| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Maken Tosch
DUST University
Ivy League
9107
   |
Posted - 2014.08.21 18:44:00 -
[31] - Quote
I'll leave this right here. Take your time.
On Twitter: @HilmarVeigar #greenlightlegion #dust514 players are waiting.
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Fatal Absolution
17331
|
Posted - 2014.08.21 22:16:00 -
[32] - 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
|
TechMechMeds
Level 5 Forum Warrior
5274
|
Posted - 2014.08.21 22:21:00 -
[33] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: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.
Damn, mind blown.
"Oh, look!,
There's, uh, two women f ing a polar bear".
"Don't tell me those things".
|
Bayeth Mal
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
1231
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 07:22:00 -
[34] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:
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.
I had the same thought, but didn't want to get stuck in the details. Yeah, it's kinda crazy how complicated what we're discussing is but it doesn't use any math more complicated than what we had in the 17th century.
Where as full blown astrophysics uses a lot of more recent developments, Relativity and all that.
We'll bang, OK?
|
GLOBAL fils'de RAGE
Consolidated Dust
17
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 18:59:00 -
[35] - Quote
TechMechMeds wrote:I know a fair amount.
I was wondering though, The massive ships we see in all sci fi would surely be the quickest ships because they have bigger engines right?.
Or would their mass affect their speed and manoeuvrability?.
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.
travelling faster than the speed of light would cause you to go back in time.
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Fatal Absolution
17359
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 20:54:00 -
[36] - 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
|
GLOBAL fils'de RAGE
Consolidated Dust
18
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:37:00 -
[37] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: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.
Apollo 13 rentry?
|
GLOBAL fils'de RAGE
Consolidated Dust
18
|
Posted - 2014.08.28 02:41:00 -
[38] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: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.
theory? Damn your physic's and break the bonds of Photon's-we'll just gloss over power consumption needs for now.
Photons and Gravity both described, but still not explained!
|
Killar-12
The Corporate Raiders
Top Men.
3286
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 06:34:00 -
[39] - Quote
Immortal John Ripper wrote:TechMechMeds wrote:I know a fair amount.
I was wondering though, The massive ships we see in all sci fi would surely be the quickest ships because they have bigger engines right?.
Or would their mass affect their speed and manoeuvrability?. Only Georgi LaForge can make a massive ship the quickest. With some help with that albino and wesley crusher...
http://votekhanpaul2008.ytmnd.com/
http://evil-guide.tripod.com/
|
Bayeth Mal
Opus Arcana
Covert Intervention
1432
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 10:28:00 -
[40] - Quote
GLOBAL fils'de RAGE wrote: a pebble at near light speed travel would be a mini nuke.
Depends on your definition of near light speed. 95% of light speed and "mini nuke" doesn't quite do it justice.
I'd have to check the math but it might be more than the entire worlds nuclear arsenal.
Google "XKCD What If" for a bunch of physics answers for random questions like this.
We'll bang, OK?
|
|
|
Bayeth Mal
Opus Arcana
Covert Intervention
1432
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 10:44:00 -
[41] - Quote
Also I forgot to mention for the OP.
It depends on your definition of "quickest."
Lets say you have two ships that weigh the same. One has a fuel burning engine that produces 10,000 pounds of thrust and has 200 seconds of fuel. And the other has a highly efficient ion engine producing 50 pounds of thrust but can keep going for 48 hours.
1st one can change course quickly etc, the other can attain a higher top speed and can produce more thrust over all.
We'll bang, OK?
|
TechMechMeds
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
5525
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 13:23:00 -
[42] - Quote
Bayeth Mal wrote:Also I forgot to mention for the OP.
It depends on your definition of "quickest."
Lets say you have two ships that weigh the same. One has a fuel burning engine that produces 10,000 pounds of thrust and has 200 seconds of fuel. And the other has a highly efficient ion engine producing 50 pounds of thrust but can keep going for 48 hours.
1st one can change course quickly etc, the other can attain a higher top speed and can produce more thrust over all.
An ion drive takes ages to speed up though doesn't it?.
So the question would really be, for how long would the thrust engine maintain a higher speed than the ion drive.
Right?.
Iv been digging and I actually understand it now although I wouldn't be able to explain it in depth, nor can I be bothered right now even if I could lol.
My hometown beat Manchester united.
Git gud man utd.
4-0
|
TechMechMeds
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
5525
|
Posted - 2014.09.09 13:30:00 -
[43] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: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.
Wouldn't you have to be certain of where you are going in space at the speed of light to ensure that you go back in time?.
How do we even know which direction is going back in time if it is all relative?.
We look at the early universe as going back in time, how do we know that it is not us who are in the older part of the universe for sure, gazing out to the fresh beginning s of our universe and we are in fact in the past!
What if the cake was a lie man!.
PS. Half of that is jokes.
My hometown beat Manchester united.
Git gud man utd.
4-0
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |