121–130 of 155 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The sun is a giant fusion reactor And chernobyl was a giant fission reactor. What's your point?
The comparison between the two is almost exactly the same as the comparison between a fart and a hurricane: 16 orders of magnitude, give or take. Space is really hostile.
Nuclear doesn't work with Elon's approach to development. You can't blow up multiple nuclear rockets within the atmosphere just to learn what needs fixing for the next attempt. Then again, it's looking like the whole 'fail fast' approach is over anyway, with Starship grounded by red tape. A full-stack Starship failure is seemingly too big/dramatic/risky to get away with doing repeatedly, especially admidst the politi…
You can. You just can't legally do it in Texas. Maybe SpaceY will be based in North Korea or somewhere to escape the burdensome regulatory regime in the USA.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> size of coke cans. Not really, each one would be 6 inches in diameter and weight over 300lbs.
Sounds impossible. A 6 inch diameter uranium sphere is only 80 lbs, and there are no materials significantly denser than that.
Nuclear doesn't work with Elon's approach to development. You can't blow up multiple nuclear rockets within the atmosphere just to learn what needs fixing for the next attempt. Then again, it's looking like the whole 'fail fast' approach is over anyway, with Starship grounded by red tape. A full-stack Starship failure is seemingly too big/dramatic/risky to get away with doing repeatedly, especially admidst the politi…
Sure you can. Russia has blown up multiple experimental nuclear-powered cruise missiles in the last few years [0,1]. It's a political question of tradeoffs, of how much you value technological progress on a particular front.
America hasn't blown up any atmospheric nuclear reactors in this century. America is also unlikely to learn how to build aerospace nuclear reactors in this century.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyonoksa_radiation_accident
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16509396 ("U.S. Has Been Watching Russia's Nuclear-Powered Cruise Missiles Crash and Burn (thedrive.com)")
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It makes you wonder though, should you set up such space based infrastructure, is it even worth publicizing lest you trigger an arms race?
You couldnt do it without publicizing. Space stuff is big and loud. Space itself is transparent. Doing big secret stuff in space is extrodinarily difficult.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds impossible. A 6 inch diameter uranium sphere is only 80 lbs, and there are no materials significantly denser than that.
They sell coke cans in the shape of a sphere?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can. You just can't legally do it in Texas. Maybe SpaceY will be based in North Korea or somewhere to escape the burdensome regulatory regime in the USA.
Countries with less burdensome rules are subject to ITAR restrictions.
Nuclear doesn't work with Elon's approach to development. You can't blow up multiple nuclear rockets within the atmosphere just to learn what needs fixing for the next attempt. Then again, it's looking like the whole 'fail fast' approach is over anyway, with Starship grounded by red tape. A full-stack Starship failure is seemingly too big/dramatic/risky to get away with doing repeatedly, especially admidst the politi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For specific impulse. When you have unlimited power, you want the lightest possible molecular mass exhaust for the best total delta V.
So, since beta radiation is even lower mass... just put a block of nickel-63 into a magnetic lens?
- This math is specifically about thermal propulsion; your 17 keV electron wasn't in thermodynamic equilibrium with anything, it's a different sort of problem