Space X

This is the polite off topic forum. If you’re looking to talk smack and spew nonsense, keep moving along.

Moderators: mgil, chromoly

Post Reply
User avatar
mbasic
Registered User
Posts: 9331
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 9:06 am
Age: 104

Re: Space X

#61

Post by mbasic » Fri Feb 12, 2021 7:15 am

aurelius wrote: Thu Feb 11, 2021 3:52 pm
Hiphopapotamus wrote: Thu Feb 11, 2021 12:46 pm Yeah, it's apparently a pretty serious problem that they don't really have an answer for. How do you clean up thousands of bolts and washers moving at 16,000 miles an hour, fast enough just tear through any 'net' you use?
Controlled explosions to destabilize orbit and have them burn up in atmosphere.

I'm sure that is a very bad idea with all of the 5 seconds I spent on it.
you would have to direct hit the orbiting trash with your projectile and/or the intentional fragments from your proposed exploding thingy.

there is no concussive shockwave from an explosion in space to move shit around.

maybe load the explosive device with large quantities of metal dust or something?

seems messy from a standpoint of having more shit in space/orbit.

-----------------


User avatar
aurelius
Grade A Asshole
Posts: 4571
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:14 am
Location: Dallas
Age: 43

Re: Space X

#62

Post by aurelius » Fri Feb 12, 2021 7:26 am

Space Roomba?

User avatar
mikeylikey
Rabble Rouser
Posts: 1339
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:32 am
Location: Coconut Island
Age: 40

Re: Space X

#63

Post by mikeylikey » Fri Feb 12, 2021 8:59 am

So, what you guys are talking about is some version of the Kessler Syndrome, where you have a chain reaction of collisions in which each collision creates thousands of dangerous uncontrolled bits of debris which then collide with other stuff, and the amount of debris grows exponentially till you can't use space anymore.

The near term risk of this is probably exaggerated, and it definitely doesn't happen like you see in the movies with this massive rapid chain reaction like a room full of mousetraps going off. Stuff in space isn't just floating around, it's orbiting. Orbit is tricky. If you violently destruct a satellite, all the pieces are going to get a velocity kick in one random direction or another, and a significant fraction of those pieces are going to burn up fairly quickly because you've changed their orbit to an ellipse that intersects the atmosphere. The rest of the pieces will de-orbit, albeit much more slowly, due to atmospheric drag. And while those small pieces are dangerous because they can disable satellites, you aren't going to get a cataclysmic chain reaction at least with the current or near-future volume of stuff in orbit.

User avatar
mbasic
Registered User
Posts: 9331
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 9:06 am
Age: 104

Re: Space X

#64

Post by mbasic » Fri Feb 12, 2021 9:13 am

mikeylikey wrote: Fri Feb 12, 2021 8:59 am So, what you guys are talking about is some version of the Kessler Syndrome, where you have a chain reaction of collisions in which each collision creates thousands of dangerous uncontrolled bits of debris which then collide with other stuff, and the amount of debris grows exponentially till you can't use space anymore.

The near term risk of this is probably exaggerated, and it definitely doesn't happen like you see in the movies with this massive rapid chain reaction like a room full of mousetraps going off. Stuff in space isn't just floating around, it's orbiting. Orbit is tricky. If you violently destruct a satellite, all the pieces are going to get a velocity kick in one random direction or another, and a significant fraction of those pieces are going to burn up fairly quickly because you've changed their orbit to an ellipse that intersects the atmosphere. The rest of the pieces will de-orbit, albeit much more slowly, due to atmospheric drag. And while those small pieces are dangerous because they can disable satellites, you aren't going to get a cataclysmic chain reaction at least with the current or near-future volume of stuff in orbit.
I just don't think you'll get that much stuff to move around to begin with ... "vastness" and all.

