[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 16 KB, 250x202, rage.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2568711 No.2568711 [Reply] [Original]

In regards to Mars....

We don't need a massive magnetosphere.

Nuclear propulsion could get us there far faster than conventional means, and we have the the tech for it NOW, as opposed to the VASIMR rockets

The super rockets described in project Orion could carry a fucking shitload, UP TO FUCKING 8 MILLION TONS IN THE "SUPER ORION" DESIGN

THINK OF WHAT KIND OF ADVANCES ON A PLANET YOU COULD MAKE WITH 8 MILLION TONS OF SUPPLIES AND HUMANS

BUT NOOOOOOO

WE CAN'T USE NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN SPACE

EVEN IF THEY'RE FOR THE FUCKING BETTERMENT OF THE HUMAN RACE AS A WHOLE

THIS IS WHY WE CAN'T HAVE NICE THINGS

YES I FUCKING MAD.

YOU KNOW WHY THIS GOT CANCELED? WELL SUPPOSEDLY SOME FUCKING IDIOT THOUGHT IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO SHOW PRESIDENT KENNEDY THE PROJECT AS A MEANS OF AN INTERSTELLAR NUCLEAR WARSHIP

THOSE DENSE MOTHERFUCKERS. WHY DO YOU THINK THAT THE UNITED STATES WHICH PARADES ITSELF AROUND AS A PEACEKEEPER WOULD ACCEPT THAT? SURE THE US ISN'T ALWAYS FUCKING PEACEFUL BUT THEY'RE SURE NOT BUILDING MOTHER FUCKING NUCLEAR WARSHIPS IN SPACE.

PEOPLE ARE FUCKING STUPID.

IF I HAD A DOLLAR FOR EVERY TIME HUMANITY FUCKED UP THE CHANCE TO BE MORE THAN JUST A BUNCH OF SPECKS ON A PALE BLUE DOT, I'D HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO FUCKING DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT MYSELF.

>> No.2568718

Rage... is a gross understatement...

>> No.2568722
File: 33 KB, 200x200, ferengi_highlight.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2568722

Don't make me laugh, Hew-man

>> No.2568734

man if a nuke went off in space it would be s cool

>> No.2568730

>8 million tons
Yeah, you aren't lifting 8 million tons into LEO, much less taking it to Mars.

Grow up, kid. At least do some order-or-magnitude sanity checks before whining.

>> No.2568735

Ok smart stuff.

What power source will be used on Mars?

>> No.2568742

>>2568730
HERE'S YOUR FUCKING ARTICLE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_%28nuclear_propulsion%29

CTRL-F MILLION AND YOU'LL FUCKING FIND IT.

>> No.2568748
File: 33 KB, 171x172, 1279843588422.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2568748

>>2568742
>using wikipedia for exact calculations instead of just a general overview

>> No.2568752

>>2568735
THERE'S THIS THING CALLED SOLAR POWER, EVER HEARD OF IT?

SURE THERE'S DUST STORMS BUT IT'S MORE FUNCTIONAL THAN MOST OTHER SUGGESTIONS

>> No.2568760

>>2568742
3.2 million tons of the 8 million are bombs. 3000 bombs at 1080 tons each. Fucking NUCLEAR bombs.

Really?

>> No.2568768

>>2568760
>>2568730
For comparison, the Saturn V is 3,350 tons.

And to be VERY clear, we're talking total masses, not payload. You're not moving 8 million tons of "supplies and humans", even in the ridiculous "Super Orion" bullshit. OP is either stupid or a troll.

>> No.2568771

>>2568760
That's STILL 4.8 million tons to work with.

That's by no means a small amount.

>> No.2568780

>>2568771
>big numbers are big
So what?
Also, the rest isn't payload weight. We've only accounted for the bombs, in that design.

How the hell does this thing get into orbit, again?

>> No.2568782

AND ALSO, THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO FOR THE SUPER ORION RIGHT AWAY

THEY COULD USE A SMALLER VERSION JUST FOR A NORMAL MANNED MISSION TO MARS, OR EVEN SATURN'S MOONS, WHICH IS WHAT THEY SAW POSSIBLE WITH THE DESIGN.

>> No.2568785

>>2568780
>Assembling a pulse drive spacecraft in orbit by more conventional means and only activating its main drive at a safer distance would be a less destructive approach. The Lofstrom launch loop or a space elevator hypothetically provides an excellent solution, although in the case of the space elevator existing carbon nanotubes composites do not yet have sufficient tensile strength. All chemical rocket designs are extremely inefficient (and expensive) when launching mass into orbit, however could be employed if the result was seen as worth the cost (for example, the alternative being the impact of an asteroid of size similar to that of the Cretaceous-Tertiary extinction event).

