I just wasted far too much time on the page you linked to!
2446 posts • joined 27 Apr 2007
I just wasted far too much time on the page you linked to!
NASA won't fund a single launch organisation. It will fund multiple different organisations, at least two and very possibly three. It's got something to do with eggs and baskets.
You want to know what kills *LOTS* of people via man-made airborne contaminants? Coal-fired power stations.
"...or should that be plankton?"
Depends how fast the current is moving. Even a whale is plankton if the current is strong enough that the whale can't swim against it.
The same place 92 times? That's incredible! Do you live on the moon?
Aaaaaages. And that's just the wait for three to arrive together.
Those planets must be rather uncomfortable, with one cooked side and one frigid side and craaazy winds.
We keep finding earth-sized planets in the goldilocks zone around various dwarf stars but they are necessarily always close to their star and therefore tidally locked. I think our best chance of finding alien life will be on planets orbiting larger stars, so that the planets are orbiting far enough out to be spinning. Unfortunately those ones are not so easy to spot.
Pretty sure our magnetic field is also important, I wonder if any of these planets* have magnetic fields?
*not actually planets according to the official definition.
When my 9 year old saw the video he said "woah, that looks like an ominous butthole".
"Power isn't a problem if you have enough solar panels..."
Luckily, when you collect lots of old satellites you get to keep all their solar panels :-)
A biscuit tin?
The white tops on the waves tell me it was pretty windy out there when the landing happened, so the smoothness of the landing is a superb result. Well done SpaceX.
And of course if one engine fails on the way up the satellite should still get there but the water landing will probably be scrubbed (i.e. the first stage will just ditch) because of the extra fuel needed to fly with just 8 remaining engines. All of which is fine by me, it's great to see such a flexible system with built-in redundancy.
Light, by definition, is not at rest.
It is after you turn the switch off at bed time.
Great question. I think the answer might be something along these lines:
The detached outer parts of the sail are angled to reflect the light *inwards* and back at the central part, which means the force on the outer parts is both forwards and outwards to the sides. The outwards forces don't move the craft because the outer parts of the sail are attached to each other and are merely tensioned by the outwards forces.
The central parts of the sail push the craft directly backwards.
So, add up all the forces, and we get slightly more backwards force from the central part than forwards force from the outer parts, with the difference giving tension to the outer parts. The craft decelerates.
Someone please tell me (politely) if I've completely stuffed this up, as I'm no expert!
Avoid intense backscatter by making the sail a very shallow bowl shape (convex towards us) so that the reflected light spreads out as it comes back.
Around 26,250,000,000 liters which comes to about 10,488 Olympic-sized swimming pools...
...or just one Olympic-sized swimming pool, if it's a really deep one.
Original post downvoted because literally millions of small two-seaters have already been sold to happy customers all over the world. Not everyone wants a "standard size car".
Jeremy Clarkson is just as much of a valuable '(inter)National Treasure' as Stephen Fry; just operating on an entirely different plane.
Don't be silly, everyone knows Clarkson operates in an entirely different car.
Australian politics is certainly in a mess.
Hooray! I had thought I might be the only one who had sat down and worked out that replacing the UK's car fleet with electric cars would require an approximate doubling of the UK's power generation and distribution infrastructure.
@Neil Barnes Not only would it need the doubling of the power available but it would require that power to be available 24/7/365 - something that renewable power is unable to do (wind generate with no wind and solar doesn't cut it at night) Another thing is that the power would have to be so cheap otherwise people could not afford to use it - again something renewable energy isn't.
There is no need to double power station output or upgrade the distribution network. This is how it will work: solar panels on the house roof, Powerwall battery in the garage, charge your electric car overnight while you sleep. (On the rare occasions you need to drive more than 400km in one day you can use a fast-charge station at lunchtime). As for pricing: solar panels + Powerwall will pay for themselves in a decade at current prices so they are already financially viable, and pricing will improve further as the tech is refined.
"A similar but much more ambitious strategy has worked out very well in Hong Kong."
I was on holiday there a couple of weeks ago. Although I do miss the excitement of landing at the old airport, the new airport is very impressive. What makes the new airport work so well is the excellent express train into Kowloon & Hong Kong Island*, and the big fast road as well. Basically they've thought very carefully about transport infrastructure and they've spent big as required.
*A nice feature when departing is that you can check in your bags and collect your boarding pass at the central station on Hong Kong Island, thereby avoiding check in queues at the airport itself.
The driverless cars (at least for anothe 20-30 years) will require a licenced driver fully capable and able to control the vehicle at all times when needed.
Nope. Google has already managed to persuade the US government that the computer can be classified as the car's driver: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/09/google-computers-self-driving-cars-human
20-30 years? From the time driverless cars get the green light (pun intended) it will be 5 years max until the requirement for a licensed human back-up driver is removed.
It's called "off site storage."
It's certainly a whole level above cloud storage.
I'll show you my planet and you show me your dead king. Oh wait... you can't.
it's on the order of 13,000 feet. About a foot per ns. It'd be a pretty poor navigation system that depends on absolute time, as opposed to relative.
It'd be a pretty poor navigation system that depends on 1/6th of a dead king's armspan as a unit.
It is sad that it has come to this but I can't blame you.
(I can blame the Govt.)
Except that climate science is far from finished therefore the scientists have not "put themselves out of a job": they are being sacked (replaced) purely because government policy is to ignore climate change and support big business.
It would be nice if authors could be bothered to reply "thanks mate" after I've gone to the effort of using the Tips & Corrections link. Usually I don't get any indication of whether it has even been read, and that makes me less inclined to use the link in the future.
The winglets help reduce wasteful wingtip vortices. But I'm concerned about the tips of the winglets: there is nothing there preventing them having their own little vortices. The winglets need wingletlets, and the wingletlets need wingletletlets, etc. A branching fractal wing.
An infinite number of mathematicians walk into a bar. The first orders a beer, the second orders half a beer, the third orders a quarter of a beer and so on. After a few orders the bartender pours two beers and says, “you fellas ought to know your limits.”
Layers and layers of libraries, scripting languages etc. might be fast and convenient for developers, but they're wrecking the end user experience.
As a developer I totally agree with you. I remember the days when web page file size was all-important, now nobody seems to care. Most of my fellow developers have the attitude that it's more convenient to just bung in the MegaAwesome library which has a function for that tiny little thing you need to do because it's easier to add multimegabytes of bloat which will never be used than spending three minutes writing and testing a few lines of js. Madness. Now where's me false teeth and pipe?
"healthy skepticism" means considering both sides of the argument, and all research & evidence, with an open mind. LP was a cherry-picker: he was anything but open-minded.
And leaving your back door wide open.
There is a good telly series called Humans. Watch it if you haven't already.
What's with the horizontal cracks in the dune face? Something must be helping the particles stick/clump together otherwise the cracks would immediately fill in.
More specifically, it landed on a pad next (ish) to the one it launched from.
"Imagine the tip."
Most rockets are either pointy or rounded.
I've heard of a "salvo" of rockets before, but that's more if you're trying to blow stuff up
A salvo is when they are going up, so on the way back are they an ovlas?
It's worth mentioning that even if a Merlin engine fails it doesn't really matter. The Falcon 9 is designed to be able to continue with eight engines if one does conk out. (Presumably that would mean the Falcon Heavy could cope with up to three engine failures?)
We've already seen this happen: on one earlier launch an engine conked out mid-flight, and the Falcon 9 continued and successfully put the primary payload in the correct orbit. Extra fuel was used which meant the chances of getting the secondary payload to its correct orbit dropped from 99% to 95%. NASA decided that 95% wasn't good enough and refused permission for SpaceX to continue with the secondary payload... I still count that as a solid success for the Falcon 9's ability to handle an engine failure.
Gyros (reaction wheels) are good for a while... but over time they can accumulate stored momentum until they are spinning at maximum, at which point they are no longer useful. Of course you could add another mechanism (e.g. rockets) to move the craft so you can dump that momentum, but now you have two systems instead of one and therefore everything is heavier.
So why do some craft use reaction wheels? Because they are really good at making very tiny attitude adjustments, so you can keep the craft pointed accurately at a distant target. Not all craft need that accuracy.
Probably held together with gaffa tape. Works for backyard cricket balls.
Precedent: the Carrington event. Sorry to ruin your excuse.
"defenstrate their greenhouses"
Throw their greenhouses out of windows?
This ??? gallery of ??? grub proves that the best colour for post-pub nosh is beige. Also yellow. Often with an added splattering of brown and/or red. Green is to be kept to the absolute minimum, or preferably avoided altogether.
??? = wonderful / questionable / delectable / dodgy (I'll let you choose)
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017