NASA plans electrolysis-powered ROBOT EEL for Europa's oceans Jupiter's moon Europa isn't the place for a Curiosity-style rover, since under its icy crust it may well have liquid oceans, so NASA's slung some money towards developing a robot eel concept. The robot, funded as one of a bunch of advanced concepts to get Phase 1 funding under NASA's Innovative Advanced Concepts program, which …
"Might even be unconstitutional here in the U.S., where we have the right to arm bears or something like that."
I have it upon great authority from Billy-bob that one has the right to bare arms in the US.
Although, the actual intent, as insane as it sounds today, recall that gunpoweder ran firearms, they were flintlocks or fused cannons, *everyone* was allowed to have any one of those.
As a cannon cost as much as a fire engine of the period, rifles were a lifelong investment and pistols were for the gentry.
Today, one goes through the same background investigation as is required for a top secret security clearance, which involves neighbors interviewed, a decade of former neighbors and employers (if something cropped up in the seven year portion), current and former employers, current and former coworkers, one's criminal history, domestic violence makes you shit out of luck, current on child support.
*Then* you can get your howitzer.
Or machinegun.
Or disguised firearm.
Or "destructive weapons" (see food for howitzers and other things that can blow up the neighborhood).
*While* previously paying for a $200 tax stamp, which if rejected, see shit out of luck.
Me? I'm happy with a bolt action, lever action, semiautomatic action and nothing crazier. .50 BMG is flat out wrong for me, my osteoarthritis would never forgive me that abuse.
I'll be happy with a .308 precision fire system to enter into contests for cash prize.
My pistols are largely the same, expensive, due to customization to ensure pinpoint accuracy.
I keep a hunting rifle and pistol to dispatch still living game, lest it suffer further.
But, the majority of my firearms defend me from only one "tyranny" of this modern world; the tyranny of the unperforated "x" ring.
I enjoy that last bit.
Back to the matter at hand, I'd use radiothermic generators to melt the ice and slide in the probe behind.
But, I'm dubious on gathering enough energy, considering our current level of technology.
Making the damned thing work on Earth would be beyond our current level, considering the specifications. Might as well specify a TARDIS.
There was already talk about using RTGs to generate heat for a probe to (very) slowly melt its way down the ice to the ocean. Once it reaches liquid water the eel can be released to wander around.
The big issue as I see it is how to communicate back what it finds because it sure won't be able to do so through 10 miles of ice. Can the probe melting its way down unspool a fiber behind it that's connected to something on the surface? That way the undersea probe can seize the line once it reaches water and releases the eel and the eel can stay within contact of the probe which acts as a relay to the surface.
Easy for me to say, but trying so many new things at once something is bound to go wrong. Not even counting the possibility of the eel and/or the probe being eaten if Europa's oceans are as interesting as we'd all like them to be...
Yes that seems to reared it's Fugly head again....it was in this one as well
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/05/11/small_wordpress_sites_leaking_like_sieves/
and this one (although you need to get to page 2 for the repeat)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/05/08/a_loud_confusing_exciting_jumble_of_the_great_and_the_gregarious/
This post has been deleted by its author
Mining asteroids for water because of the supposed cost of placing water into orbit is a bit misguided. Just combine the following:
space elevator
Archimedes screw
rising sea levels
If it's plausible to have a space elevator then it's just as plausible to have an Archimedes screw of the same length. Dip it into the ocean and hey presto, you have water for space flight and a solution for rising sea levels!
You do realise that an Archimedes screw operates at an angle and won't work vertically up a space elevator, don't you?
And do you have any idea how much power would be needed to lift enough water to make a noticeable difference to sea levels?
Finally (and assuming AGW sea-level rise is real, I really don't want to get into that debate here, let's just assume it is and carry on, ok), what do you think will happen to sea levels once climate returns to its "usual" state if we have removed so much water already? That's right, sea levels go down from "usual" levels.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