>> No.2568790

>>2568785
Oh, so now we're talking about pipedream megaprojects BEFORE the pipedream megamship.

OP was suggesting we should have done this yesterday.

>> No.2568794

fuck that shit.
you want to use nuclear weapons?
nuke mars into a lower orbit, shit gets warmer gets a magnetosphere and bam.
we can colonize it.

to far away?
nuke it closer to earth.

>> No.2568799

>>2568794
>nuke mars into a lower orbit

You and OP fail SO FUCKING HARD at order-of-magnitude estimation. Yes, I mad.

>> No.2568802
File: 60 KB, 318x470, 1296055504084.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2568802

We don't need nuclear/nuclear electric rockets to get us to Mars.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Direct

>> No.2568803
File: 28 KB, 390x310, 1295678426663.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2568803

>>2568794
>nuke mars into a lower orbit, shit gets warmer gets a magnetosphere

>> No.2568811

Guys, OP's idea of a mega-ship is pretty ridiculous, but Orion used with smaller ships merely to visit other worlds is not that out-of-this-world.

Multiple small missions would be far more productive than one mega-mission, less costly, and safer.

>> No.2568815
File: 205 KB, 1024x768, 1287240161476.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2568815

>>2568811
Look, someone reasonable! Get him!

>> No.2568836

>>2568811
according to the description in this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5IviadEChM&feature=related

A mars trip would take four weeks total.

A Saturn trip? 7 months.

Imagine what today's technology could reduce the times to.

>> No.2568845

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhOtK3hr3Xo&feature=related

Fucking Russians.

Now they're gonna get to Mars first, all because we (U.S.) were being retarded and canceled it.

>> No.2568857

>NUCLEAR WARSHIPS IN SPACE.
FUND IT!

>> No.2568862

>>2568845
There's no booze on Mars. They won't actually go.

>> No.2568865

We need small-ish (hot) nuclear fusion reactors before we can do any kind of serious space travel, which is certainly coming within the next few centuries. (By the way, everyone's worrying about what energy we're going to use in the distant future when coal runs out--it's nuclear fusion obviously since it's the only choice!)

But space travel that would reach any extraterrestrial life is impossible by the laws of physics. Unless scientists can make infinite improbability drive*, we cannot traverse vast interstellar distances without either taking too long or using more energy than a spaceship can contain.

But why do future missions have to be manned? We're not putting flags on surfaces of planets to wave our dicks at enemy nations (besides, machines can plant flags anyway).

Either small scale nuclear fusion OR teleportation.

But it's obviously impossible. Assuming the almost self-evident notion that there exists intelligent life elsewhere that should have been capable of making rockets, wouldn't they have traveled to our corner of the galaxy. Wouldn't Hubble have seen the ship?

Or are they even using ships? Maybe they're using something else that our hominid minds are too retarded to think of!

>> No.2568879

>>2568865
>But space travel that would reach any extraterrestrial life is impossible by the laws of physics.

Depends on what kind of life you're talking about.

>> No.2568882

project longshot is better.

possible trips to Alpha Centauri B in 100 years

4.5% the speed of light

We'll get to mars.

Sooner and quicker than you think.


So Mars would be a piece of cake.

>> No.2568890

>>2568815
what the fuck is that in your picture

>> No.2568899

>>2568890
A Moray Eel.

>> No.2568905

>>2568879

if we find any alien life we should nuke it closer to earth.
that way we can be neighbors.

>> No.2568918

>>2568905
Andromeda's going to collide with the Milky Way in a few billion years. We should nuke it away.

>> No.2568920

>>2568879
Nobody gives a shit about bacteria or the methanogens hypothesized to be in Mars.

>> No.2568922

HOW DO WE GET TO GLIESE?

WELL DUH, WE NUKE IT CLOSER!

>> No.2568933

>>2568918

dude, we should nuke a different galaxy to collide with us at the same time.

threesome action!

>> No.2568935

>>2568920
I do. Fuck your shit.

>> No.2568939

>>2568918
The moon is bright and hurts my eyes at night.

We should nuke it away.

>> No.2568954

Guys... you know how global warming is such a big problem?

Well, I have a solution...

So, we take the sun, and we nuke it farther away

>> No.2568959

>>2568939

you are being stupid.
the sun doesn't have any light of it's own it's all reflected from the sun.
nuke the sun.

>> No.2568962

>>2568954
>>2568959

fuck ye, two birds, one nuke.

