Sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Admin Acc
Posts: 3,288
|
Post by Sgtsammac on Apr 18, 2012 5:13:18 GMT
In the very least, I may decide that after x date AM powerplants become "standard" just to make sure we 'can' achieve interstellar flight on a scale that would still be playable. It'd be rather boring if we were stuck with 7 month flight times between planets in ships that could only carry a few trained guys at a time.
And that way at least with AM and AR tech being theoretically sound, I'm sticking as close to reality as I can.
|
|
|
Post by IcyNudibranch on Apr 18, 2012 5:22:39 GMT
I don't think the arc reactor would work. From the best answers I could get (maybe you know more than me, I just looked it up on Wikipedia), it sounds like it was never properly explained, and that the best explanation would be it is a matter-antimatter reactor. So, basically, an arc reactor and an antimatter reactor would be the same thing, just on different scales.
Maybe this entire post just did nothing.
|
|
Sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Admin Acc
Posts: 3,288
|
Post by Sgtsammac on Apr 18, 2012 5:37:59 GMT
The arc reactor is a nuclear fusion reactor. The Palladium (yes it's real, yes it works the way IM says it does) stores and purifies hydrogen which the reactor then slams together. The resulting process creates intense amount of energy, helium, and radioactive neutrons. (My friend said they had a 15min half life but she wasn't sure how accurate the number was) The only reason an AR isn't feasible with current technology is because we have no way to contain the force of a small star. That and the palladium deteriorates during the process, and it's a fairly rare mineral (Used in electronics).
But in theory, the energy from the fusion process could be contained in a sufficiently powerful EM field. The question then is, how strong must it be?
AM is similar I suppose in that the atoms are forced together, but the reaction comes from the contact of the - and + atoms, not the force of crushing them together into a totally new element. Which also means an AM reactor has to simply drop an anti particle onto a posi particle and then boom. Little to no energy required. (Minus the fact that I think you store antimatter in EM fields) whereas nuclear fusion requires a large amount of start up energy to get the atoms flying fast enough to start the reaction.
Both lines of research are under explored due to demand and costs, but both are theoretically sound. Which is more efficient in the long run? I don't know, they both use fairly rare fuels and both have large energy costs due to storage and just running in general. But their outputs are so theoretically high that it'll offset the needed power to run.
|
|
|
Post by IcyNudibranch on Apr 18, 2012 5:48:33 GMT
Fusion is probably more efficient, just because you don't need to build huge particle accelerators to create your fuel source. But if you're saying all you need for an arc reactor is a powerful magnet; then those could definitely exist, especially with space travel. We could use larger reactors on space craft and then mine other planets for rare earth metals like neodymium to make smaller, but more powerful magnets. Once again, if you invest in it, the technology will come.
|
|
Sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Admin Acc
Posts: 3,288
|
Post by Sgtsammac on Apr 18, 2012 7:40:47 GMT
Sounds good to me
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 18, 2012 10:37:53 GMT
I was bashed yesterday on IRC for proposing anti-matter powered spacecraft, but I think it's technically possible.
It's one of our best bets anyway.
|
|
Sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Admin Acc
Posts: 3,288
|
Post by Sgtsammac on Apr 18, 2012 11:07:45 GMT
Well like I said, Anti-matter or Fusion would be our two best bets for hard science space craft. They really are both theoretically sound ideas.
|
|
|
Post by alice on Apr 18, 2012 11:52:15 GMT
|
|
shark
Battle Mod
You can't always do what's right. You can always do what's left.
Posts: 1,167
|
Post by shark on Apr 18, 2012 16:32:38 GMT
Since my rocket science knowledge is limited, I plan on using espionage to straight up steal whatever you guys hash out
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 18, 2012 18:35:27 GMT
You already did, shark
|
|
shark
Battle Mod
You can't always do what's right. You can always do what's left.
Posts: 1,167
|
Post by shark on Apr 18, 2012 18:52:58 GMT
The Mighty Department of Most Excellent Espionage strikes again! Huzzah!
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 18, 2012 20:38:52 GMT
Yohoho!
"Genetic weapon
In 1997, U.S. Secretary of Defense William Cohen referred to the concept as a possible risk.[1] In 1998 some biological weapon experts considered such a "genetic weapon" a plausible possibility, and believed the former Soviet Union had undertaken some research on the influence of various substances on human genes.[2]
The possibility of a "genetic bomb" is presented in Vincent Sarich's and Frank Miele's book, Race: The Reality of Human Differences, published in 2004. The authors believe that information from the Human Genome Project will be used in just such a manner.
