/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.9918546]

We can conceptualize a realistic way of creating just about every feature in the Iron Man armor suits at this very moment, and even more impressive features.

ITT you attempt to prove me wrong. Assume the resources expended to create the armor aren't a problem.

[Anonymous No.9918550]

>>9918546
Shoulders and hips are ball joints.

[Anonymous No.9918560]

>>9918550
You could easily create a suit of armor with sufficient degrees of freedom to support advanced motion though. The picture is just for decoration.

[Anonymous No.9918566]

Why bother with Iron Man suits if we already have LRon Man E-meters?

[Anonymous No.9918573]

>>9918560
At that point it would be so unwieldy as to be idiotic and a person might as well just pilot a mech. And at that point you might as well just make a waldo instead.
You're a little brain soft scifi faggot, I'm a big brain hard scifi autist. You can't win.

[Anonymous No.9918593]

>>9918573
Not necessarily, we can envision advances in materials technology to be able to construct a human sized suit.

Also the point isn't what would be most worthwhile or not and at no point in my OP did I imply it wouldn't be more worthwhile to do X, you shouldn't conflate inability to comprehend logical statements with autism.

[Anonymous No.9918599]

>>9918546
The latest model uses nothing but nanobots and looks a bit like a pixilated T-1000 from Terminator 2 when it morphs into new things. It is also super thin.

[Anonymous No.9918600]

>>9918593
>we can envision advances in materials technology to be able to construct a human sized suit.
Too bad geometry say you can't. It's not an issue of material properties.

>you shouldn't conflate inability to comprehend logical statements with autism.
I didn't.

[Anonymous No.9918603]

>>9918546
>conceptualize
>envision

Sci-fi until you have a working model

[Anonymous No.9918622]

>>9918600
>Too bad geometry say you can't. It's not an issue of material properties.
You can envision a suit with thousands of tiny super strong actuators and other motion enabling components though

>>9918603
Sure, the point here is that some sci-fi feats contradict known physics and we will never be able to achieve them, but it isn't the case with this suit.

[Anonymous No.9918623]

inertia

[Anonymous No.9918637]

>>9918622
>You can envision a suit with thousands of tiny super strong actuators and other motion enabling components though
We're not blue whales. There just aren't enough atoms available at the scale where that would be viable.

[Anonymous No.9918638]

>>9918623
I'm not saying the suit has to operate under the explanations given by the authors. The arc reactor and repulsor technology is physically unsound, but we have other ways of achieving equivalent feats

[Anonymous No.9918642]

>>9918622
>but it isn't the case with this suit.

It is the very case.

>>9918638
>but we have other ways of achieving equivalent feats

Not without changing the form factor.

[Anonymous No.9918646]

>>9918637
That doesn't make any sense. We can even envision an organically generated artificial locomotion system that will create something akin to muscles and interfaces it with some advanced materials.

[Anonymous No.9918651]

>>9918642
>It is the very case.

Substantiate that claim then.

>Not without changing the form factor.

There is no need to do that with sufficiently advanced technology.

[Anonymous No.9918658]

>>9918646
Your skin wrinkles to allow to for it to move. Any level of thickeness of a biocompatible anything that would constitute armor and not just paint would be too thick to move like you do.
Give up on your pipe dream, it is physically impossible.

[Anonymous No.9918664]

>>9918651
>There is no need to do that with sufficiently advanced technology.
>if we have enough technology we can connect four non-planar points with a single straight line
See how that is a retarded statement? Your statement is retarded for the exact same reason.

[Anonymous No.9918667]

Power consumption. Good luck running it for more than 20 minutes

[Anonymous No.9918668]

>>9918651
>Sufficiently advanced technology.

You need to stop watching sci-fi.

[Anonymous No.9918670]

>>9918599
I was quite surprised by the "transformations in Tony's suit" such as the piston arms and legs that joined to make a more powerful booster

[Anonymous No.9918671]

>>9918658
There is no fundamental impediment in creating something that both assists you in moving with sufficient degrees of freedom, significantly enhances your strength and protects you against small arms fire and acceleration based damage (you can envision the human is actually in an amniotic fluid-like environment within the armor, which will probably enable him to resist being shot out of a cannon)

[Anonymous No.9918679]

>>9918664
Substantiate that analogy then.

>>9918667
A frozen antimatter core which has been bombarded by electrons in order to have a charge, suspended in a vacuum, runoff particles can be used for energy, or any more exotic variation on this, perhaps multiple small cores, perhaps this system on an artificial cellular level.

A critical hit on the armor would definitely have a different result than on Tony Stark's armor though, but that's just physics.

[Anonymous No.9918699]

Major flaws of Iron Man suit:

1: Form factor is too small.

No other flaws need to be listed. Pretend for a moment you could make a suit like that. The first problem is heat. The amount of power required, to perform similarly, also generates a great amount of waste heat. The person inside the suit would more than likely expire from heat exhaustion. If you were to use a cooling system, the system itself would take up the bulk of the suit's form factor space leaving no room for a powered exoskeleton. Speaking of power, there's no substance in existence, that could fit into the suit, which could have enough power density to power the suit; not even nuclear power. There's also a problem with material thicknesses. The armor is bullet proof yet contains all these systems and more. The thickness of the armor would be extremely thin. There's no material that can be that thin and still withstand multiple bullet strikes without failing easily.

The only Iron Man suit that has the possibility to work is the Hulkbuster Mark XLIV, specifically because the form factor size might have enough room to actually fit everything inside and still retain armor thick enough. However, it will still have a problem with power source power density.

There's a laundry list of other problems, but there's no need to go into those, if the OP is being a retarded little popsci child who wants fantasy instead of science from the science board.

[Anonymous No.9918701]

>>9918679
>Substantiate that analogy then.
There are literal physical limitations in this universe. Technology does not let you bypass them.

[Anonymous No.9918704]

>>9918546
OP is a shill for the company who makes those movies. He and his coworkers post on various social media websites in order to stir up interest in their client's products.

[Anonymous No.9918707]

>>9918546
>>9918550
>>9918699
/thread

[Anonymous No.9918738]

>>9918701
You have not demonstrated you cannot perform the feats of the suit of armor, i.e. you have not demonstrated the feats would constitute breaches of said physical limitations.

I'm done replying to your shitposts.

>>9918699
Waste heat is probably going to be a problem if you're drawing too much power from the system, sure. In fact it's probably the only real problem to which I have no real answer except maybe transferring your conscience to a more resilient support, creating an artificial human-like body, and then donning the suit of armor.

The rest just isn't true.

>Speaking of power, there's no substance in existence, that could fit into the suit, which could have enough power density to power the suit; not even nuclear power.

Already explained ITT

>There's also a problem with material thicknesses. The armor is bullet proof yet contains all these systems and more. The thickness of the armor would be extremely thin. There's no material that can be that thin and still withstand multiple bullet strikes without failing easily.

There are new materials being created that can definitely withstand at least small arms fire. You can have an exterior made out of thousands of small plates and inside something resembling stronger, artificial muscles interfaced with other parts.

[Anonymous No.9918750]

>>9918738
>enough power density to power the suit
what about free laser energy on a microchip?

[Anonymous No.9918754]

>>9918750
How about this >>9918679 ?

We can at least "conceptualize a realistic way of creating it", is what I said.

[Anonymous No.9918757]

>>9918738
>You have not demonstrated you cannot perform the feats of the suit of armor, i.e. you have not demonstrated the feats would constitute breaches of said physical limitations.
It's too tedious. Even proving my 4 non-planar points simplification is too tedious.

>In fact it's probably the only real problem to which I have no real answer except maybe transferring your conscience to a more resilient support, creating an artificial human-like body, and then donning the suit of armor.
So your solution is to make a waldo and then retain all of the idiotic design complications and non-viable design elements instead of just making an armored waldo? ... WEW LAD

>Already explained ITT
they don't produce electricity, they produce heat by proxy. That means you need heat engines. Square cube law works against you. You're a faggot.

>There are new materials being created that can definitely withstand at least small arms fire.
No. Hard things are brittle. Things that deform get penetrated. The Goldilocks zone requires thickness to work. You're retarded.

>You can have an exterior made out of thousands of small plates and inside something resembling stronger
Cool, so you have a layer that acts as well as gluing diamonds to plywood, and then the equivalent of playdoh underneath... You're a retarded faggot.

[Anonymous No.9918768]

>>9918738
Christ on a cracker you are a fucking ignorant moron.

[Anonymous No.9918783]

>>9918757
>It's too tedious.
That's a retarded appeal to authority on an anonymous board. Either provide arguments or don't post at all.

