anime52k8 Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 "they could ultimately result in ultra-light weight, ultra fast spacecraft that could carry humans to Mars in weeks instead of months, and to the nearest star system outside our own (Proxima Centurai) in just about 30 years." http://www.theverge.com/2014/8/1/5959637/nasa-cannae-drive-tests-have-promising-results and let me guess, it's powered by a cold fusion reactor? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gakken85 Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 microwaves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB0 Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 and let me guess, it's powered by a cold fusion reactor? Close enough. The only reason I give it ANY chance to be credible is because NASA's tested the damn thing on their own equipment and somehow generated thrust. If, and this is a VERY BIG if, there isn't a loophole somewhere that they overlooked, some gimmick or trick, it is friggin' non-newtonian motion and flies in the face of any understanding of physics. To my eyes, it's rather telling that NASA opted out of trying to explain how the damn things WORKS. Or as they put it, "This paper will not address the physics of the quantum vacuum plasma thruster, but instead will describe the test integration, test operations, and the results obtained from the test campaign." They aren't pretending to know what they've seen, and preserving the most wiggle room possible for later follow-up statements. Because what they're seeing is patently ridiculous. It's only noteworthy because the... THING... appears to work on NASA's test bed, not just halfway around the world in Elbonia. And it appeared to work both on the "proper" test unit AND the "defective" unit that wasn't supposed to be able... ummm, was supposed to be EVEN LESS able to generate thrust. I fully expect to see a more mundane explanation come out than "screw conservation of momentum", but the results should be interesting regardless. Either everything we know is wrong, or someone managed to punk NASA while NASA was expecting to be punked and actively looking for tricks. And neither answer is boring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gakken85 Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 http://www.engadget.com/2014/08/25/3d-printed-vertebra-implant/ Boy gets 3D printed vertebra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB0 Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 (edited) So earlier today, the New Horizons space probe hit it's last major milestone before the Pluto flyby next year, when it crossed Neptune's orbit. No pics, Neptune's in the wrong place. NH is actually closer to Pluto than Neptune right now. In a helluva coincidence, this ALSO happened to be the 25th anniversary of Voyager 2's Neptune flyby. Keep on truckin', NH! Don't let the "not a planet" haters get you down! Edited August 26, 2014 by JB0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFly!! Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 http://www.engadget.com/2014/08/25/3d-printed-vertebra-implant/ Boy gets 3D printed vertebra that's fantastic! next thing to do (or maybe the first thing they should've done) is to test the material if it's carcinogenic? So earlier today, the New Horizons space probe hit it's last major milestone before the Pluto flyby next year, when it crossed Neptune's orbit. No pics, Neptune's in the wrong place. NH is actually closer to Pluto than Neptune right now. In a helluva coincidence, this ALSO happened to be the 25th anniversary of Voyager 2's Neptune flyby. Keep on truckin', NH! Don't let the "not a planet" haters get you down! what do you guys think about the idea that the asteroid belt came from a destroyed planet or planets? http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=67572 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sketchley Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 what do you guys think about the idea that the asteroid belt came from a destroyed planet or planets? It's possible, but it's just as likely that they are the leftovers of planets that almost formed, but couldn't because of the influence of Jupiter's gravity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB0 Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 that's fantastic! next thing to do (or maybe the first thing they should've done) is to test the material if it's carcinogenic? what do you guys think about the idea that the asteroid belt came from a destroyed planet or planets? http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=67572 It's highly unlikely, to be charitable. You have to explain why everything is still in orbit(as any planet-cracking impact would've greatly disrupted that orbit), and why it didn't recoalesce. Especially with Ceres being a third of the mass of the asteroid belt. If there was ever enough mass to FORM a planet, there should have been enough mass there to REform a planet. It's almost certain that Jupiter's influence prevented Ceres from absorbing the rest of the asteroid belt, and still does today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scyla Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 Printed screens anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skullmilitia Posted October 12, 2014 Share Posted October 12, 2014 That makes me think Clear display on visors HUD style are only a short time away. Pilots getting real time data on their shields, just like Macross.Eventually ending up on Motorcycle helmets and the like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 So, er... we can has compact nuclear fusion reactors? http://aviationweek.com/technology/skunk-works-reveals-compact-fusion-reactor-details Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