>> No.2568964

>>2568959
>the sun doesn't have any light of it's own it's all reflected from the sun.

MY BRAIN HURTS

>> No.2568973

>>2568964

nuke your brain.

>> No.2568976

So, you know those UV rays people are so worried about?

Yeah, well we should just nuke them away.

>> No.2568982

how does it make it into space in the first place with out nuking where ever it is launched from?

>> No.2568988

>>2568982

i fail to see the problem here.

>> No.2569002

>>2568982
a normal Orion rocket could easily be launched with conventional rockets, then have them detached once at a safe distance from earth, and then use the propulsion.

The super orion would most likely have to be constructed in orbit over a long period of time, if it's even practical to make one in the first place.

>> No.2569007

>>2568982
It doesn't, if it uses its primary engine.

>> No.2569019

>>2569002
It's not practical at all. That's part of the fun.

>> No.2569023
File: 135 KB, 343x604, Push-it-somewhere-else-Patrick.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2569023

SO

WE TAKE BIKINI BOTTOM

AND WE NUKE IT SOMEWHERE ELSE

>> No.2569033

>>2569002
>mfw I want to go on gmod spacebuild, create an interplanetary biodome, land it on another planet and gradually terraform it

>> No.2569041

>>2569033
>I have no face

>> No.2569049

Hey guys

you know how people don't like all the nukes on the planet?

We should nuke them away.

>> No.2569053

>>2568711
it makes sense for people to be afraid of having nukes in space

>> No.2569059

>>2569053
Those fears can't be justified when the rocket has no means of firing nuclear missiles down to earth.

>> No.2569062

>>2569033

okay okay, fuck orion, we choose a place we want to go to right?

and we nuke the entire fucking solar system there.
the sun, the earth, the fucking moon, we just nuke ourselves over and then you can just nuke any part of earth you want into the new planet.

>> No.2569076

>>2569062
so.. we destroy ourselves, thus creating multiple planets, therefore propagating our species to other worlds?

BRILLIANT!

>> No.2569082

>>2569053

>it makes sense for people to be afraid of having nukes in space

dude, shooting nukes from space isn't any more deadly then doing so from earth

besides it's not like anyone is ever going to nuke someone from space...

so about the solar system relocation program...
anybody got any extra nukes?

>> No.2569084

>>2569059
but if it fucks up and crashes

>> No.2569090

>>2569059
The rocket itself is fucking full of nuclear weapons. All it has to do is drop them.

Hell, it could drop itself. But this is a problem with basically anything in orbit.

>> No.2569091
File: 9 KB, 215x169, alpaca3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2569091

>>2569082

>besides it's not like anyone is ever going to nuke someone from space...

mfw

>> No.2569096

>>2569084
Nuclear bombs don't explode on impact.

It's not a video game here. It's much more complex than gunpowder.

>> No.2569103

>>2569096
and by on impact, I mean by collision force alone.

It would only fuck up the bomb, no nuclear boom-boom.

>> No.2569104

>>2569096

we shall nuke complexity.

>> No.2569115

>>2569090
So your idea is...

NASA is going to make a rocket, send it up into space, and then for NO REASON, drop nuclear bombs on Earth from space?

>> No.2569127

>>2569096
I'm well aware of that. Allow me to clarify.

All it has to do is drop them, then set them off at the appropriate altitude.

>> No.2569129
File: 91 KB, 610x600, nasaisincompatent.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2569129

>>2569115

dude, it's nasa.
they fuck up a lot.

>> No.2569132

>>2569090
>Men, prepare for the drop
>Umm... drop?
>Why of course, we're going to drop ourselves on Russia and fuck their shit!
>Sir... we're in orbit. We can't "Drop"
>...Fuck.

>> No.2569135

>>2569115
well it'd be pretty cool to watch from space, aside from the fact you will be watching everyone you know die

>> No.2569152

VASIMR rockets, though slower, are what we will most likely use, as they're not nuclear weapons.

They will use nuclear power, yes, but no explosions.

Now, if we had a nuclear propulsion rocket and a VASIMR rocket in one....

>> No.2569155

>>2569115
No, goddammit.

>it makes sense for people to be afraid of having nukes in space
>Those fears can't be justified when the rocket has no means of firing nuclear missiles down to earth.
>The rocket itself is fucking full of nuclear weapons. All it has to do is drop them.

It's about what COULD happen. Not what's probable. People are irrational, right?

>> No.2569167

>>2569132
You're being intentionally dense just to be funny. It's working.