>So your solution is to make a waldo and then retain all of the idiotic design complications and non-viable design elements instead of just making an armored waldo? ... WEW LAD

As I said, resources are not a problem, only the fact that we can make a suit

>they don't produce electricity, they produce heat by proxy. That means you need heat engines. Square cube law works against you. You're a faggot.

You could channel particles into subsystems as needed, both weapons and propulsion could use antimatter in a more direct manner instead of converting it into electricity. Only powering the locomotion system itself would require electricity, which could be managed.

>No. Hard things are brittle. Things that deform get penetrated. The Goldilocks zone requires thickness to work. You're retarded.

We have just now started doing this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIcZdc42F0g and stopping small arms fire when we're able to manufacture with atomic precision will become trivial.

>Cool, so you have a layer that acts as well as gluing diamonds to plywood, and then the equivalent of playdoh underneath... You're a retarded faggot.

The key point is acting as, when in reality you will have a fully integrated locomotion and armor system.

Apart from heat concerns there is no fundamental impediment here, and even heat concerns can be beat if humans one day decide to upgrade the seats of their conciseness whilst retaining a body resembling the original organic one.

The key point is: while it will stretch your imagination, it's possible, there is no fundamental impediment.

[Anonymous No.9918799]

>>9918679
Youre out of your mind. Frozen antimatter? The most dangerous, expensive substance in the universe. That is so stupid dude. Thats like getting rid of a mole problem by spraying your lawn with 50000 gallons of sarin.

[Anonymous No.9918805]

>>9918783
too much effort to respond completely to jsut be ignored, I'm only going to respond to portions that I think you may be receptive towards.
You're wrong wrt electricity and motion.
You don't understand material science. 'stronger than steel' almost always refers to tensile strength. Tensile strength is completely irrelevant to ballistics. Hard things are hard for the exact same reason that they are brittle. Soft things are soft for the exact same reason that they are malleable. Those (along with thickness) are the only relevant characteristics for the efficacy of ballistic armor.

>The key point is: while it will stretch your imagination, it's possible, there is no fundamental impediment.
As I said before: You're a little brain soft scifi faggot, I'm a big brain hard scifi autist. You can't win.

[Anonymous No.9918829]

>>9918699

[Anonymous No.9918892]

>>9918799
For the purposes of this thread, I don't care.

>>9918805
>You're wrong wrt electricity and motion.
I'm not saying we can build a device to magically convert electricity to motion, I'm merely saying the suit's feats that draw the most power could mostly bypass the need for converting antimatter into electricity.

>Those (along with thickness) are the only relevant characteristics for the efficacy of ballistic armor.

Not really, liquid armor is an actual thing that exists right now and doesn't give a damn about your principles. You can't even begin to imagine the advances that material science has in store for us. The material I posted is great at absorbing energy and it is destroyed in the process. Perhaps we can create a material that can withstand the impact of a hundred bullets in the same spot and maintain integrity which would suffice as a feat.

>As I said before: You're a little brain soft scifi faggot, I'm a big brain hard scifi autist. You can't win.
Since no one commands enough knowledge to be able to extrapolate to all the myriad of problems we're considering, you're just wrong, and like the rest of us. At most you know the very basics of physics surrounding problems outside of your area of expertise which are a quick google search away. You're also again conflating lack of reading comprehension with autism.

[Anonymous No.9918929]

>>9918892
>You're also again conflating lack of reading comprehension with autism.
Had you given consideration to the possibility that I am actually a big-brain autist?

>Since no one commands enough knowledge to be able to extrapolate to all the myriad of problems we're considering
That's why we have reference manuals. Do I know the properties of UNS T56757? No, and I don't need to. It is very achievable for an individual to know enough about every field to know what is and is not possible/viable. You don't understand that 99.9999% of all field relevant knowledge is niche information and irrelevant even within the field for the vast majority of things.

>doesn't give a damn about your principles
You mean physics?

>You can't even begin to imagine the advances that material science has in store for us.
... "if we just had more technology, we could do things that are literally impossible". You need to substantiate how an improvement would come about. There are finite materials and finite arrangements of those materials.
Stronger steel? Precision/engineered dislocations at the nano-scale? Nanoscopic open cell matrix composites? Yeah sure, why not.
Just believe and magic becomes science? Fuck off.

>Perhaps we can create a material that can withstand the impact of a hundred bullets in the same spot and maintain integrity which would suffice as a feat.
It's called an inch of steel. But I guess 'my principles' of material science, terminal ballistics, and physics don't count in this case...

