Advertisement
by The 44th Indp Legion » Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:01 am
by SquareDisc City » Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:02 am
You do realise that this is relatively often the case. It's annoying, but we can't do a lot about it.YellowApple wrote:a single paper that is not openly available without paying up and that doesn't seem to be matched by other, freely-available scientific documentation
XXXO=
XXXO=
XXXO=
XXXO=
XXXXXXOO=
XXXXXXOO=
XXXXXXOO=
XXXXXXOO=
XXXXXXOO=
XXXXXXOO=
XXXXXXOO=
XXXXXXOO=
by Fata (Ancient) » Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:30 am
by Our Most Resplendent Goddess Sen » Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:32 am
YellowApple wrote:Meanwhile, this article on HowStuffWorks indicates that the complete opposite is true in real-life hybrid vehicles - that smaller engines are more efficient. So your mileage may vary.
YellowApple wrote:Very good points, I suppose. However, it still doesn't answer one fundamental issue that I have with big ships vs. small ships: the square-cube law. What's being discussed is true for the reactor itself, but if the main engines still only provide thrust over one face of a rectangular prism, and the prism as a whole has a volume - and therefore mass (assuming equal density in the entire volume) - growing faster than the area of thrust, then wouldn't that be an increasingly-restrictive bottleneck as the size grows?
YellowApple wrote:Big ships have big mass, which means more propulsive force is necessary to move with a given acceleration than a small ship with a small mass. More force equates to more fuel consumed per unit of acceleration.
by IshCong » Thu Nov 01, 2012 5:27 am
The 44th Indp Legion wrote:This has been bugging me for a while now - but what if your ships/fighters had a propulsion method that didn't require fuel in the ordinary sense?
Given the size and sheer mass of most of my ships ICly (I don't usually bring anything but the 'small' ones out for RPs for obvious reasons, but w/e), the main sublight propulsion is, in principle, an alcubierre drive - in other words, a spatial distortion drive that will accelerate irrespective of mass. A bonus feature is being able to deflect stuff (including lasers, funnily enough) with it at certain angles. However, the fighters and missiles both use a different propulsion system from that and another. The fighters use a 'gravatic' drive, the same technology as on my hovertanks, to propel them efficiently whilst relatively near a great mass, usually a planet, but ships fine too.
The 44th Indp Legion wrote:Missiles on the other hand use a more traditional rocket-like propellant, which enables them to traverse inter-ship distances autonomously, but is less efficient because you have to drag a mass in fuel around.
The 44th Indp Legion wrote:Obviously my tech base takes a few liberties, but could similar principles be applied more realisticly? Furthermore, I'd like to add that 'strike craft' (by which I mean actual ship-sized stuff) rather than 'fighters' can work well in an FT setting, if noly because if you put them in a big mothership/carrier-thing, you don't have to fit them with (an often bulky, heavy and in combat unnecary) intergalactic FTL drive, right? That could be a lot of weight saved, right? Or am I just talking fantasies and nonsense?
by Yes Im Biop » Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:38 am
[violet] wrote:Urggg... trawling through ads looking for roman orgies...
Idaho Conservatives wrote:FST creates a half-assed thread, goes on his same old feminist rant, and it turns into a thirty page dogpile in under twenty four hours. Just another day on NSG.
Immoren wrote:Saphirasia and his ICBCPs (inter continental ballistic cattle prod)
by Old Sarthal » Thu Nov 01, 2012 8:07 am
by Yes Im Biop » Thu Nov 01, 2012 8:08 am
Old Sarthal wrote:Yes Im Biop wrote:
Space ant's.
While space ants are possible, space bees would obviously be more effective, as space ants must carry fuel for the return trip, while space bees die after stinging anyway, not to mention that space bees are far more intimidating, especially if crossbred with space sharks.
[violet] wrote:Urggg... trawling through ads looking for roman orgies...
Idaho Conservatives wrote:FST creates a half-assed thread, goes on his same old feminist rant, and it turns into a thirty page dogpile in under twenty four hours. Just another day on NSG.
Immoren wrote:Saphirasia and his ICBCPs (inter continental ballistic cattle prod)
by Rethan » Thu Nov 01, 2012 8:12 am
Old Sarthal wrote:Yes Im Biop wrote:
Space ant's.
While space ants are possible, space bees would obviously be more effective, as space ants must carry fuel for the return trip, while space bees die after stinging anyway, not to mention that space bees are far more intimidating, especially if crossbred with space sharks.
by Old Sarthal » Thu Nov 01, 2012 8:16 am
Yes Im Biop wrote:Old Sarthal wrote:
While space ants are possible, space bees would obviously be more effective, as space ants must carry fuel for the return trip, while space bees die after stinging anyway, not to mention that space bees are far more intimidating, especially if crossbred with space sharks.
...Space Spider Hawks.
by Yes Im Biop » Thu Nov 01, 2012 8:18 am
[violet] wrote:Urggg... trawling through ads looking for roman orgies...
Idaho Conservatives wrote:FST creates a half-assed thread, goes on his same old feminist rant, and it turns into a thirty page dogpile in under twenty four hours. Just another day on NSG.