------------------------------------------

OR

(don't care if I get a ton of shit for this)

Image

Hiphopapotamus
Registered User
Posts: 1205
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2017 1:16 pm
Age: 57

Re: Space X

#65

Post by Hiphopapotamus » Fri Feb 12, 2021 9:33 am

Image

User avatar
mikeylikey
Rabble Rouser
Posts: 1339
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:32 am
Location: Coconut Island
Age: 40

Re: Space X

#66

Post by mikeylikey » Fri Feb 12, 2021 10:53 am

mbasic wrote: Fri Feb 12, 2021 9:13 am

I just don't think you'll get that much stuff to move around to begin with ... "vastness" and all.
it's vast but not THAT vast, and there are a couple of other factors:

1) The density (or lack thereof) of objects needs to be considered in context of the speed. On a city street, a traffic density of one car per mile is nothing. You would barely even need to look both ways before crossing. Evenly space 3 Nascars at full speed on a 2.5 mile oval and you'd have a hard time running across the track without getting hit. Space junk is going ~ 100 times that fast.

2) While space is 3d, there are certain altitudes that are a lot more useful than others, so most of it is somewhat concentrated in finite orbit ranges.

User avatar
mbasic
Registered User
Posts: 9331
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 9:06 am
Age: 104

Re: Space X

#67

Post by mbasic » Fri Feb 12, 2021 12:54 pm

Hiphopapotamus wrote: Fri Feb 12, 2021 9:33 am Image
wiki:
( i stopped reading at the heading: "Lasers method" ... I'm not reading that wall of text/excuses)


Laser methods
The laser broom uses a ground-based laser to ablate the front of the debris, producing a rocket-like thrust that slows the object. With continued application, the debris would fall enough to be influenced by atmospheric drag.[185][186] During the late 1990s, the U.S. Air Force's Project Orion was a laser-broom design.[187] Although a test-bed device was scheduled to launch on a Space Shuttle in 2003, international agreements banning powerful laser testing in orbit limited its use to measurements.[188] The 2003 Space Shuttle Columbia disaster postponed the project and according to Nicholas Johnson, chief scientist and program manager for NASA's Orbital Debris Program Office, "There are lots of little gotchas in the Orion final report. There's a reason why it's been sitting on the shelf for more than a decade."[189]

The momentum of the laser-beam photons could directly impart a thrust on the debris sufficient to move small debris into new orbits out of the way of working satellites. NASA research in 2011 indicates that firing a laser beam at a piece of space junk could impart an impulse of 1 mm (0.039 in) per second, and keeping the laser on the debris for a few hours per day could alter its course by 200 m (660 ft) per day.[190] One drawback is the potential for material degradation; the energy may break up the debris, adding to the problem.[citation needed] A similar proposal places the laser on a satellite in Sun-synchronous orbit, using a pulsed beam to push satellites into lower orbits to accelerate their reentry.[16] A proposal to replace the laser with an Ion Beam Shepherd has been made,[191] and other proposals use a foamy ball of aerogel or a spray of water,[192] inflatable balloons,[193] electrodynamic tethers,[194] electroadhesion,[195] and dedicated anti-satellite weapons.[196]
Image

Hiphopapotamus
Registered User
Posts: 1205
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2017 1:16 pm
Age: 57

Re: Space X

#68

Post by Hiphopapotamus » Fri Feb 12, 2021 2:00 pm

We could also just make the space debris listen to the SS podcasts and eventually it will want to kill itself.

User avatar
mbasic
Registered User
Posts: 9331
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 9:06 am
Age: 104

Re: Space X

#69

Post by mbasic » Sun Feb 14, 2021 7:17 pm

mikeylikey wrote: Wed Feb 03, 2021 2:36 pm
mbasic wrote: Wed Feb 03, 2021 2:34 pm
mettkeks wrote: Wed Feb 03, 2021 2:33 pm mikeylikey Agree. Space travel should remain a hobby of some rich white dudes spending their own money the stole fair and square on it.
ftfy
Image
Dudes a snake oil salesmen ...