>I'm merely saying the suit's feats that draw the most power could mostly bypass the need for converting antimatter into electricity.
There is no free lunch faggot.

[Anonymous No.9918935]

>>9918546
Can't make an arc reactor
Project over.

[Anonymous No.9918953]

>>9918546
Powerplant, flight system.

[Anonymous No.9918960]

>>9918929
>Had you given consideration to the possibility that I am actually a big-brain autist?
That certainly doesn't seem like it's the case

>It is very achievable for an individual to know enough about every field to know what is and is not possible/viable. You don't understand that 99.9999% of all field relevant knowledge is niche information and irrelevant even within the field for the vast majority of things.
If anything it would be a simple 80/20 rule and the problems we are discussing, on the fringe of known physics, would certainly require a person to command expert knowledge in an area before dismissing as impossible. Very few people have more than one areas of expertise and you're not one of them.

>You mean physics?
I mean the principles which you wrote down, which fail for the examples I provided, and probably countless others.

>There are finite materials and finite arrangements of those materials.
The complexity of those structures though is formidable. Today we have kevlar soaked in magnetorheological fluid, with atomic precision manufacturing we can develop approaches to build structures that will resist small arms fire.

>It's called an inch of steel. But I guess 'my principles' of material science, terminal ballistics, and physics don't count in this case...
It can go by many other names though, and nothing in the realm of known physics prevents that.

>There is no free lunch faggot.
You clearly do not understand even the most basic notion that while we're not after a free lunch, you have to be mentally disabled to pay 1000€ for that 10€ buffet. Simply put, the most impressive, power intensive feats of the suit would not require paying the toll in electricity.

[Anonymous No.9918971]

>>9918935
Addressed ITT

>>9918953
Flight system could be done by either continuous or discrete but very high frequency systems utilizing antimatter, antimatter catalyzed fusion, antimatter to heat air into plasma inside a reaction chamber, you name it. The energy density with the frozen antimatter core is certainly there.

[The Lord No.9918978]

The inertial forces would cause catastrophic deformation in fast-moving mega-mecha made of mountains of metal but man-size power armor and modestly massive mechas are feasible.

[Anonymous No.9918979]

>>9918960
>Simply put, the most impressive, power intensive feats of the suit would not require paying the toll in electricity.
Thermo controls are slow. They are not viable. Hydraulics can not be used directly and must be converted to electricity and controlled with electricity. Momentum is no viable as it would induce severe losses from transfer and does nothing unless converted to hydraulics or electricity.
Your options are: momentum, pressure, heat, electricity. Converting between them results in losses. Momentum and heat are inherently non-viable.

[Anonymous No.9918999]

>>9918971
Cant do anything involving antimatter without sufficient containment, how will you miniaturize containment? Where will you store propellant for a flight system sufficient to lift the suit? How will you preform any fusion without shielding? A man-sized suit probably couldn't provide sufficient protection from nearby fusion reaction even if it were made of solid lead.

[The Lord No.9919002]

>>9918979

[Anonymous No.9919005]

>>9918599
>not posting high quality version

[The Lord No.9919010]

>>9918999
>A man-sized suit probably couldn't provide sufficient protection from nearby fusion reaction even if it were made of solid lead.
what if it contained in a localized ~10 million Tesla field such that the plasma losses were negligible? Or did you mean fission?

[Anonymous No.9919015]

>>9918979
The locomotive functions, even the ones evidencing super human strength, have pathetic power requirements at human muscle tissue levels of efficiency. There is no reason as to why we can't do even better, fast and stronger than them.

The power intensive feats such as flight or firing a bolt of what appears to be plasma would not have vast requirements for electricity if you had the power source which I described. A functional plasma cannon could also probably be built as such https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/3348/plausible-plasma-weapons without a major electricity draw.

You could also have interesting particle beam and smart bullets the comic writers couldn't even dream up

[Anonymous No.9919030]

>>9918699
>OP is being a retarded little popsci child who wants fantasy instead of science

/thread

[Anonymous No.9919035]

>>9918971
>hurr antimatter
anti matter isn't magic, you fucking doofus.
Iron man's arc reactor is magic
If the power generation process was 99% efficient (and that's being extremely generous)
and using the LOWER figure of 3 GW (his first mini arc reactor) that leaves 1% as heat, which is 30MW of heat
The average surface area of a human is 1.9 square meters
Lets be generous and say its 2 square meters

so using the stefan-boltzmann law, plugging in power and radiated surface area, you get an armor temperature of about 4000K
Didn't think through that magical antimatter did you

[Anonymous No.9919056]

>>9919002
SQUARE CUBE LAW

>>9919015
And how do those things work without electricity? You know, those things that only work because of electricity...