Immoren wrote:Saphirasia and his ICBCPs (inter continental ballistic cattle prod)
by G-Tech Corporation » Thu Nov 01, 2012 8:35 am
by Escalan Corps-Star Island » Thu Nov 01, 2012 11:55 am
G-Tech Corporation wrote:Yes Im Biop wrote:
Implications... terrifying
I surmise they spin webs of dark matter in the void between stars to capture the unwary spacefarer, then cocoon him in stranglets and siphon off his matter and thermal energy to warm their bellies in the frigid blackness whence they make their homes.
by Balrogga » Thu Nov 01, 2012 12:07 pm
G-Tech Corporation wrote:Yes Im Biop wrote:
Implications... terrifying
I surmise they spin webs of dark matter in the void between stars to capture the unwary spacefarer, then cocoon him in stranglets and siphon off his matter and thermal energy to warm their bellies in the frigid blackness whence they make their homes.
by G-Tech Corporation » Thu Nov 01, 2012 12:18 pm
Balrogga wrote:G-Tech Corporation wrote:
I surmise they spin webs of dark matter in the void between stars to capture the unwary spacefarer, then cocoon him in stranglets and siphon off his matter and thermal energy to warm their bellies in the frigid blackness whence they make their homes.
You know, that gives me some ideas I can use with my Kythons. Thanks
by Yes Im Biop » Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:59 pm
[violet] wrote:Urggg... trawling through ads looking for roman orgies...
Idaho Conservatives wrote:FST creates a half-assed thread, goes on his same old feminist rant, and it turns into a thirty page dogpile in under twenty four hours. Just another day on NSG.
Immoren wrote:Saphirasia and his ICBCPs (inter continental ballistic cattle prod)
by YellowApple » Thu Nov 01, 2012 5:35 pm
by G-Tech Corporation » Thu Nov 01, 2012 5:38 pm
YellowApple wrote:Yes Im Biop wrote:
The hell have i done...
A wonderful thing.
That brings up an interesting question, though; what considerations would need to be taken to establish the feasibility of an organism that lives in the vacuum of space as its natural habitat? Based on things like space activity suits in real life, as well as the amount of radiation in space, I imagine an exoskeletal organism would have a better chance of survival, but that's just wild speculation.
by Arthropoda Ingens » Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:02 pm
You're assuming that space lifeforms would still be carbon- and DNA based.G-Tech Corporation wrote:YellowApple wrote:
A wonderful thing.
That brings up an interesting question, though; what considerations would need to be taken to establish the feasibility of an organism that lives in the vacuum of space as its natural habitat? Based on things like space activity suits in real life, as well as the amount of radiation in space, I imagine an exoskeletal organism would have a better chance of survival, but that's just wild speculation.
Hence, Space Spiders. Their genomes would have to be excessively mutation resistant, their exoskeletons would need a tensile strength near that of FT composites, and they might even need multiple membranes through which foodstuffs would pass to prevent explosive decompression of their innards.
by G-Tech Corporation » Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:06 pm
Arthropoda Ingens wrote:You're assuming that space lifeforms would still be carbon- and DNA based.G-Tech Corporation wrote:
Hence, Space Spiders. Their genomes would have to be excessively mutation resistant, their exoskeletons would need a tensile strength near that of FT composites, and they might even need multiple membranes through which foodstuffs would pass to prevent explosive decompression of their innards.
As opposed to consisting of weird spacetime bullshit, Xeelee-like.
by SquareDisc City » Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:33 pm
YellowApple wrote:Yes Im Biop wrote:
The hell have i done...
A wonderful thing.
That brings up an interesting question, though; what considerations would need to be taken to establish the feasibility of an organism that lives in the vacuum of space as its natural habitat? Based on things like space activity suits in real life, as well as the amount of radiation in space, I imagine an exoskeletal organism would have a better chance of survival, but that's just wild speculation.
by Strykla » Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:37 pm
SquareDisc City wrote:YellowApple wrote:
A wonderful thing.
That brings up an interesting question, though; what considerations would need to be taken to establish the feasibility of an organism that lives in the vacuum of space as its natural habitat? Based on things like space activity suits in real life, as well as the amount of radiation in space, I imagine an exoskeletal organism would have a better chance of survival, but that's just wild speculation.
Toss away your science and run on rule of cool. Survival in space purely on solar power might be possible, but to grow an organism needs to take in matter, and space is known for its lack of such.
Now an atmosphere-less planet is another mater. Provided there's a suitable solvent life could exist. In a vacuum any liquid will tend to either freeze or boil, but it could be replenished from geological sources. The organism's skin and general physiology might well be designed to minimise fluid losses; perhaps it could be waxy like certain plants. If warm-blooded it would not need as fast a metabolism as life on Earth since there'd be no air to cool it. And of course it can't breathe, it would have to take in everything it needs from either solid or liquid substances.
by Yes Im Biop » Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:44 pm
SquareDisc City wrote:YellowApple wrote:
A wonderful thing.
That brings up an interesting question, though; what considerations would need to be taken to establish the feasibility of an organism that lives in the vacuum of space as its natural habitat? Based on things like space activity suits in real life, as well as the amount of radiation in space, I imagine an exoskeletal organism would have a better chance of survival, but that's just wild speculation.
Toss away your science and run on rule of cool. Survival in space purely on solar power might be possible, but to grow an organism needs to take in matter, and space is known for its lack of such.
Suck in enough energy and it could force its self to mutate
Now an atmosphere-less planet is another mater. Provided there's a suitable solvent life could exist. In a vacuum any liquid will tend to either freeze or boil, but it could be replenished from geological sources. The organism's skin and general physiology might well be designed to minimise fluid losses; perhaps it could be waxy like certain plants. If warm-blooded it would not need as fast a metabolism as life on Earth since there'd be no air to cool it. And of course it can't breathe, it would have to take in everything it needs from either solid or liquid substances.
[violet] wrote:Urggg... trawling through ads looking for roman orgies...
Idaho Conservatives wrote:FST creates a half-assed thread, goes on his same old feminist rant, and it turns into a thirty page dogpile in under twenty four hours. Just another day on NSG.
Immoren wrote:Saphirasia and his ICBCPs (inter continental ballistic cattle prod)
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement