This_Username_42
This_Username_42 t1_j25bsli wrote
Reply to comment by IsraelZulu in A *dumb* question, for a mixup by Independent-Choice-4
There is a finite amount of potential energy that is stored by you being elevated in a gravitational field. That’s why going up a mountain is harder than going down a mountain, you’re putting energy into climbing, and getting it back when you descend
If you imagine being out in space, and you fell to earth (negating air resistance) — you’d be moving very very fast. When you started, there is a lot of energy stored — you’re at the very top of the “mountain”
That means that you have a certain amount of kinetic energy corresponding to your speed and mass.
When you “hit” earth, and imagine a soft landing where you aren’t obliterated — that kinetic energy is exactly equal to you “climbing” the mountain — I.e. being out in space.
When you want to climb the mountain to get out of earth’s gravitational field, then you need to use that much energy to get up to speed to jump out.
Escape velocity is simply how fast you’d have to start out at to get away from earth, negating air resistance.
This_Username_42 t1_j1vvrmb wrote
Reply to comment by GuacamoleFrejole in do we really believe aliens can decode the golden records by Calm-Confidence8429
That’s extremely unlikely. They don’t have different photons than we do
This_Username_42 t1_j1v5b5k wrote
Reply to comment by kjpmi in do we really believe aliens can decode the golden records by Calm-Confidence8429
Well, omoamumao wasn’t sending any signals out — voyager does (or did?) send out a radio signal
This_Username_42 t1_j0psd9a wrote
Reply to comment by Still_Vacation_3534 in What if a quantum computer could navigate a hypersonic missile?? by dcRoWdYh
Quantum computers can’t solve impossible problems — they can solve some instances of very high complexity computation in less time compared to classical computing.
Like I said — a missile doesn’t have a hard time figuring things out quickly enough, it has a hard time gathering accurate information (flare countermeasures), or determining where the craft will be in X time (unknowable since it is piloted) and then getting to the correct position at the right time because it is a physical aircraft bound by physical laws.
Kinematics are not complex problems compared to computational techniques on a classical computer
If you were talking about some type of quantum camera that (insert made up helpful feature here), sure, maybe; but the inputs to your quantum computer are the same as the classical one. And after the quantum computer does its job, even, somehow, let’s pretend it does it instantaneously, are still limited by response time of the missile and Physical laws. Which are the real crux of the difficulties anyways
This_Username_42 t1_j0jq75x wrote
Reply to comment by armorhide406 in What if a quantum computer could navigate a hypersonic missile?? by dcRoWdYh
OP missed the logic by miles
This_Username_42 t1_j0jq2pj wrote
Reply to comment by fookidookidoo in What if a quantum computer could navigate a hypersonic missile?? by dcRoWdYh
Sorry you should try a megafemto hypercamera analyzer if you want decent results read a book please
This_Username_42 t1_j0jpzsv wrote
Reply to comment by dcRoWdYh in What if a quantum computer could navigate a hypersonic missile?? by dcRoWdYh
Then put that in the post lol
But also that’s an even less reasonable answer because a quantum computer isn’t a communication device. If you’re talking about quantum communication, that won’t be somehow unphased by other effects, it just pertains to fidelity of communications in the face of intercepting a signal
Furthermore my points still stands as the limitations are not onboard computers, but rather physical realities of the missile as an aircraft
I like your level of condescension after reading a handful of articles on quantum computing
This_Username_42 t1_j0jpx0x wrote
Reply to comment by dcRoWdYh in What if a quantum computer could navigate a hypersonic missile?? by dcRoWdYh
Then put that in the post lol
But also that’s an even less reasonable answer because a quantum computer isn’t a communication device. If you’re talking about quantum communication, that won’t be somehow unphased by other effects, it just pertains to fidelity of communications
Furthermore my points still stands as the limitations are not onboard computers, but rather physical realities of the missile as an aircraft
I like your level of condescension after reading a handful of articles on quantum computing
This_Username_42 t1_j0ii7fm wrote
Higher cost, same function. Waste.
A missile isn’t limited by its computation. It’s limited by information gathering (knowing position and vector of its true target) and physical limitations of itself a a physical aircraft.