[Anonymous No.9919077]

>>9919035
I don't care about the writer's explanation for the feats, I only care about the fact that we can accomplish said feats. Read the thread. Arc reactor is just garbage, but we don't need it.

>>9919056
Most of the requirement for those things is in the form of heat, and that is not a problem.

[Anonymous No.9919080]

>>9919077
>Most of the requirement for those things is in the form of heat, and that is not a problem.
Confirmed never taken heat transport. You're still a faggot.

[Anonymous No.9919091]

>>9919077
So the suit just needs its own nuclear power plant then and you can only walk as far as the cables are long then
Or you have somehow an antimatter reactor in the chest, that is 99% efficient, that dissipates all that unavoidable heat over the surface of the body, resulting in a surface that is 4000K in temperature.
tl;dr not going to happen

[Anonymous No.9919093]

>>9919080
You don't transport heat, you transport ionized anti hydrogen a small distance, from small frozen cores near target, heat intensive subsystems of the suit, such as the gloves and boots.

[Anonymous No.9919100]

>>9919091
Read the thread. You are grossly misrepresenting the strategies I proposed to achieve the armor's feats.

[Anonymous No.9919103]

>>9919091
Yeah but what if we had this literally impossible magical material that didn't absorb heat? You know, technology will eventually progress to that point.
I fucking love science.

[Anonymous No.9919108]

>>9919103
Read the thread. You are grossly misrepresenting the strategies I proposed to achieve the armor's feats

[Anonymous No.9919112]

>>9919108
>Read the thread.
I did. I'm the only telling you why you're retarded.

>You are grossly misrepresenting the strategies I proposed to achieve the armor's feats
Nope.

[Anonymous No.9919121]

>>9919103
Well if he has access to magical power generation technology, then everything else is simple, relatively speaking

[Anonymous No.9919140]

>>9919112
>Talks about a reactor for power generation
>When I've already pointed out the feats with the highest power requirements don't even need a reactor to convert something to electricity
>A frozen, charged anti hydrogen core is somehow a reactor instead of a very energy dense battery
You're just dumb or lazy.

>>9919121
You're just trolling now

[Anonymous No.9919147]

[Anonymous No.9919151]

>>9919140
People have told you numerous times that you cannot get around the power & heat problem and you don't want to listen.
go to /diy/ instead where they might indulge your fantasy

[Anonymous No.9919170]

>>9919151
There is no "heat and power" problem. You don't need a reactor for the most power intensive feats, just heat. A 50 gram core near the boot has enough energy stored for more flight time than the suit of armor as actually depicted in fiction. There is no reactor here.

[Anonymous No.9919174]

>>9919170
there is heat that cannot do useful work. there's no other way around thermodynamics son

[Anonymous No.9919178]

>>9919170
>moves 1 inch
>explodes

[Anonymous No.9919185]

>>9919178
Addressed ITT. The one difference from Stark's suit of armor is that fatal damage will result in an explosion equivalent to a few megatons of TNT but I see no way around this.

>>9919174
This isn't the case though.

[Anonymous No.9919190]

>>9919185
It is the case, you just don't know any better

[Anonymous No.9919198]

>>9919190
Provide arguments as to why that is then.

[Anonymous No.9919201]

>>9919198
100% efficient processes are impossible. There is some percentage of the input energy that is waste heat. Therefore you are a retarded faggot.

[Anonymous No.9919202]

>>9919198
Because any heat engine has a theoretical maximum efficiency that you cannot go beyond
If you're using heat differential to do useful work (such as flight), that's a heat engine

[Anonymous No.9919204]

>>9919201
You don't need to draw "power" from the cores equivalent to that of an atomic weapon every single second though, just enough to emulate the feats seen from that suit of armor. At least in the MCU.

[Anonymous No.9919210]

>>9919204
Then OP needs to specify exactly what he expects the suit to do. Otherwise we're all just arguingm over each other's own interpretations on what it does.

But OP wont because OP is a faggot

[Anonymous No.9919211]

>>9919202
It doesn't matter, one kilogram of antimatter is the energy equivalent of over two thousand nukes, even at 1% efficiency that's enough to imitate the feats which is all I care about.

