[Fetty]

while wer talking about detail
when flying and being destroyed a ship should "spill" its payload wich then explodes
think about that

[mikhael]

Originally posted by IceFire

Onto magnetism.  A company in Japan experimented to some success using magnetic propulsion in boats.  Some may be familar with the technology in its fictional name "caterpillar drive" (Hunt for the Red October).  Apparently it works...but I forget how well.  Well enough to make some news headlines some time back...I never really followed up on it.  SO magnetism isn't such a "stupid" idea in its entirety either.

Note the proper name of that propulsion: magnetohydrodynamics. it needs a fluid (water, hence the HYDRO fragment) to force through troughs to create a thrust effect. We've progressed past the idea of space as being permeated by the aether. I don't think you're going to get anything remotely resembling thrust from the freefloating hydrogen particles out there. [with the exception of a Bussard ramjet type device, but that has to be signifigantly larger than a missile to be of any use to anyone due to the incredibly low density of matter it has to work with).

My mantra with technology is that given the right amount of time, experience, and expertise...just about anything is possible. And if you look at all the imposibilities of this century (you can't clone animals, you can't break the sound barrier, going to the moon is impossible, flying through the air in a heavier than air craft is impossible, wireless communication is impossible, sending someones voice through electronic wires is impossible, etc.) I'm fairly confident with that mantra.

I agree--to an extent. There are hard physical laws that cannot be ignored nor broken, however. Magnetism will never be a long range force. Gravity will never be a strong force outside of a mass of superdense, supermassive chunk of matter. Even assuming you could focus gravity, or twist magnetism into a serious mode of propulsion, you would have far greater destructive ability than a mere missile. You're talking about a deeper understanding and manipulation of space-time to achieve those effects. Why bother with a mere missile?

Back to the subject at hand: blow up all the ordinance aboard. It would look cool, make hanging around stuff much more dangerous and generally be more fun. And THAT is the whole point.

[Nico]

Originally posted by mikhael

Note the proper name of that propulsion: magnetohydrodynamics. it needs a fluid (water, hence the HYDRO fragment)

just to say that it works very well in air too, hence the hyd... ok, doesn't work, but still it works in air, I've seen stuff about that, it was cool.

[IceFire]

I knew it was a water thing, I didn't hear anything about air...but thats cool enough.  I was using it more as a point rather than a realistic application to space.

True that there are the laws of physics and I fully suscribe to the idea that there are certain things that cannot be done or cannot be done in a certain way.  But I still have a healthy dose of optimism that we don't know all of the tricks in the bag and there are plenty more laws that we haven't really begun to understand.

I really hope the universe is still filled with many wonders and that we haven't begun to start solving even a fraction of them.

[demon442]

Originally posted by Fetty
if you look over to ion propulsion
uses xenon gas and inonises that wich results in very high velocity of the molecule or whatever and object is moved, on earth that drive couldnt move a couple sheets of paper but in space it serves its purpose
givin the fuel efficiency and the nature of the "fuel" it isnt as explosive as "conventional" rockets

Yeah, except for the fact that it would take roughly two weeks to get up to 2 meters per second with the technology we have now.  And I doubt there is going to be some major breakthrough that will enable us to travel at 30 meters per second in under a second, ever.

[mikhael]

Originally posted by IceFire

I really hope the universe is still filled with many wonders and that we haven't begun to start solving even a fraction of them.

Any universe which has a Neutron Electron is as marvelous and wonderful as  can ever exist. The damn thing is its own antiparticle. That just rocks.

From Everything2.com's entry:
A lepton, symbol [ lower-case Greek letter nu], with a mass less than 1.5X10-5 that of an electron. It has a neutral charge, and hence is its own antiparticle. It is believed to be stable, and has a quantum spin of +1/2. Its spin is oriented opposite its velocity, as in all neutrinos.

Electron neutrinos, and other neutrinos, are only effected by the weak and gravimetric forces, so they rarely react with other forms of matter, and are therefore difficult to detect.

This data is only from various theories and experiments. The existance of the electron neutrino has been proven, but its charge, spin, mass, and half-life are still under question.