electric indigo Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 The Philae probe has successfully landed on the comet 67P/Tschurjumow-Gerassimenko! Hope to see some postcards soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB0 Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 Successful?! The harpoon didn't even fire, much less kill the dang thing! Captain Ahab is FURIOUS! Seriously, though. Good job, ESA. Got the first, second, AND third cometary landings in one drop. That's impressive on multiple counts, especially as the landing was fully automated on unknown terrain. (Landings 2 and 3 are believed to be because the comet was softer than expected, and thus the anchors on the landing gear failed to secure purchase initially. And without either the top thruster to press it down or the Ahab Gambit to tether it, it bounced back off the comet twice before gaining a toehold.). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renegadeleader1 Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 (edited) I just got back from watching Interstellar and its got me thinking about space travel, FTL, and time dilation. I'm having trouble getting my head around the last part. I mean I kinda get the concept of time dilation as the faster you go time passes slower for you than it would on earth. What I don't get is why? It doesn't make sense to me that if I lauched from earth in a rocket and kept going faster that time would slow for me and earth would speed up. No matter what the earth orbits the sun at a pretty constant speed right? Why would that change just because I'm going faster? I hope what I'm asking makes sense. Edited November 17, 2014 by renegadeleader1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sketchley Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 I mean I kinda get the concept of time dilation as the faster you go time passes slower for you than it would on earth. What I don't get is why? It doesn't make sense to me that if I lauched from earth in a rocket and kept going faster that time would slow for me and earth would speed up. No matter what the earth orbits the sun at a pretty constant speed right? Why would that change just because I'm going faster? To clarify: it's relative. Time for you stays the same, but for everyone else it speeds up OR (from the perspective of people on Earth) time stays the same for them, but for you it slows down [not that you would notice it]. Even for us on Earth, time is flowing slightly different from other parts of the galaxy and universe in general (something about both our relative speed and proximity to gravity). For example, GPS won't work correctly if the clocks in the satellites aren't running a few microseconds faster than the ones on the surface of the Earth! What causes it is the universal constant of the speed of light. No matter how fast you go, you can neither surpass that speed, or make light go faster (or slower). So, because of that constant, if your speed changes, the passage of time (for you) also changes). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azrael Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 I mean I kinda get the concept of time dilation as the faster you go time passes slower for you than it would on earth. What I don't get is why? It doesn't make sense to me that if I lauched from earth in a rocket and kept going faster that time would slow for me and earth would speed up. No matter what the earth orbits the sun at a pretty constant speed right? Why would that change just because I'm going faster? For reference, you'll need to look up the Theory of Relativity. But as mentioned, it's all relative. People on Earth are moving at a certain speed relative to the planet. The planet is spinning at a certain speed and orbiting the sun at a certain speed. We are also affected by that 1g of acceleration. When you factor all that in, we are moving with our planet. So our passage of time behaves a certain way according to those factors. If you leave the planet, you are moving at a different velocity and at a different acceleration. So now the passage of time occurs at a different rate according to those factors, relative to that new situation. If you go to a different planet, times passes at a different rate according to the velocity and acceleration of that planet, i.e., it won't be the same as on Earth. It won't be the same for that spaceship you came on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB0 Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 In fact, just travelling around the world on a jetplane affects time. You're a few microseconds younger than you would be if you'd stayed on the ground. (As Stephen Hawking noted, exploiting this to extend your life doesn't work because the slight gains are more than offset by the poor health effects of eating airline food.) Basically, though... relativity is friggin' magic. No one understands it. Not even Einstein. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skullmilitia Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 For reference, you'll need to look up the Theory of Relativity. But as mentioned, it's all relative. People on Earth are moving at a certain speed relative to the planet. The planet is spinning at a certain speed and orbiting the sun at a certain speed. We are also affected by that 1g of acceleration. When you factor all that in, we are moving with our planet. So our passage of time behaves a certain way according to those factors. If you leave the planet, you are moving at a different velocity and at a different acceleration. So now the passage of time occurs at a different rate according to those factors, relative to that new situation. If you go to a different planet, times passes at a different rate according to the velocity and acceleration of that planet, i.e., it won't be the same as on Earth. It won't be the same for that spaceship you came on. You're missing out the importance of Gravity as well. Gravity effects time by bending it as well. The closer to a heavier object the slower time goes for you. The further away from Gravity's reach, the faster time speeds up. Time is just a measure, just like having a Yardstick made out of rubber, it can be stretched and crunched on the pull of forces of gravity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renegadeleader1 Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 You're missing out the importance of Gravity as well. Gravity effects time by bending it as well. The closer to a heavier object the slower time goes for you. The further away from Gravity's reach, the faster time speeds up. Time is just a measure, just like having a Yardstick made out of rubber, it can be stretched and crunched on the pull of forces of gravity. why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB0 Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Because magic. I stand by this statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azrael Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 You're missing out the importance of Gravity as well. Gravity effects time by bending it as well. The closer to a heavier object the slower time goes for you. The further away from Gravity's reach, the faster time speeds up. Time is just a measure, just like having a Yardstick made out of rubber, it can be stretched and crunched on the pull of forces of gravity. That's why I mention that 1g and acceleration. why?Because gravity would affect your relative velocity and acceleration by reducing your velocity and relative acceleration because there's a force pulling on you as you run from it. 'Eff it. This is the better answer. Because magic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB0 Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Hey, it accurately sums up my understanding of how relativity works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grss1982 Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 http://www.gizmag.com/nerf-vulcan-sentry-gun/28263/ Slap in some Heavy Machine guns and PRESTO!!! Sentry guns from Aliens, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wmkjr Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 http://www.gizmag.com/nerf-vulcan-sentry-gun/28263/ Slap in some Heavy Machine guns and PRESTO!!! Sentry guns from Aliens, Flashbang to stun or EMP grenade to disable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerli Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Just... wow http://io9.com/heres-a-photo-of-something-that-cant-be-photographed-1678918200?utm_campaign=socialflow_io9_facebook&utm_source=io9_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sketchley Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Just... wow http://io9.com/heres-a-photo-of-something-that-cant-be-photographed-1678918200?utm_campaign=socialflow_io9_facebook&utm_source=io9_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow Agreed. Wow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB0 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Quantum physics gives me a headache. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the double-slit experiment, to heck with entanglement. And THIS... just no. One thing at a time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerli Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Don't worry, Einstein didn't like Quantum physics either... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sketchley Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Quantum physics gives me a headache. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the double-slit experiment, to heck with entanglement. And THIS... just no. One thing at a time. There's just one thing to keep in mind with this stuff: never, ever, ever measure it! (that article started to bring a chuckle with how it took great pains to indicate the particles weren't being measured!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB0 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) Don't worry, Einstein didn't like Quantum physics either... Einstein was a pretty smart dude.</massive_understatement> Edited January 13, 2015 by JB0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mechaninac Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB0 Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 So I guess this is technology-related. Former electronics superstore and PC manufacturer turned flea market trash bin Radio Shack filed for bankruptcy. I can't say I'm even remotely surprised, they've been in a downward spiral for a decade at least. I'm only surprised it's taken them this long. But I also can't say it doesn't make me sad. They used to be such a great place, with so much neat stuff packed into such a small space. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
areaseven Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 Scientists may have found an inner-inner Earth's core Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mechaninac Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 ^ Is it made of nougat? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M'Kyuun Posted April 17, 2015 Share Posted April 17, 2015 Tootsie Roll. One, two, th-ree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.