[Anonymous No.9919212]

>>9918546
>>9919210
>OP is a faggot
/thread

[Anonymous No.9919214]

>>9919211
>that I care about
And which feats are those?

>1% efficiency
enjoy irradiating yourself with the other 99% of gamma radiation

[Anonymous No.9919219]

Noone in this thread has mentioned his flight? He flies from LA to Afghanistan and back without refueling in a suit that is possibly 1-2 inches thick.

>inb4 antimatter
PTotally science fiction garbage, containment woulf require superconductors (with liquid he cooling) and GW's of power to prevent it from self-detonating.

>Magic suit 0
>Science 1

[Anonymous No.9919222]

>>9919214
*which is all I care about.

The feats are the ones we see in the MCU. Super strength, flight, repeated bolts of something which looks suspiciously like a plasma discharge.

Only this suit of armor would be a weapon of mass destruction, and the user would be capable of leveling a midsize country in an afternoon.

[Anonymous No.9919225]

Just so everyone is clear heres the tldr

>Faggot OP wants ironman suit that performs similar to movies but if you point out any flaw in movies suit design/magic operation of said suit he cries about writers interpretations.


OP is a retard faggot, if you are going to fantasize about something like this go for pacific rim-esque robots, as they are within possibility.

[Anonymous No.9919229]

>>9919225
>go for pacific rim-esque robots, as they are within possibility.

I was thinking about that as a counter argument point, but realized those move too fast for their mass and impact. They are like moving around wrecking balls. More realistically, they'd be slower and have different methods of impacting something since the current designs for most would destroy themselves when simply punching.

[Anonymous No.9919232]

>>9919219
This.

>Ironman wannabe decides its time to land his magic suit and the superconducting magnets he has all throughout it to prevent antimatter/matter collision pull him straight into the nearest I-beam, rendering him useless until he powers down suit's cooling. At which point his antimatter collides with regular matter and levels city + himself.

Genius OP

[Anonymous No.9919234]

>>9919225
> but if you point out any flaw in movies suit design/magic operation of said suit he cries about writers interpretations
Please point out where I defended imbecilic plot devices like the arc reactor and didn't explicitly state I only care about the feats and not how we accomplish them

[Anonymous No.9919235]

>>9919005
>>9918599
well there you go, we can't even begin to consider iron man suits then, because the technology necessary to make them might not be possible. Strong Nanomachines might be impractical to construct.

[Anonymous No.9919236]

>>9919222
>implying Iron Man cannot level a midsize country in an afternoon if he wanted

[Anonymous No.9919240]

>>9918546
>We can conceptualize
>>9918560
>You could easily create
>>9918593
>we can envision advances in materials technology
>>9918622
>You can envision
>>9918638
>we have other ways of achieving
>>9918646
>We can even envision
>>9918651
>with sufficiently advanced technology
>>9918671
>you can envision
>>9918679
>A frozen antimatter core
>>9918738
>You have not demonstrated you cannot
>Already explained ITT
>There are new materials being created
>>9918783
>appeal to authority
>antimatter
>will become trivial
>heat concerns can be beat if humans one day decide to upgrade the seats of their conciseness whilst retaining a body resembling the original organic one
>>9918892
>liquid armor is an actual thing that exists right
>You can't even begin to imagine the advances that material science has in store for us.
>Perhaps we can create

holy shit OP is a fucking crazy moron.

[Anonymous No.9919241]

>>9919234
>and not how we accomplish them
then just imagine it and be done with it

>you'll just have to imagine the fire

[Anonymous No.9919243]

>>9919240
/thread

[Anonymous No.9919251]

>>9918546
This is OP
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byzQQNTY720

[Anonymous No.9919252]

>>9919251
If this is what an apostle is maybe I should sign up for his religion.

[Anonymous No.9919258]

>>9919252
He is the state sponsored Ghana propaganda piece KANGZ 'inventor'. A bit like Iran's F313, except annually and with bootleg/nigger-rigged parts instead of stuff from amazon.

