are envisioning would be a waste of resources. We have too many actual problems that need real solutions now to waste time, money and brainpower on a problem that has a 1 in 10 million chance in happening.

Last edited by Janissy on 17 Apr 2011, 1:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

We face real problems right now. Using resources to to address something that is very unlikely to happen is a waste. We're running out of energy, food, natural resources, the forests which provide us with oxygen. The polar icecaps are melting. Disease is rampant. These are real probems happening now. And you want to waste money on something with a 1 in 10 million chance of happening.Waste!

This makes no sense to me. It sounds like you are trying to propose actually propelling a rocket with a nuclear power. How would you do that? If you used controlled fission, the mass required to control the reaction is way too high and you still need to carry a huge amount of coolant/propellant to get actual thrust. You might as well just used solid/liquid rocket fuel.

Not to mention, with traditional rockets we can get nukes into a high altitude, non-ballistic orbit. Moving from this parking orbit to anywhere in our solar system doesn't take a large amount of energy, because there is so little drag. We can deliver a nuke to just about anything we can reliably track, it just takes a great deal of time and planning.

Due to the speeds which asteroids can travel, tracking at a long enough range to be able to actually intercept it is a major issue. The deep space network is built to try and do this type of tracking, but i doesn't have sufficient range yet.

They do have some things you could consider "nuclear powered rockets" that use nuclear isotope decay to generate electricity for an electric rocket. Yet they are mainly used for very slow accelerations for deep space missions, were there is little power available from the sun.

Nuclear power is great, controlled fusion will be a necessary part of survival 40+ years from now, but it's not a good rocket power source.

Sorry for the aside,

Last edited by huntedman on 17 Apr 2011, 3:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Clearly, there is no place in your mind for facetiousness.

Even if I accept the humans are made in the image of God, whose God? Yours, no doubt.

How did you go from Aspies having the "powers" to deflect asteroids (brutally suppressed by NTs) to humans with god like abilities. Are you suggesting that Aspies are closer to divinity than other humans?

The rocket would be powered by the explosions of atomic bombs much like lighting a fire cracker under a tin can. The 1960's Orion Project has already demonstrated this fact. Fusion hydrogen bombs would reduce radioactive fallout. Using Helium 3 fuel with laser ignition would produce zero radiatioactive fallout even with uncontained and uncontrolled explosions.

Nuclear fusion is a technology that is practical for today's energy needs and is the magic bullet that solves the problem of global warming. The reason why nuclear fusion technology is always 50 years into the future is attempts are made to control and contain the plasma. However there is no need to contain or control nuclear fusion but rather all that needs to be done is to harness the power of hydrogen bombs. This is called a PACER power plant and operates by the use of peacefull atomic explosions underground. However this technology which is a source of endless clean energy is being brutally suppressed and continued suppression will result in runaway global warming.

And of course neurotypicals are the problem. Neurotypical engineers think of socially acceptable forms of nuclear power like nuclear fusion tokamaks that use magnetic force fields to contain the plasma. The only problem is that it takes more energy to contain the plasma of a nuclear explosion then what energy you can get out of it. Autistics are not bound by social constraints but look to the real logical and pragmatic solutions to a problem and even if their solutions seem totally obscene by social standards they nevertheless work are safe and produce no radiation.

Sorry, androbot2084, I'm done. Your ideas are not in any way that I can see connected to reality. You take individual ideas and construct bizarre scenarios and arcane conspiracies. I guess I am supposed to accept that you have some special knowledge or something. I can't do that.

Andro, I honestly don't know how true or false your latest assertions are. What I do know is that you have a terrible track record of factual accuracy, that your assertions concerning nuclear power can't possibly be completely true or else market forces would've pounced on it*, and the whole thing shows very obvious signs of starting with your conclusion (NTs are the root of all evil) and working backwards to find supporting evidence.

*For example, Japan is already using above-ground nuclear reactors to make up a huge portion of their energy supply because they don't have any other viable options, and the Fukushima disaster hasn't deterred the Japanese government in the slightest. Why on Earth would they be so reluctant to use your hydrogen bomb reactors when they're already so heavily reliant on nuclear energy?

Even though I’m not NT, I would be a supporter of the TOMAMAK designs. The magnetic field they to produce does consume less energy than the reaction produces. They have build reactors demonstrating this, but they still have to shut them down quickly because it doesn't start producing power fast enough to power its own magnetic field and be self sustaining.

I read what i could find about the PACER reactor, although that wasn't much, It's an interesting idea. The shell that they proposed to try and contain the explosion has some intense dimensions, but building an entire power plant with the type of strength necessary to contain a one mega-tonne explosion, then having complete confidence that the structure won't fail, after the first explosion then after the 10,000th.

I don't know, and I don't think its a social thing. its a level of confidence when releasing that much energy, trying to hold that in a pressure vessel, having the steel surface not erode over time, what seems like a large amount of irradiated coolant material that you will have to exchange at some point. Yet I read only such little information, so it's hard to be fair in commenting, but i just don't see how it is failsafe.

Project Orion, having a nuclear explosion behind a rocket, not having the structure fail, adsorbing the impact and controlling direction to move forward, its an ambitious project. They started the process of proving it could be done, and at some point got their funding cut. Wither it could work or not, It just isn't the only or the easiest way to deliver a decent sized payload to an asteroid.

i just think they are ideas proposed somewhere in the government, they get to a certain level of development and just turned out to be unfeasible. The concept starts out simple, yet all the problems you have to solve to make it functional and safe start to add up too quickly.

The idea of a nuclear fusion PACER power plant or an Orion atomic rocket that runs off of clean green radiation free hydrogen and boron fuels is perfectly feasible but requires violating the nuclear test ban treaty. Although the nuclear test ban treaty was a great idea when it was written, a neurotypical environmentalist simply will not allow any exception to this treaty. If the planet burns because of greenhouse gasses the NT environmentalist says so be it "no nukes". If an asteroid slams into Earth killing a billion people then so be it and read my lips "no nukes". An atomic rocket could be used to get rid of our nuclear weapons and nuclear waste but the NT environmentalist still says "no nukes". Meanwhile our obsolete nuclear fission power plants are melting down, blowing up and spewing out radiation but the NT environmentalist still says "no nukes" even though we have perfected radiation free nuclear fusion technology.

Autistic environmentalists like Carl Sagan are much more pragmatic about nuclear power. People like Carl Sagan realize that a nuclear power plant simply cannot be shut down and atomic bombs simply cannot be disassembled but must be properly disposed of in outer space using atomic rocket technology.

Right, because environmentalists have SOO much political clout.

The threat to any program focusing on object collision at this point is strictly monetary, and rightfully so-
policy-makers have decided spending millions on Armageddon-type scenarios is at best whimsical when most governments have been operating in the red for decades and millions in the US are chronically-hungry.

NASA tends to like big budgets, even if it makes their plans impractical
You don't need nukes to stop an asteroid, in fact almost all simulated scenarios show them to be inneffective. Its a lot simpler to just magnify sunlight onto a portion of an asteroids surface, inducing outgassing, and thus created a 'natural' rocket that will redirect it. Wouldn't cost too much to build a big reflective Mylar surface in space,

Please, please, please don't tell me you actually believe

a. Scientists have a suicide and mass genocide wish and
b. neurology is remotely relevant and
c. the only thing stopping nuclear power is NT environmentalists (LOL), as opposed to the immense multi-billion dollar political clout of oil and auto industries

You sound like a tin-foil hat wearer. Correct me if I've misunderstood you.

They're in style, this time of year...

I had a pretty good Illuminati conspiracy close to my heart when I was fifteen. I'm sure I could find some way to convince myself that this is somehow an autistic vs. NT thing.

When your conclusion precedes your reasoning, you got a problem.