>> No.2569196

hey guys

what if we nuked the international space station into mars orbit

>> No.2569209

>>2569196

we have an international space stations?
well... fuck.
i guess we can nuke it.
would seem like a waste though...

fuck it, lets just nuke mars into it's orbit.

>> No.2569252

>>2569127
No, you don't have to set it off.

Just drop it, the impact will be enough to fuck shit up.

>> No.2569253

>>2569209
I laughed

I'm imagining an onion news episode now
>Today NASA announced that they had successfully nuked Mars into the orbit of the International Space Station. The Red Planet can bee seen by all humans now, in great detail. When asked to elaborate how they accomplished such a feat, all NASA executive Bobby Bobson could say was "Very carefully" In other news, NASA cancels yet another plan for a trip to Mars

>> No.2569255

>We don't need a massive magnetosphere.

GTFO

>> No.2569285

>>2569255
true fax

A small spacecraft only needs a few hundred meters diameter magnetosphere, it was in some article I found a few days ago, though I can't find it now.

>> No.2571892

>>2568845
Any they'll accomplish nothing because Mars is even more useless to us than the fucking Moon.

>> No.2571900
File: 17 KB, 252x252, 1286605916598.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2571900

>>2571892

>> No.2571904

>>2571900
We don't even know if there is anything to use for fuel on Mars, as far as space exploration goes it could very well be a dead end.

>> No.2571916

>>2571904
>if all ice was melted on Mars it could cover it to a depth of 11 meters
>ice is hydrogen and oxygen
>Mars receives roughly half the sunlight that Earth does
>it has geothermal energy
HOW ABOUT I TERRAFORM YOUR SHIT

>> No.2571922
File: 16 KB, 300x403, 1274182071888.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2571922

>>mfw they realise mars contains billions of tons of 'rare-earth' materials and the race starts.

>> No.2571924

>>2568735

Uranium

>> No.2571946

>>2571916
>it has geothermal energy

Oh please, we can't even use that here on Earth if you believe 3/4 of the experts.

>> No.2571951

>>2571946
>Oh please, we can't even use that here on Earth if you believe 3/4 of the experts.
[citation needed]

>> No.2571962

Why don't we just nuke ourselves to mars?

Like with you know jetpacks?

Except they'd be nukes.

>> No.2571977

>>2571962
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_%28nuclear_propulsion%29

>> No.2571993
File: 14 KB, 482x477, 215.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2571993

>>2571922

>mfw when people think "rare earth minerals" has anything to do with scarcity.

>> No.2572055
File: 27 KB, 450x320, 65468451587.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2572055

mars is a world of wonders

>> No.2572068

>>2568711
>IF I HAD A DOLLAR FOR EVERY TIME HUMANITY FUCKED UP THE CHANCE TO BE MORE THAN JUST A BUNCH OF SPECKS ON A PALE BLUE DOT, I'D HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO FUCKING DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT MYSELF.
LOL 10/10 post nigga

>> No.2572706

OP mad as hell

but I'm pretty pissed it got canceled too

>> No.2572709

>>2572055
Actually, no, Mars is really fucking boring.

>> No.2572739

I'm getting really tired of people with no knowledge of space travel and all of its complexities (Politics, economics, orbital mechanics, chemistry, etc.) who read entry-level scientific literature yet think they can run a space program.

Stop this.

>> No.2572752

>>2572709
Don't tell me you wouldn't go to mars if you had a chance to

>> No.2572763

>>2572752
Sure. For a day or two. A month tops.

>> No.2572775

>>2571993
>>2571993

Diamonds, diamonds everywhere.

>> No.2572783
File: 28 KB, 404x267, 1291780493380.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2572783

>>2572775
>mfw you think diamonds are actually valuable
OH LOL
You don't know much about De Beers, do you?

>> No.2572823

>>2572783
wat has beer got to with diamonds?

>> No.2572828

>>2572823
>implying diamonds are not made out of compressed beer

>> No.2572842

>>2572783 exceptional material properties
>>2572783 u trollin me

>> No.2572876
File: 23 KB, 640x480, vlcsnap-2011-02-05-02h25m10s253.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2572876

>>2568794
>nuke mars into a lower orbit, shit gets warmer gets a magnetosphere

>> No.2572882

Ok, cut the guy some slack. How much progress do you think we could have made if the government had directed some of the last 2 trillion dollars it spent toward NASA. I really don't know, but i am willing to guess quite a bit. Nuclear propulsion, on the other hand, probably wouldn't be the primary mode of transportation.

>> No.2572899

>>2572842
The market price of diamonds is vastly and artificially inflated from what would be expected given the practical uses and the available supply of natural diamonds.