User avatar
mettkeks
Registered User
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2018 1:28 pm
Location: Siegen, Germany
Age: 28

Re: Space X

#70

Post by mettkeks » Mon Feb 15, 2021 12:10 am

mbasic wrote: Sun Feb 14, 2021 7:17 pm
mikeylikey wrote: Wed Feb 03, 2021 2:36 pm
mbasic wrote: Wed Feb 03, 2021 2:34 pm
mettkeks wrote: Wed Feb 03, 2021 2:33 pm mikeylikey Agree. Space travel should remain a hobby of some rich white dudes spending their own money the stole fair and square on it.
ftfy
Image
Dudes a snake oil salesmen ...

That reminds me of his tunnel boring company that managed to bore tunnels for a tenth of the cost of traditional tunnel boring. Though it turned out to be 100x more expensive when you scaled it up to real tunnel size... For a normal tunnel, not one of his wannabe hyperloop tunnels.

Edith says: Oh it's in the video and even worse than I remember. lol.

TommyJo
Registered User
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2021 12:49 am

Re: Space X

#71

Post by TommyJo » Mon Feb 15, 2021 3:12 am

mbasic wrote: Fri Feb 12, 2021 12:54 pm
Hiphopapotamus wrote: Fri Feb 12, 2021 9:33 am Image
wiki:
( i stopped reading at the heading: "Lasers method" ... I'm not reading that wall of text/excuses)


Laser methods
The laser broom uses a ground-based laser to ablate the front of the debris, producing a rocket-like thrust that slows the object. With continued application, the debris would fall enough to be influenced by atmospheric drag.[185][186] During the late 1990s, the U.S. Air Force's Project Orion was a laser-broom design.[187] Although a test-bed device was scheduled to launch on a Space Shuttle in 2003, international agreements banning powerful laser testing in orbit limited its use to measurements.[188] The 2003 Space Shuttle Columbia disaster postponed the project and according to Nicholas Johnson, chief scientist and program manager for NASA's Orbital Debris Program Office, "There are lots of little gotchas in the Orion final report. There's a reason why it's been sitting on the shelf for more than a decade."[189]

The momentum of the laser-beam photons could directly impart a thrust on the debris sufficient to move small debris into new orbits out of the way of working satellites. NASA research in 2011 indicates that firing a laser beam at a piece of space junk could impart an impulse of 1 mm (0.039 in) per second, and keeping the laser on the debris for a few hours per day could alter its course by 200 m (660 ft) per day.[190] One drawback is the potential for material degradation; the energy may break up the debris, adding to the problem.[citation needed] A similar proposal places the laser on a satellite in Sun-synchronous orbit, using a pulsed beam to push satellites into lower orbits to accelerate their reentry.[16] A proposal to replace the laser with an Ion Beam Shepherd has been made,[191] and other proposals use a foamy ball of aerogel or a spray of water,[192] inflatable balloons,[193] electrodynamic tethers,[194] electroadhesion,[195] and dedicated anti-satellite weapons.[196]
Image

Here! The last sentence refers to "anti-satellite weapons". This is the main problem with all these devices. Each of them can be recognized as an anti-satellite weapon. And this can be problematic from the point of view of the treaty on outer space.
I hope that everyone will be able to come to an agreement for the common good

User avatar
aurelius
Grade A Asshole
Posts: 4571
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:14 am
Location: Dallas
Age: 43

Re: Space X

#72

Post by aurelius » Mon Feb 15, 2021 9:28 am

TommyJo wrote: Mon Feb 15, 2021 3:12 amI hope that everyone will be able to come to an agreement for the common good
Image

DoctorWho
Registered User
Posts: 1822
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 9:40 am
Age: 63

Re: Space X

#73

Post by DoctorWho » Wed Feb 17, 2021 1:05 pm

You guys are a tough crowd. The guy:
- starts a car company (the last remaining auto start up was Jeep in the 1940s or so).
- starts SpaceX, putting lots of satellites to orbit to provide wireless data (making the Russians and Chinese plan their own).
- starts The Boring Co. (using the waste would be great if it could ever work).

Most new ventures fail. I'm guessing that most new ventures in each of the above categories fail more often and bigger. He could have just eff'd off after paypal, but taking on big things is pretty great -- even with his problems with saying too much.

User avatar
mettkeks
Registered User
Posts: 1600
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2018 1:28 pm
Location: Siegen, Germany
Age: 28

Re: Space X

#74

Post by mettkeks » Wed Feb 17, 2021 2:27 pm

DoctorWho wrote: Wed Feb 17, 2021 1:05 pm You guys are a tough crowd. The guy:
- starts a car company (the last remaining auto start up was Jeep in the 1940s or so).
- starts SpaceX, putting lots of satellites to orbit to provide wireless data (making the Russians and Chinese plan their own).
- starts The Boring Co. (using the waste would be great if it could ever work).

Most new ventures fail. I'm guessing that most new ventures in each of the above categories fail more often and bigger. He could have just eff'd off after paypal, but taking on big things is pretty great -- even with his problems with saying too much.
He started space X and got all the government coin he needed. Then he put batterie's in cars he sold to rich environmental snobs and secured more government funding and still hasn't made any money from selling expensive batterie's with overpriced cars around them. The boring Co. is just bullshit. Like the the hyperloop, and a lot of the stuff he tries to sell to governments and stock markets whenever he "revolutionizes" anything.

DoctorWho
Registered User
Posts: 1822
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 9:40 am
Age: 63

Re: Space X

#75

Post by DoctorWho » Wed Feb 17, 2021 4:56 pm

mettkeks wrote: Wed Feb 17, 2021 2:27 pm
DoctorWho wrote: Wed Feb 17, 2021 1:05 pm You guys are a tough crowd. The guy:
- starts a car company (the last remaining auto start up was Jeep in the 1940s or so).
- starts SpaceX, putting lots of satellites to orbit to provide wireless data (making the Russians and Chinese plan their own).
- starts The Boring Co. (using the waste would be great if it could ever work).

Most new ventures fail. I'm guessing that most new ventures in each of the above categories fail more often and bigger. He could have just eff'd off after paypal, but taking on big things is pretty great -- even with his problems with saying too much.
He started space X and got all the government coin he needed. Then he put batterie's in cars he sold to rich environmental snobs and secured more government funding and still hasn't made any money from selling expensive batterie's with overpriced cars around them. The boring Co. is just bullshit. Like the the hyperloop, and a lot of the stuff he tries to sell to governments and stock markets whenever he "revolutionizes" anything.
I see your points, which are pretty fair, and he might fail at all these. Statistically, it's pretty likely that he'll fail at one or more. And there is something in the books about selling credits to the auto manufacturers, but Tesla showed a profit last year. Maybe it's a profit only if you look at it in just the right way, but it's even while designing new models. And he's bucking the Lidar trend for self-driving going instead for a machine learning thingamabob. There is so a lot of good that comes out of somebody trying something new, even if it fails.

I was skeptical of Tesla for a long time, and uncertain about the environmental benefit of elec cars (though I'd change if we started building nukes and if the disposal and mining issues are not so big), but it's a hell of an accomplishment to me. And the Ludacris mode changed my perception of electrics from pale-vegan-driven priuses to lots of speed.

There def are a lot of actual subsidies, and tax breaks/credits (which have arguments going both ways), but that's the world we like in. I don't the man himself for them.

User avatar
aurelius
Grade A Asshole
Posts: 4571
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:14 am
Location: Dallas
Age: 43

Re: Space X

#76

Post by aurelius » Thu Feb 18, 2021 7:03 am

DoctorWho wrote: Wed Feb 17, 2021 4:56 pm You guys are a tough crowd. The guy:
- starts a car company (the last remaining auto start up was Jeep in the 1940s or so).
- starts SpaceX, putting lots of satellites to orbit to provide wireless data (making the Russians and Chinese plan their own).
- starts The Boring Co. (using the waste would be great if it could ever work).
Yeah. I agree with this. There are a lot of worse examples of rich assholes out there. Gates and Musk are not those rich assholes. They are actively trying to change the world with their own efforts.

My main complaint is Musk seems to want to be the idiots' champion. And so he presents this public face of an anti-education stoner. When in reality he has an elite education and is a hard working, risk taker that is hyper dedicated to what he does (anyone see the interview he did with the car manufacturing expert discussing the problems with Tesla cars?).

DoctorWho
Registered User
Posts: 1822
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 9:40 am
Age: 63

Re: Space X

#77

Post by DoctorWho » Fri Feb 19, 2021 10:09 am

aurelius wrote: Thu Feb 18, 2021 7:03 am
DoctorWho wrote: Wed Feb 17, 2021 4:56 pm You guys are a tough crowd. The guy:
- starts a car company (the last remaining auto start up was Jeep in the 1940s or so).
- starts SpaceX, putting lots of satellites to orbit to provide wireless data (making the Russians and Chinese plan their own).
- starts The Boring Co. (using the waste would be great if it could ever work).
Yeah. I agree with this. There are a lot of worse examples of rich assholes out there. Gates and Musk are not those rich assholes. They are actively trying to change the world with their own efforts.

My main complaint is Musk seems to want to be the idiots' champion. And so he presents this public face of an anti-education stoner. When in reality he has an elite education and is a hard working, risk taker that is hyper dedicated to what he does (anyone see the interview he did with the car manufacturing expert discussing the problems with Tesla cars?).
I know Musk draws a lot of negative attention, but didn't know why. Just read Musk's wikipedia page, and there are things there to not like about him (as there are about all of us). But he's likely the only recent billionaire who could build a bookcase.

Didn't know about anti-education part (though he started a school for his kids and about 20 others that sounds like a dream.)

JonA
Registered User
Posts: 2138
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:00 am
Age: 48

Re: Space X

#78

Post by JonA » Fri Feb 19, 2021 11:20 am

FWIW, I just got an email from Starlink: "Starlink Now Available - First Come, First Served". But it turns out it's just available for making a $99 deposit and they'll let me know as soon as it's actually available.

re: Musk I dunno, he's just some rich guy, same as the rest. Like Steve Jobs, some people like his products so they think he must be a nice guy. Other's immediately dislike him for that same reason.
DoctorWho wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 10:09 amBut he's likely the only recent billionaire who could build a bookcase.
Have you happened to see David Letterman's interview of Bill Gates? Dude is trying to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich while they talk and just can't seem to get it done.

DoctorWho
Registered User
Posts: 1822
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 9:40 am
Age: 63

Re: Space X

#79

Post by DoctorWho » Fri Feb 19, 2021 11:40 am

JonA wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 11:20 am FWIW, I just got an email from Starlink: "Starlink Now Available - First Come, First Served". But it turns out it's just available for making a $99 deposit and they'll let me know as soon as it's actually available.

re: Musk I dunno, he's just some rich guy, same as the rest. Like Steve Jobs, some people like his products so they think he must be a nice guy. Other's immediately dislike him for that same reason.
DoctorWho wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 10:09 amBut he's likely the only recent billionaire who could build a bookcase.
Have you happened to see David Letterman's interview of Bill Gates? Dude is trying to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich while they talk and just can't seem to get it done.
Haven't seen it but will look for it. My view about Musk compared w others comes down to little more than I prefer mechanical types to software types, and people who shake things up. No deep thoughts involved.

The guys I worry about are the social media titans. Network effect + enormous scalability = whichever company wins the tournament makes the founders fantastically rich. And it's now a major public forum run by guys who all have the same politics.

User avatar
mikeylikey
Rabble Rouser
Posts: 1339
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:32 am
Location: Coconut Island
Age: 40

Re: Space X

#80

Post by mikeylikey » Wed Mar 03, 2021 7:42 am

Looks like Elon is going to try another bellyflop manoeuvre today. Third time's a charm maybe. Ima very excite.

Post Reply