In 2005 the official view of the International Committee of the Red Cross was "The potential to target a particular ethnic group with a biological agent is probably not far off. These scenarios are not the product of the ICRC's imagination but have either occurred or been identified by countless independent and governmental experts."[3]"
|
|
shark
Battle Mod
You can't always do what's right. You can always do what's left.
Posts: 1,167
|
Post by shark on Apr 18, 2012 20:51:52 GMT
Interesting... Although in the modern age of global migration I can't see such a weapon being incredibly precise. As usual, the perfect defence is sex.
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 18, 2012 20:53:04 GMT
Yeah, a disputable concept.
|
|
shark
Battle Mod
You can't always do what's right. You can always do what's left.
Posts: 1,167
|
Post by shark on Apr 18, 2012 21:03:34 GMT
I think the problem would be with specificity. In order to justify the cost of research and synthesis of a virus (I'm assuming virus, that makes most sense to me), you would want to target genes that are: 1. held by a sizeable population, so as to cripple your target nation 2. vital to day-to-day cell operation 3. specific enough that you wouldn't infect unintentional targets I think you'd have trouble finding that group of genes. Gene bombs would probably make an awesome eugenics tool, not really a great weapon.
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 18, 2012 21:16:31 GMT
Hmm. This is relevant isn't it?
Can we use existing spaceship drawings for future spaceships? I don't like my SB ones and I would like to use existing pics.
|
|
shark
Battle Mod
You can't always do what's right. You can always do what's left.
Posts: 1,167
|
Post by shark on Apr 18, 2012 21:19:06 GMT
Aww but that takes all the fun out of designing cool shit... >
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 18, 2012 21:20:29 GMT
Why the hell is my cat so big? I limited it to 100 px
THE HELL? It keeps changing.
|
|
shark
Battle Mod
You can't always do what's right. You can always do what's left.
Posts: 1,167
|
Post by shark on Apr 18, 2012 21:21:43 GMT
you probably have to do it 9 times
|
|
Sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Admin Acc
Posts: 3,288
|
Post by Sgtsammac on Apr 19, 2012 1:06:22 GMT
Ill vote you may modify existing designs, and submit them in any medium (which is normal), but u may not directly use anything existing.
Sent from my VM670 using ProBoards
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 19, 2012 1:12:08 GMT
Check Sam's armoury. He's using figurines of a mortar team. Plus, I want to use 3d images of spacecraft, how can I modify those
|
|
Sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Admin Acc
Posts: 3,288
|
Post by Sgtsammac on Apr 19, 2012 3:04:00 GMT
xD he does, that's amusing. Sam, change it And to answer your question, either photoshop, or find and modify the original 3d file. Or duplicate the ship in 2d in some medium and modify it.
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 19, 2012 10:30:20 GMT
*wut, I don't have PS, I don't have the 3d file because they are drawings, wut?* Example: How can I modify this?
|
|
|
Post by sgtsammac school on Apr 19, 2012 11:10:51 GMT
xD he does, that's amusing. Sam, change it And to answer your question, either photoshop, or find and modify the original 3d file. Or duplicate the ship in 2d in some medium and modify it. Aww.. but that pic matched exactly the mortar design i was basing on, but whatever i will see if i can make a pixel one later but i couldn't find any Refs.
|
|
Sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Admin Acc
Posts: 3,288
|
Post by Sgtsammac on Apr 19, 2012 11:48:26 GMT
Well Prok, guess you better start replicating that in either PMG or SB so that you have something you can modify. We are all still artists here, we can make our own things. Remember, quality isn't a huge deal.
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 19, 2012 18:16:57 GMT
Well, I've got something epic waiting for you guys. Hopefully Sam will like it more than my last spacer Wait a few hours Also, about the whole non-existent tech thing, how do Anti-grav fields work
|
|
|
Post by asrodrig on Apr 19, 2012 18:25:32 GMT
What are the group's thoughts on genehancements? In other words, what year can we bust out "suoer soldiers"?
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 19, 2012 18:31:37 GMT
Alice asked, I believe it could be done 2010, because it's possible now. It's not done only because of ethics.
If not, 2050?
(BTW this is my opinion)
|
|
Sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Admin Acc
Posts: 3,288
|
Post by Sgtsammac on Apr 19, 2012 21:04:07 GMT
On Biosoldiers, I'll give you an exact date by 2000, but it'll be between 2010 and 2050 for sure. As for Anti-Grav, while I don't claim to understand just how this is supposed to work, here's this: www.americanantigravity.com/interviews/eugene-podkletnov-on-the-gravity-impulse-generator.html#more-956The ability to do that at least suggests that we could find a way with similar tech to make anti grav work. Granted, Anti-Grav that doesn't involve magnets could very well be something we can't prove in hard science. It'll probably be something we'll decide as a group to add.
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 19, 2012 21:39:10 GMT
|
|