|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Arkena Wyrnspire
Fatal Absolution
16988
   |
Posted - 2014.08.15 16:06:00 -
[1] - Quote
The thing about space is that there's no friction. It all comes down to the raw momentum output of your engines.
Mass wouldn't strictly affect speed - but it would affect acceleration. Unlike on a planet the speed limit is very high - you can just keep accelerating and accelerating. The higher the mass, the harder it'd be to accelerate your ship though, and manouevrability is essentially how fast you can cancel your momentum in one direction and accelerate in another. So manouevrability would be affected, but speed wouldn't be.
You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
'Lucent Echelon' - Gallente FW channel
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Fatal Absolution
17069
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 22:16:00 -
[2] - Quote
Monty Mole Clone wrote:didnt they recently prove the existence of the higs boson and higs field? if so all we need is a higs force field to renders anything inside massless and whamo speed of light baby.
of course you would have to get over the fact that where ever you went, when you came back the dirty apes would be in charge because of relativistic effects and whatnot
This is... not going to happen.
There are a ridiculous number of problems with randomly making things massless.
You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
'Lucent Echelon' - Gallente FW channel
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Fatal Absolution
17262
|
Posted - 2014.08.20 18:18:00 -
[3] - Quote
The most important thing for ship speeds and maneouvrability would be thrust to mass ratio.
It'd be entirely possible for a larger ship to go faster than a smaller ship - if more of it, proportionally, was given over to engines than in the smaller ship.
You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
'Lucent Echelon' - Gallente FW channel
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Fatal Absolution
17264
|
Posted - 2014.08.20 18:53:00 -
[4] - Quote
Well, in some cases in this thread it is rocket science, so... 
Also, my understanding of the term astrophysics was that it tended to be a bit more astronomical in nature than what we've been discussing - it thinks more about the nature of heavenly bodies like stars, black holes, etc rather than the actual motions of these things. Pedantic, probably, but the ideas with momentum, inertia, etc are very much Newtonian physics.
You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
'Lucent Echelon' - Gallente FW channel
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Fatal Absolution
17331
|
Posted - 2014.08.21 22:16:00 -
[5] - Quote
TechMechMeds wrote:
Defo.
Whoever is in control of that when they try, my hat goes off to them.
Is it one person or a few that are controlling it?.
I'm pretty sure it's controlled by computers.
It's an absolutely stunning work of calculation. Calculating the motion of objects being affected by several bodies that are affecting each other is insanely complicated and this level of precision is mind boggling.
Imagine throwing a knife out of a window, having it bounce several times and then perfectly cut a fly in two.
That's less precise than this.
You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
'Lucent Echelon' - Gallente FW channel
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Fatal Absolution
17359
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 20:54:00 -
[6] - Quote
GLOBAL fils'de RAGE wrote:
Inertia is going to stress the structure, and once you are outside of a planets magnetic fields protection you are going to get blasted by cosmic radiation (really nasty particles and radiation) your ship will need substantial physical protection again increasing mass.
A fleck of paint at 45,000 mph is potentially lethal to and astronaut, a pebble at near light speed travel would be a mini nuke.
Yeah, this is why space junk is such a problem. It's ridiculously lethal if you're unlucky enough to hit some. There are some tiny pieces scattered all around orbit and if a piece the size of a fingernail collided with, say, the ISS, it would be as damaging as a grenade.
Quote:
travelling faster than the speed of light would cause you to go back in time.
Well, theoretically, if it could be done.
You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake.
'Lucent Echelon' - Gallente FW channel
|
|
|
| |
|