[Fetty]

Originally posted by demon442


Yeah, except for the fact that it would take roughly two weeks to get up to 2 meters per second with the technology we have now.  And I doubt there is going to be some major breakthrough that will enable us to travel at 30 meters per second in under a second, ever.

leme answer that with another quote

by Bill Gates

640kb will last 5 years

you never know whats gona happen
especialy with high technology
and the game plays in the future or do you see deimoses launching from kennedy space port ? so it very well can be possible or not
isnt the universe a great place ? i wouldnt wana live anywhere else

[<<ERROR>>]

These 'neutron electron' particles, or neutrinos, do have seperate antipatricles - antineutrinos. If what everything2.com said is true, then neutrons would be their own antiparticles (as they have no charge!) and there could be no atoms as anything bigger than hydrogen would simply go boom.
Antineutrinos are given off in beta decay of radioactive nuclei in response to an electron being given off, as the lepton number has to remain constant (electron = +1, antineutrino = -1), like the conservation of charge or energy. There have been discussions on whether neutrinos can change between 'types' - electron, muon and tau and there have been huge detectors set up using tanks of water to try and find them. They have had a few 'hits' per week and there is a huge endeavour using a part of the Mediterranean sea as a detector. A neutrino will annihilate with an antineutrino of the same type (and possibly other types), but never with another neutrino.
The only particles that are their own antiparticles are some mesons (particles consisting of 2 quarks, the components of protons, neutrons, lambdas, etc) and the bosons, or force carriers - photons, gluons (carriers of the strong force), Z particles (a carrier of the weak force, but it is very unstable) and possibly the graviton, but gravitons have never been contained or produced artificially, so we can't prove it.
Just trying to set the record straight.

[mikhael]

Originally posted by <<ERROR>>
[a bunch of stuff removed that basically says I was wrong, and proves  you can't always trust the web. I should have looked up the entry in my encyclopaedic reference. I was wrong.]
The only particles that are their own antiparticles are some mesons (particles consisting of 2 quarks, the components of protons, neutrons, lambdas, etc) and the bosons, or force carriers - photons, gluons (carriers of the strong force), Z particles (a carrier of the weak force, but it is very unstable) and possibly the graviton, but gravitons have never been contained or produced artificially, so we can't prove it.
Just trying to set the record straight.

Strictly speaking, gravitons have never been observed or detected in any way, only theorised.

The point, however, which was missed in the above correction, is that quantum  mechanics makes the universe a properly weird and wonderful place without having to add in crazy fruity IMPOSSIBLE things.

Oh, and Fetty: you can think that way all you want, but you're not going to overcome physics with wishful thinking. Gates wasn't referencing a verifiable physical fact about the universe. He was stating an opinion about the future. The two are not even remotely in the same ballpark.

[Fetty]

please do enlighten me
no technology has ever advanced ?
and is not possible for that technology to advance ?

never heard of theoretical physics ?
(that is mostly wishful thinking, e.g. Tachyons)
and plz do tell me that you know everything about the universe so that i may call you god

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Fetty
please do enlighten me
no technology has ever advanced ?
and is not possible for that technology to advance ?

never heard of theoretical physics ?
(that is mostly wishful thinking, e.g. Tachyons)
and plz do tell me that you know everything about the universe so that i may call you god

Don't call me god. I'd disappear because I don't believe in me (as such).

However, you imply that its possible to advance past the actual limitations of physics--which is impossible. Its like saying "if I add 2 and 2 together enough times, I'll get 5!" There ARE hard rules to the unverse. They don't apply in all scales, but with the realms in which they do apply, they are inescapable. If you don't believe it, just go an try to build something really simple, like a perpetual motion machine.

You're never ever going to be able to make a photon of any sort impart more specific impulse than it does RIGHT NOW. You will NEVER make gravity push instead of pull. Magnetism will always be additive. Mass/energy will always be conserved. Entropy will always increase. Hydrogen atoms will always be the most plentiful element in the Universe. Light speed is always constant within a given medium. These are simple, immutable, inescapable facts of the universe in which we live. Debating them does not make them change. Wishing for it does not make them change. No matter how many advances you make in science you can't beat the system. It's physics, not magic or mysticism or religion or philosophy or history.

Hate to burst your bubble.

[Fetty]

the sun spinns arround us
the world is flat
.............

do you know what im trying to say ?

since we where talking about the future i was talking about what ifs you dont know what advances in understanding we make and nether do i

what if gravity is pure bs ?
remember ? the world cant be round thats impossible, but then ....

its just a theory
but without imagination of that could be wed still sit in caves

[Shrike]

Originally posted by mikhael
In the future your bombs/rockets/missiles might use different propellants, but they'll all have one thing in common with modern propellants: they'll be very explosive and very flammable.

Untrue.  FS ships use deuterium fuel, which is in the absence of oxygen pretty much inert - it's fusion fuel, not chemical reagents.  Thus, unless you make it fuse, it's not doing much.

Helioses on the other hand...... lets just say an explosion in the magazine of a destroyer would leave very very small chunks.

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Shrike
Untrue.  FS ships use deuterium fuel, which is in the absence of oxygen pretty much inert - it's fusion fuel, not chemical reagents.  Thus, unless you make it fuse, it's not doing much.

Well, yeah, Shrike: SHIPS use fusion for generating power/motive-force. But you don't want to strap a fusion drive on the back of the thing that's going to blow up intentionally; reaction based drive system give a great motive force and they're pretty much designed for disposability. Its almost the perfect thing for ordinance delivery.

Fetty: I suggest going back to school, learning some scientific methodology and history. Then you will understand the differences between "The earth is flat!" and "Gravity is always additive.". Until you have grasped the differences between the two, there's no point in considering the discussion.

[Fry_Day]

Oh, and Fetty: you can think that way all you want, but you're not going to overcome physics with wishful thinking

I think you're missing the point. You can't break proven boundaries, you just go around them - It was impossible to get a square root of a negative number using real numbers, so complex numbers were invented. It's still impossible to get a square root of a negative number under the condition of the result being a real number, but if you change the condition to the result being a complex nubmer, you can.

[<<ERROR>>]

OK, I see your point. There is no harm in optimism.

[Shrike]

Originally posted by mikhael
Well, yeah, Shrike: SHIPS use fusion for generating power/motive-force. But you don't want to strap a fusion drive on the back of the thing that's going to blow up intentionally; reaction based drive system give a great motive force and they're pretty much designed for disposability. Its almost the perfect thing for ordinance delivery.

A harbinger bomb is specifically stated to use a half-scale fighter drive, and the harbinger is 30+ years old.  While chemical rockets may be the suggested RL system, FS uses fusion drives on at least some of its munitions.

[Fetty]

mikhael : u dont understand theoretical physics do you
its both knowledge and imagination but i think u dont have much imagination so as you nicly sayd : thers no point in discussing
and please dont come with the crap of go back studying
you dont even know what kind of school i was nor my grades not even the country


for you that what is, is and thers no other possibility
fine with me i respect that i simply dont agree

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Fetty
mikhael : u dont understand theoretical physics do you
its both knowledge and imagination but i think u dont have much imagination so as you nicly sayd : thers no point in discussing
 

Obviously, I haven't the foggiest clue as to your conception of "theoretical physics". I could go into a proper internet pissing contest of who has the bigger library, or has read the most book or has gone to which schools. I shall, however, not. I'll state it bluntly: I believe you to be incorrect, wrong, and furthermore, way off-base. I cannot backup this position in any rational way, of course.

and please dont come with the crap of go back studying
you dont even know what kind of school i was nor my grades not even the country
 

I would say that it would have to be an excellent school with excellent grades in a country known for its excellent tertiary educational system. I am, of course, basing all of this on the clarity and correctness of your statements--as well as your excellent grasp of the language. I should never have sought to match my wits and education against your excellent mind.

for you that what is, is and thers no other possibility
fine with me i respect that i simply dont agree

I fully respect that you do not agree, I do, however, feel it imperitive to point out, once again, that you are incorrect, wrong, and miseducated on the matter which you endavour to discuss.

Shrike: I stand corrected. Foolish though it is to use something like a fusion drive for ordinance delivery, it would appear that the GT[v]A does not consider it a great expense to throw away such drive systems on mere bombs. My other points, however, still stand.

[Anaz]

*gets popcorn*

this should be fun...