[ 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: 128 KB, 1500x794, img1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7331587 No.7331587 [Reply] [Original]

Why has the hoverboard not been invented yet? It's almost October 21st 2015.

>> No.7331612

But it has

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSheVhmcYLA

>> No.7331613

>>7331587
I'm also waiting on that time machine promised in that early 1900s movie

>> No.7331630

Why hasn't the infinite walkway portrayed in the Jetsons been released yet ?

>> No.7331634

>>7331612
>look guis I can stand on a magnet

>> No.7331637

>>7331634
This.
>>7331612
It's just a fucking magnet on a metal floor. If you're going to only be able to use your hoverboard in a special room you may as well just get a room with a crane and swing yourself around in a harness.

>> No.7331639
File: 154 KB, 1280x500, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7331639

>>7331634
>Look guys I can sit on rubber wheels

>> No.7331643

>>7331613
Time machines are arguably impossible and even if they weren't you would need some seriously advanced and expensive tech to pull it off. A hoverboard is simply a case of making a board fly with a human on it. I have no idea why no-one has managed this yet?

>> No.7331648

We would if we didn't just start working on them. If we started in 1985, we'd probably have some by now.

>> No.7331660

>>7331648
No-one is working on a hoverboard. The Hendo is simply a flashy magnet

>> No.7331663

>>7331660
Something that hovers would be revolutionary for pedestrian transport.

>> No.7331664
File: 87 KB, 575x575, MaleLeg_th002.jpg?1352385264.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7331664

>>7331663

Whats' wrong with legs? I think they're pretty cool.

>> No.7331674

>>7331664
What if the terrain is shit? It would be great for places that have few roads. Boston Dynamics is working on a robotic mule that can carry equipment through rough terrain. Imagine if you could just hover the equipment across the gorge?

>> No.7331681

>>7331664

Being able to hover over everything regardless of terrain would be nice, especially if it can transport more than one person or other things that you may need.

For primitive needs, legs are pretty cool. From an engineering standpoint, there's better things than just squishy tissue and bone.

>> No.7331686

>>7331681
From an engineering standpoint, you want maximum efficiency. Why the fuck would you waste the huge amount of energy needed to produce lift when you can just fucking walk. If the terrain is really that horrible and you need to transport stuff/people a large distance, you can use a plane.

>> No.7331693

>>7331686
>the huge amount of energy needed to produce lift

The minimum power requirement to hover at a constant height is exactly zero.

>> No.7331694

>>7331686

It's not always feasible to use a plane and bringing a car with you is not always the best option. Military would benefit from a hovering craft or even something like a robotic mule like >>7331674 mentioned.

>> No.7331696

>>7331686
Are you a retard? You're a burger invading North Korea, it all went wrong, one guy is shot up pretty bad, LZ is too hot for choppers, you can a) walk back to base over 20 miles worth of mountainous terrain or b) hover your buddy to base high enough to avoid the rocks but low enough to be unseen by the gooks with RPGs. Even if you did fly high, one hovering stretcher is a much smaller target than an entire helicopter.

>> No.7331705

not quite good enough to hoverboard. but i still find this video cool

>> No.7331709

>>7331696
Do you know how loud planes and choppers are? It's not because loud things sound badass, it's because it's necessary for lift. That isn't gonna go away when you scale down the size and it's gonna be an even bigger give away than a chopper picking you up with non of the armor. The robotic mule that DARPA is making is trying to emulate a humans ability to walk on rough terrain with ease. Plus it needs a huge battery, and it's hard to transport unless it's constantly on. Having something hover will take an even bigger battery than the robotic mule, and will be hard to carry unless it's constantly on. Having a light stretcher that you can just turn on and float on is a fantasy, stop kidding yourselfs.

>> No.7331715

>>7331643
If course if you word it that way it sounds simple. For example a time machine simply makes clocks go backwards.

>> No.7331720

>>7331709

See

>>7331693

Something silently hovering and using no energy does not break any rules. See also: blimps

>> No.7331723

>>7331720
You ruled out helicopters because they are too big to safely pick someone up mid firefight, then use a blimp as a counter example?

>> No.7331730

>>7331723

I'm not the anon you were arguing with. It just seems like you had a misconception about physics. It still does, if you think size is the pertinent idea.