[Anonymous No.9919269]

>>9919234
1. Current technology struggles to contain a few atoms of antimatter in a large building yet you continue to think that it's possible to use antimatter.
2. Prolonged flight as >>9919219 is nonsense, even if you had unlimited energy you cannot get around newtons 3rd law with anything we have currently.
3. Open air plasma discharge at any moderate distance is not something within the realm of science today.
4. Ignoring antimatter which is already an impossible fuel within his suit's size constraints there's nothing that can be used for power generation/storage that would allow for what he does.
5. Actuators and such that would be used in such a suit are nowhere near the same power output as him (IE lifting up a few tons) and they are already almost as efficient as they get.
6. His suit creates it's own O2, as noted when he goes into space on multiple occasions. Since you can't pull atoms from nothing explain that one.
7. I have to reiterate, his flight is absolutely retarded. The suit is envisioned to generate hundreds of tons of thrust without any kind of propellant, feel free to rewatch the scene with the flying aircraft carrier.
8. He get's hit by things ranging from missiles to large caliber gunfire without ever penetrating his suit.

If you want to try to dumb down his suit so that it:

>Cant fly for more than 10 seconds
>Has a very limited use time (in the order of under an hour AT BEST)
>Cant discharge plasma in any meaningful way
>Cant be in space for more than a few minutes
>Cant lift anything more than 2-3x his body wieght, that's standing on the ground, not in flight.
>Cant stand prolonged gunfire of more than 2-3 minutes, definetly can't withstand 1 or more near-range explosions of significant size.
Then sure you have a very possible suit.

[Anonymous No.9919285]

>>9919269
If we use hypergolic fuel can we boost it to 20 seconds?
OP is already OK with it exploding whenever it moves because a sufficient containment field is impossible given the spatial restrictions.

[Anonymous No.9919287]

>>9919269
OP could probably get around your atmospheric flight limitations by having a heat source (which goes back to my criticisms on being able to get rid of useless heat, let alone useful heat) heat up atmospheric air and expel it at high speed. That would work in principle, but doing it within the confines of armour that is an inch thick is not feasible.
Space flight wouldn't work with this system, even if it could be made that small and fit inside an armoured boot

[Anonymous No.9919290]

>>9919287
I'm going to poke the retarded nest.

Hey OP >>9918546 , google 'vacuum dewar' and 'nuclear jet'

[Anonymous No.9919320]

>>9919290
btw if OP is willing to have a potentially self detonating / self irradiating, 100% energy generation power source, why not go the extra mile and have him have METALLIC HYDROGEN as a fuel source? kek

[Anonymous No.9919795]

>>9919251
I cant fucking handle this. Africa just needs to get nuked.

[Anonymous No.9919808]

>>9919795
>do something cool
>needs to get nuked
With paranoia like that, are you sure you're not a fucking nigger?

[Anonymous No.9919826]

>>9919808
>waste what little resource you have building a pile of nothing instead of investing it into your society
>cool

[Anonymous No.9919878]

>>9919826
>building something cool isn't investing into your society
welp guess you are a NIGGER afterall

[Anonymous No.9920026]

>>9919878
Option A) Idiotic exoskeleteon that is so primitive it is good for absolutely nothing

Option B) water, sanitation, stable government, agriculture, education

You are mentally challenged.

[Anonymous No.9920084]

>>9920026
Option A) Being cool and an inspiration
Option B) Uninspiring shit that experts already have handled
Fucking niggers

[Anonymous No.9920352]

>>9920084
Again, you are mentally challenged

[Anonymous No.9920501]

>>9918546
>>9919240
/thread

[Anonymous No.9921013]

>>9920352
You're a nigger

[Anonymous No.9921055]

>>9918546
Current energy production methods can't store enough energy or generate enough power at such a small scale.

[Anonymous No.9921064]

>>9918546
No Jarvis, no magical propellantless jetpack, no rad energy blasters, no hyper-compact energy source.
What's the point when you take all that away?

[Anonymous No.9921077]

>>9921064
>No Jarvis
Anon, this is literally the only thing about it that is viable.

[Anonymous No.9921081]

>>9921077
if an AI as good as Jarvis existed it would be worth more money than the iron man suit

[Anonymous No.9921090]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned that good enough brain/computer interfaces to make exoskeleton suits don't exist yet

[Anonymous No.9921092]

>>9921081
99% of the utility doesn't need AI.

[Anonymous No.9921125]

>>9921092
I know, I'm just saying

[Anonymous No.9921302]

>>9921081
You could just pay/kidnap the actor who plays jarvis/vision and get him to read from a screen that ouputs flight data for cheaper than an AI

[Anonymous No.9921636]

No military on earth would build it. You are better served with some kind of flight device like Orion's scooter, a good shovel and a sniper rifle.

