/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9325340
As far as i know there aren't any spacecraft traveling at even a fraction of c so therefore the slower you travel the accuracy needed to get a reading needs to go up.
>Whys that a problem
The main problem is external apparatus is needed (the huge boon on most current satellites is usually the magnetometer) which are usually delicate, getting everything done on a chip would be an ideal solution.
>What is this?
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/515321/an-interplanetary-gps-using-pulsar-signals/

All I got, might be useful in like 100 years if we ever get to the speeds/accuracy it actually works at. I was trying to invent a 3D space compass to go with it but came to a dead end as there is literally no way to get a 3D reference without relying on magnetometers or pulsar GPS.

>>7969410
*speedometer
Meant to post this in the SR thread.

Definitely me.

>>7019724
Samefag but this.

>>6547959
Send letters. Back on Saturday.

>>6547375
90% Of the time some of the work is already done in some form ,if you really care about who is credited with what.

50% of /sci/ are shitposters.

>>6397769
This is the best suggestion, practising IQ tests will give you a higher score, I’m not sure it will make you any more intelligent or successful though.

>>5910455
What is mega society

>>5909884
Lol I meant the tabletop version of the LHC..

Bumpan because shitposing everywhere

I'll shoot, basically my design idea is to create a material that uses excess heat to create a small electrical current, It works pretty much the same as any electrical generator but at a molecular level. The first use that came to my head is improving battery-life by recuperating lost energy. Patent pending.

Actually this song is better
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6phIoOBFKk
also polite sage for not /sci/

Bumping for discussion and less idiocy.

Want me to explain my thoughts on this?

>>4776796
If you could build a mining device that could also replicate itself with just the materials/sunlight then it could happen exponentially (similar to a cell) might be along way off though technology wise.

>>4776790
We obviously are.

>>4776778
>IMPLYING ITS ECONOMICALLY VIABLE TO PUT THOSE IN SPACE DUMMY

>>4776766
>Implying demand will stay the same as more advanced technology becomes avilable
>Hurrr Durrr

>>4776616
I agree with you about the we are not exactly running out of minerals, its just the most useful are scarse and therefore not economially viable.

>>4776573
>>4776526
Him/her, My bad.

>>4776553
The main problem is the fundemental design of the launching method (hasnt changed since the 60's) which is why other more efficient and cost effective methods are being developed. Basically you are saying that it isn't worth building becuase the INITIAL COST is too high, which is infact magnitudes smaller than the potential returns.

>>4776526
The main problem is the fundamental design of the launching method (hasnt changed since the 60'
s) which is why other more efficient and cost effective methods are being devoloped. Basically you are saying that it isn't worth building becuase the INITIAL COST is too high, which infact magnitudes smaller than the potential returns.