>> No.7331732

>>7331709
>It can't be done, it will never work
This is why all /sci/ kids will end up as unknown wageslaves. Doing things by the book, not pushing the boat out, die forgotten.

>> No.7331736

>>7331693
>The minimum power requirement to hover at a constant height is exactly zero.

Can someone elaborate?

>> No.7331742

>>7331736
dw=mgdh
P=dw/dt
dh=0
therefore dw/dt=0
therefore P=0

>> No.7331746

>>7331736
>Can someone elaborate?
Yes:
the guy you reply to thinks there are no barriers to technology other than what he learned in high school physics.

If we could make pure conservative lift, we wouldn't bother with helicopters.

>> No.7331750

>>7331746
>It hasn't been done therefore it can never be done
How did you get into engineering school?

>> No.7331751

>>7331746
Isn't that what we are trying to accomplish though? Some sort of zero point energy?

>> No.7331756

>>7331750
By learning stuff rather than daydreaming about sci-fi movies.

>hurr durr if I can dream it someone will make it
Actually, once you learn a bit about the history of tech, you will find out that what technology does is opening possibilities nobody suspected existed some years ago.
What it rarely does is come up with stuff people expected, like you're expecting your hoverboard right now.

>> No.7331758

>>7331750
>>7331751
You aren't making any contributions to this thread. Go back the the FTL thread with that "anything is possible so it should be made for consumers within my lifetime" shit.

>> No.7331763

>>7331756
>>7331758
We aren't talking about warp speed or teleportation here we are talking about a frickin flying board! How can you all be so narrow-minded?

>> No.7331766

>>7331758
I never stated that anything is possible, I'm just not quick to label things as impossible.

>> No.7331771

SJW cuck.

>> No.7331773

>>7331766
I wasn't quick to label it impossible. I gave many flaws in a hoverboard working in the field. All you've said is "it could be possible because it's not impossible hurt sure"

>> No.7331781

>>7331773
>Loud
wrap it in insulation, noise cancelling devices?
>Needs huge battery
make a better battery? use a petrol engine?

>> No.7331783

>>7331766
You're posting about anti-gravity on a board dedicated to real science. As for craving 80's sci-fi tech, be happy about Nike finally making them self-lacing shoes and just cut your losses man.

>> No.7331787
File: 145 KB, 950x593, hoverboard.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7331787

>>7331587
>implying

>> No.7331790

>>7331783
Last time I checked half the threads on /sci/ were about the Em-Drive which is about as anti-gravity-quack-tier as you get.

>> No.7331792

>>7331781
The noise isn't from the device itself, it's from the air it pushes down in order to lift the itself. There are hoverboards out there, I made one in my elementary school for the science fair. It's basically just a giant loud ass fan with a wooden plank strapped to it. You're right about the battery though, that's why I have so much faith in Tesla to bring tech further into the future.

>> No.7331799

>>7331792
Wahey finally an optimistic, visionary non book-regurgitating engineer in this thread.

>> No.7331815

>>7331773
>I wasn't quick to label it impossible. I gave many flaws in a hoverboard working in the field.

All based on the same misconception about basic physics, namely that power is needed to stay in place. Which, to be clear, it isn't. The chair you are sitting on is not expending energy to support you.

>> No.7331832

>People still think we will get hover boards because they appeared in Back to the Future.

You people don't understand. Marty changed the future. Their shenanigans in the time line improved their own situation, but at the expense of destroying that exciting future for the rest of us.

>> No.7331835

>>7331815
Sure it is. As I place my anus on-top of it it creates internal tension in the chair which heat's up and therefore adds to entropy.

>> No.7331841

>>7331832
This is the Copenhagen interpretation of Back to the Future.

>> No.7331842

>>7331815
Because the chair is exerting a force on the ground. A hoverboard is not. It could create a difference in air pressure like a wing or chopper (which would use energy and be loud as fuck) or a use buoyant force (which is dependant on the shape and volume of the device. Protip--even if you had a complete vaccum in a stretcher sized device it wouldn't exert enough of a buoyant force on the air to keep the weight of a human up). So if you have something else to offer, please feel free. Otherwise shut up.