A quantum computer won’t do a better job of analyzing incoming info (cpus don’t gather information) and certainly won’t help it fly any better, other than adding weight
This_Username_42 t1_iy7rjqe wrote
Reply to comment by Coffee_Huffer in Best times for stargazing/astrophotography? by Sparkychong
The term is solar noon — you can look up based on your location here:
This_Username_42 t1_ixnke5t wrote
Reply to comment by UmbralRaptor in What school level physics ecuasions were used in the apollo moon landing missions? by langos4life
Come on man of course that’s what he meant
This_Username_42 t1_ixkwcx7 wrote
Reply to comment by jim10040 in what would happen if a liquid mass of water collided with earth? by Brave-Line-6326
You lost us with the water iron
This_Username_42 t1_ixkwaw0 wrote
Reply to comment by EarthSolar in what would happen if a liquid mass of water collided with earth? by Brave-Line-6326
It would nearly immediately freeze.
The vacuum of space would cause water to boil off, drawing energy from the mass until it froze
This_Username_42 t1_ix74byy wrote
Reply to comment by triffid_hunter in Someone tell me how the Big Bang began 13 billion years ago, yet the *observable* universe is 83 billion light years apart? by novacks0001
I went to undergrad for physics and took some (not many) Astronomy courses and I do not think I knew this. Thanks
This_Username_42 t1_ix4sndp wrote
Reply to comment by Throwawaycuzawkward in What are some horrifying space facts. by galactic_oblivion
I like your comment and agree, and in some ways I think the freeze-dry flavor of boiling might even be spookier to many people.
People have been getting boiled for a lot of human history, but not freeze dried — that’s some space-age torture
This_Username_42 t1_ix4r519 wrote
Reply to comment by Throwawaycuzawkward in What are some horrifying space facts. by galactic_oblivion
To clarify for any layfolk — you don’t boil as in “getting hot”. The pressure drop means that the boiling point of water is lower than body temp, so the liquid will turn to a vapor and escape the body (high pressure moves to low pressure), which will remove heat from your body
So you’re not on the stove boiling, you’re stuck in a (painful) freeze dryer
This_Username_42 t1_iwltyo7 wrote
Reply to comment by Equivalent_Ad_8413 in Artemis II Status? by Equivalent_Ad_8413
As someone who supports space exploration, saying “we need” to launch one a year is a pretty childish way to scope out space travel plans
This_Username_42 t1_iwemshp wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in The oracle who predicted SLS’s launch in 2023 has thoughts about Artemis III - "It may happen in 2028, but I'm not sure it will be on SLS" by Adeldor
No no please crucify me I’ve been waiting for this
This_Username_42 t1_iwc58ne wrote
Reply to The oracle who predicted SLS’s launch in 2023 has thoughts about Artemis III - "It may happen in 2028, but I'm not sure it will be on SLS" by Adeldor
I like how we are talking about humans pushing our outer limits for exploration, but within the context of believing that some magical oracle man can guess the future
This_Username_42 t1_iu2ydc3 wrote
Reply to comment by triffid_hunter in If someone builds a space elevator, what is its clear night visibility distance? If a station was grounded in Los Angeles, how far away would it be visible assuming the station is many times the size of the ISS? by [deleted]
How many “good” regions are there? I assume some rock types would be unsuitable for anchoring (maybe it’s anchored so deep it doesn’t matter?) but definitely not near tectonic plates and presumably not in any type of water? Would need to be close to a major port or shipping hub, and probably some other criteria
This_Username_42 t1_iu1di24 wrote
Kinda like asking — my car has a 16 gallon gas tank, how much torque does my car output?
We’d need to know engine displacement and gearing to determine a ballpark for torque, and it would only be an estimate
You’ve given us total amount of fuel, which is how much energy you have to spend. But the burn rate and nozzle design determine thrust (among other secondary factors mentioned in this thread). Imagine burning 13 lbs fuel on the ground. What is your thrust? Very low. Ok, say you have a super small nozzle and burn rate. Burn lasts a long time, but low thrust. Huge nozzle and high burn rate? Very large thrust for a short time
This_Username_42 t1_isr75qz wrote
Reply to comment by sg3niner in NASA outlines case for making sole-source SLS award to Boeing-Northrop joint venture by jeffsmith202
Willie would only use it in a bind and leave you double the cash to cover it
Unless you’re the IRS
This_Username_42 t1_j25cdy4 wrote
Reply to comment by Saoirsenobas in A *dumb* question, for a mixup by Independent-Choice-4
If you threw a hammer at escape velocity toward earth it would hit earth because it would be pulled into the gravitational field. If you’re adding velocity toward the center of the system and you’re already orbiting the body, you’re going to go eccentric if the speed is low and impact if the speed is high. You’re ripping that hammer and it’s gonna burn up in atmosphere