[Anonymous No.9921642]

>>9918699
what about anti-matter or kugelblitz blackhole batteries?
could we hit the needed energy density with that borderline magic shit?

[Anonymous No.9921643]

>>9919240
he just wants his capeshit to be real so he can jack off about becoming ironman in the future while he rots away in his parent's basement

[Anonymous No.9921659]

>>9921636
not true.

power armor has the ability to fulfill a very specific role in the military. as a mobile replacement to crew serve weaponry. a mk-19 or M2 take 2-3 people to operate and carry. slap that shit on some power armor operated by one guy and you got a righteous squad support platform. shit, you don't even need the "armor" part. just having the extra guns is enough to fund the exoskeleton.

[Anonymous No.9921667]

The power source is so pfm that it would be impossible.

[Anonymous No.9921669]

>>9921659
>team enters building
>power armoured guy falls through the floor/stairs because he's a fat bastard that weighs too much

[Anonymous No.9921672]

>>9921659
>just having the extra guns is enough to fund the exoskeleton.
That's my point. Why not just mount such a weapon as one of many optional attachments to Orion's dorky ski thingie?

[Anonymous No.9921673]

>>9921669
when you have a mk-19, you don't need to be inside.

[Anonymous No.9921678]

>>9921672
lack of armour?
that's typically why it's powered armour, and not just an exoskeleton
if he's packing the heavy weapons, you can bet your ass that everyone is going to give him their full attention to prevent that canned ass rape from being unleashed

[Anonymous No.9921688]

>>9921092
It does though. The entire suit is a balancing act unlike any other.

[Anonymous No.9921695]

>>9921672
thats kind of what the US military has done. they've transferred a lot of the squad support weapons to small gun trucks. the problem is, its death taking one of those things down a tight street and they are still unwieldy in their role. you really do want something that is ergonomically man shaped to fit into bradley fighting vehicles, transport planes, and most importantly, buildings.

[Anonymous No.9921702]

The best conceptual "Iron man" suit I've ever seen in cinema is the Edge of Tomorrow suits. Those are even fantastically agile for the actual ability we could make with current technology, Something that has a long battery life and the ability to fly/carry ammo/fire plasma beams is so out of reach from humanity, we will probably never develop a workable facsimile.

[Anonymous No.9921722]

>>9921678
That's what the shovel is for. The cheapest and simplest armor is a big wall of earth.

[Anonymous No.9921728]

>>9921702
we can make them if we develop literal magic
so send your wishes to us discovering it, so we can have super fun meme tech to play with

[Anonymous No.9922235]

>>9918599
>>9919005
he removes his glasses and then they straight away dissaper from his hand. 316million$ budjet -_-

[Anonymous No.9922242]

>>9922235
fuck, just noticed that too…
thats just lazy filmmaking
good old days of IM 1

[Anonymous No.9922386]

>>9918546
Iron man suit is WAY too small... think power armor.

[Anonymous No.9922389]

>>9922235
>he removes his glasses and then they straight away dissaper from his hand.

The glasses were made of nanobots, that got reabsorbed into the armor... how could this have been made any clearer?

[Anonymous No.9922524]

>>9921064
I was going to say,

My two cents as a rocket mechanic:

Hypergols are fucking hard. They fart on everything and kill them. You should see some of the problems we have with storing them.

On top of that, thrusters need to be made out of some heavy materials to ensure the heat and pressure in the combustion chamber doesn't destroy them.

I think the thrusters are my biggest gripe with the Ironman suit.

But I get it. That's what makes him a super hero. This thread is the equivalent of asking "how to get superman's powers".

If only you morons could separate the two.

[Anonymous No.9922590]

>>9918637
>We're not blue whales.
Says you

[Anonymous No.9922595]

>>9922389
oh boy I sure do love nanotech

[Anonymous No.9922859]

>>9922235
Are you blind? you can clearly see the glasses being absorbed into his hand when he removes it.

[Anonymous No.9922873]

>>9918637
Yes there are wtf

[Anonymous No.9923875]

>>9921728
Not him but edge of tomorrow suits are just hydraulically assisted power suits that happen to have weapon systems attached to them and linked to hand controls. This is far more realistic than repulsors that can change between thrust and directed energy beam configurations, 3GW chest generator. An issue of size and power with respect to whatever size you go with is the more reasonable criticism

[Anonymous No.9923878]

>>9922859
This. You can see them getting absorbed, with the part his fingers are touching the last to go