Live data from Hacker News

Why the sun is a poor dumping ground for nuclear waste (2010)

csicop.org

1–10 of 176 posts

Re: Why the sun is a poor dumping ground for nuclear waste (2010)

#4
post #2

Its generally not worth it to give smart answers to dumb questions. I guess its a pet peeve of the author though.

That's not true - if your goal is to change minds or address a standpoint, treating the position fairly and giving a smart, reasoned, and respectful response to a charitable interpretation of your opposition's standpoint is the BEST way to proceed forward.

Re: Why the sun is a poor dumping ground for nuclear waste (2010)

#5
This is why you'd use gravity braking to do the work for you...

You just have to change direction, not slow yourself down, as long as your path intersects the sun you're done... we have sent spacecraft to the sun... it's not beyond our technical capabilities.

Basically, it's like flying into a banked curve... as long as you're pointed at the Sun when you exit the curve you're going to hit the sun with out needing to bleed 30km/s.

The fundamental reason why it doesn't work is because it's really expensive get stuff into space...

If it was difficult to hit things with large gravitational forces we wouldn't see very many comets in the night sky...

Re: Why the sun is a poor dumping ground for nuclear waste (2010)

#6
post #3

Is there any way to use drag to decay the orbit? We don't have to reach the sun quickly . The solar wind is blowing past, is it possible to "sail" against that at an angle and - over time - dump orbital velocity and so end up in the sun?

Don't use drag use gravity...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_assist

Basically you loop in front of a planet, and then it slingshots you back to the Sun.

Voila... done.

Re: Why the sun is a poor dumping ground for nuclear waste (2010)

#7
post #2

Its generally not worth it to give smart answers to dumb questions. I guess its a pet peeve of the author though.

That's not true - if your goal is to change minds or address a standpoint, treating the position fairly and giving a smart, reasoned, and respectful response to a charitable interpretation of your opposition's standpoint is the BEST way to proceed forward.

Were this universally the case, creationism would have ceased to have adherents several generations ago. Therefore, I submit that your position is only true for rational positions reached and held by rational people who are willing to be convinced by rational discourse.

Re: Why the sun is a poor dumping ground for nuclear waste (2010)

#8
post #2

Its generally not worth it to give smart answers to dumb questions. I guess its a pet peeve of the author though.

Why is that so? It's not a particularly dumb question for many people that don't know anything about launch costs or the massive amount of energy. I'd bet many people think if you can get it out past the moon's orbit it should start to fall into the sun.

And even if it was a flippant question, showing exactly how wrong it is through an in-depth analysis is a great way to refute such positions.

Re: Why the sun is a poor dumping ground for nuclear waste (2010)

#9
post #5

This is why you'd use gravity braking to do the work for you... You just have to change direction, not slow yourself down, as long as your path intersects the sun you're done... we have sent spacecraft to the sun... it's not beyond our technical capabilities. Basically, it's like flying into a banked curve... as long as you're pointed at the Sun when you exit the curve you're going to hit the sun with out needing to…

Yup! It depends on whether you pass behind of or in front of the planet you're using to gravity assist. http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Tutorial:_Gravity_As...
Post reply on HN