>> No.7331844

>>7331835
That's you adding energy to the chair once. Not the chair expending energy to keep you up and not even a constant flow of energy which is what power is. Just admit that the hoverboard is totally feasible.

>> No.7331849

>>7331842
You just admitted that a wing or prop could hover a human it would just be loud. How are you gonna trash the entire concept just because it's loud? A car is louder than a horse imagine if Henry Ford thought like you.

>> No.7331871

>>7331849
Can you read?
>which would use energy and be loud as fuck
As I said, I made a hoverboard in elementary school. Search it up on Google, you can make one yourself. It's just a waste of energy and unnecessarily loud compared to other forms of transportation, like this >>7331664. The only application anyone came up with was to use for military use, but I already pointed out all the flaws. Go ahead and name another application, I'll point out the flaws in that too. You know how I know there will be flaws? Because people a lot smarter than have already thought about this. That's why we don't have hoverboards yet, it's just absolutely retarded. Maybe on Venus we will be able to have them.

>> No.7331874
File: 5 KB, 185x253, hboard.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7331874

>hoverboard not been invented yet?

>> No.7331884

>>7331637
Holy shit, if you are going to be picky as fuck, go invent one yourself.

>> No.7331894

>>7331842
>Because the chair is exerting a force on the ground. A hoverboard is not.

Why not?

>It could create a difference in air pressure like a wing or chopper (which would use energy and be loud as fuck) or a use buoyant force (which is dependant on the shape and volume of the device.

You really think those are the only ways to hover, even in theory? Why so insistently unimaginative? If I gave you another example, would you just turn around and say "well just those THREE then?"

>Protip--even if you had a complete vaccum in a stretcher sized device it wouldn't exert enough of a buoyant force on the air to keep the weight of a human up).

Nice goofy strawman.

>So if you have something else to offer, please feel free.

I haven't invented a working hoverboard. Is that the argument you're getting to make? That hoverboards don't exist? Yeah, we all know that. But if you're trying to claim that such a thing is impossible, that's just dumb. "Trains can't exist! The horses would get tired too fast!"

>> No.7331898

>>7331894
Why don't you give us that fantastic conservative hovering method you keep rambling about?
>inb4 magnets

>> No.7331908

>>7331898

So you remembered that magnets exist. Ok, that's a start. Do you think maybe there are other things in the world you don't know about?

>> No.7331909

>>7331894
I'm not making any argument. You're calling me unimaginative, yet you have nothing to counter my real world examples. We already have hover boards. They exist. They are just clunky and loud, which is an engineering problem that would solve a lot more important issues than "muh hoverboard"

>> No.7331915

>>7331894
"Trains can't exist! The horses would get tired too fast!"

Exactly, the solution was finding a more efficient energy source.

With our current energy sources, there's no way to make a hoverboard like the one you want.

We need a powerful reactor (think of something like Iron man's)

Sad news: we don't have one, nor do we know what may work to invent one.

>> No.7331917

>>7331908
Oh so your idea for a hoverboard relies on something we "don't know about"?
I guess that answers OP's question then.

>> No.7331925

>>7331736
If something is not actually moving, no work is being done.

As an example of a hovering technology which can achieve zero-energy lift, here's an experiment you can try at home: First, acquire four neodymium magnets, a hard drive, some liquid nitrogen, a 3/16ths coil, and a cathermin tube with an indinium complex of +4. Using a tank of helium gas, fill a sealed, elastic vessel, then throw everything else away and release your helium balloon. You'll notice it hovers.

>> No.7331926

>>7331915
>"Trains can't exist! The horses would get tired too fast!"
Bubby, again, you should read my post there >>7331756
You're spouting bullshit that's opposite to the truth.
What happened in reality:
>steam engine gets invented
>someone comes up with a way to use it for long distance transportation, thus trains
What you think happened:
>sci-fi readers keep fantasizing about some "trains"
>nasty engineers keep telling them it's not possible
>someone invents the steam engine in order to make trains possible

Your ideas about tech are erroneous.

>> No.7331931

>>7331917

I don't have an idea for a hoverboard. My only point is that the reasons you gave for them being impossible are wrong.

>> No.7331936

>>7331926

The funny thing is, I'm a real live working engineer and you aren't.

>> No.7331942

>>7331926
I said we need a better energy source.

Then the energy source can be implemented into whatever (ex. your hovering dildo)

>> No.7331953

>>7331915
>Exactly, the solution was finding a more efficient energy source.
>With our current energy sources, there's no way to make a hoverboard like the one you want.

The whole point of this discussion is that energy is not the issue.

>> No.7331964

>>7331953
It is. Give it a fuckton of energy and then just let that shit be a scaled down version of a rocket with adjustable intensity so that it stays on its place in the air instead of going up.

>> No.7331984

>>7331763
the expectations for this hoverboard to be useful are literally antigravity

>> No.7331997

OP would you really want faggots floating in the air all around

Could you imagine walking down the street with a soda and then some bitch knocks it out of your hands with his big stupid board

>> No.7332003

>>7331953
Energy IS an issue. See
>>7331842
>It could create a difference in air pressure like a wing or chopper (which would use energy and be loud as fuck) or a use buoyant force (which is dependant on the shape and volume of the device.
And you replied with this:
>>7331894
>You really think those are the only ways to hover, even in theory? Why so insistently unimaginative? If I gave you another example, would you just turn around and say "well just those THREE then?"
The truth is, these two aren't two different ways to hover, they are the same way. They both play off the idea of a difference of pressure. The difference is that a chopper expends energy moving the rotor, while a blimp has the potential energy from moving the lighter gases down and into one place stored. This is the only way to float in a fluid. Don't call me unimaginative, because you literally cannot change direction in a fluid without there being a pressure change, that's just how the world works and how pressure is defined.

>> No.7332039

instead of all the shitposting i'll post an actual idea
why wouldn't this work?
thin wires hang from the base of your craft (or form sort of a semi sphere, if your material is strong enough) that ionize the air molecules attract them. the pressure below your craft is now bigger than above your craft. float away.
i dont really know how electrostatic fluid accelration works

>> No.7332056

>>7332039
it does work, it's weak as fuck though and can't carry its own power supply https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionocraft

>> No.7332071

>>7332056
ah I remember that. I hoped if you have more surface area through using long wires you can ionize more air and it works better

>> No.7332073

>>7331643
It should be so easy to invent a device to shoot people over the internet. And yet, you live.

>> No.7332190

>>7331942
Not going to solve shit, at best you're gonna end up with a mini hovercraft which is very different from your expectations.

>> No.7332205

>>7332056
It's just a very, very weak alternative for a turbine.

>> No.7332208

>>7331936
And how many devices did you wish into existence?

>> No.7332213

>>7332003
>while a blimp has the potential energy from moving the lighter gases down and into one place stored

What the fuck am I reading?

>> No.7332219

>>7332208
BTFO
T
F
O

>> No.7332244

>>7332208
>>7332219
SAMEFAG
A
M
E
F
A
G

>> No.7332250

>>7332213
He was pretty clear. You take some gas that wants be up and bring it down into our altitude. Boom, potential energy. Duh.

>> No.7332258
File: 4 KB, 383x176, K3WY3UW.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7332258

>>7332244
Actually, no. Here's a screencap, though everyone knows that can be edited with paint or through HTML, so I don't know why I bother.

>> No.7333127

>>7331871
>Other people tried before me therefore there is no point in trying
Dude there are flaws in everything, the job of the engineer is not to sit back and call the tech trash it is to iron out those flaws into a viable product.

>> No.7333129

>>7331915
We have the reactor it's just currently not small enough to fit inside of a hoverboard. Things get smaller over time therefore the hoverboard could happen one day. Be positive guys

>> No.7333138

>>7331587
Because you need friction with the ground to control your turns. You would know this if you weren't such a fucking poser faggot, OP.

>> No.7333140

>>7331926
ahahhaha nope, trains were actually thought up before the steam locomotive. Horses were drawing cart trains on rails in English collieries way before the steam loco. But admittedly yes no-one thought of replacing the horse until after the steam engine was invented. A big example however is flight. That was a solid sci-fi fantasy until the Wright Brothers decided to make it a reality just because they were interested in it. They had no practical reason for wanting to fly other than to prove the engineers wrong which they did in spectacular fashion.

>> No.7333145

>>7333138
so how do planes turn?
Retard