Radiators

>>53296009
If you've got FTL, artificial gravity, or any of the other wildly advanced technologies that tend to appear in most sci-fi settings, violating the laws of thermodynamics to create zero-waste closed systems or convert heat directly to energy is pretty much the least significant scientific problem.

>>53296078
I just made it so the bullshit FTL drive/artificial gravity generators in setting run really, really cold so you can just run some vents near it to cool shit down as needed. Need to keep it seperate from the rest of the ship via vaccuum/Insulation to avoid turning it into an icecube every time it's turned on though.

>>53296009
Yeah, but hopefully your ship has good enough heat sinks that it can retract the radiators temporarily. Mostly during combat, is when you'd need it. It's possible to armor radiators, but not easy, and it eats into your mass ratio like nobody's business.

>>53296009
>dump waste heat into the ammunition of your railguns
>fire lances of molten metal at the enemy while keeping your ship cool in combat

>>53296009
>not using nanotechnology to build a turbine with non-return valves for blades, creating a functional "Maxwell's Demon" style generator to extract energy from a heated gas without temperature differential, simultaneously cooling the ship and upping the efficiency of your reactor to near 100%
Do you even speculative pseudoscience?

>>53296009
Nah, we've got this. Just dump the waste heat into a parallel dimension via wormholes. Another victory for superscience that cannot go wrong!

>>53296078
>FTL
>artgrav
>violation of thermodynamics
Nope.

>>53296009
Not if your generator has 99.999% thermal efficiency.

>>53299787

You mean something impossible to do. Not even a Matrioshka brain can do it (it can't even reach Cosmic Background Radation waste).

>>53296569
>not firing FTL projectiles from the other side of solar system at any enemy
>not firing bigger FTL projectiles straight into the target system's sun from several light hours away

FTL = Time Travel

>>53300047
Time and distance are a lot more connected than you might think.

File: Black_Hole_Propulsion.jpg (27KB, 636x247px)

27KB, 636x247px

Would throwing waste energy into your artificial black hole work?

>>53300004
That's because most of the losses happen inside the star itself. An artificial fusion reactor doesn't have the same problems.

>>53300047
Depends on how the FTL works. If you're accelerating past c, then yeah, time travel. If you're bending space with warp drive(to avoid violating special relativity) or using wormholes or some shit like that, then probably not. There might be some minor violations in the apparent causality of things, but nothing that would allow you to actually travel back in time.

>>53300004
Explain your reasoning, please.

File: Dyson_sphere_exterior.jpg (307KB, 1449x1079px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 1449x1079px

Remember: If your setting doesn't have Dyson Spheres as your main habitat before FTL, it is an unrealistic setting and bad setting with no sense of scale or time.

>>53300134

See Carnot limit.

>>53300138
In my setting FTL is literally magic, so it's super simple compared to building Dyson spheres.

>>53300134
η=(T1-T2)/T1

>>53300173
>T1 = 170,000,000
>T2 = 400
>η = 0.999997

File: jakub-grygier-starlifting-stellar-matter-harvesting.jpg (37KB, 700x393px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 700x393px

>>53300138

Always remember, thought, that a real Dyson Sphere would be a swarm of satellites and orbiting habitats rather than a solid shell. Also you can employ starlifting, sucking excess hidrogen from the star, for much more efficient energy production and longevity.

>>53300138
But anon, if the Pathfinder doesn't found colonies down a bunch of inhospitable gravity wells, our people inside a perfectly serviceable space station with artificial gravity and ecosystems will never survive!

transhumanism renders a lot of this obsolete

>implying their are actually people in the space ships
>implying the space ships aren't the people

File: 1480121141624.jpg (866KB, 3000x2843px) Image search: [Google]

866KB, 3000x2843px

What are your radiators going to radiate with? You need a medium to transfer heat, unless they are more like sinks and simply build it up until they can be transferred to something else or dumped and replaced.

Real astronaut suits and space stations control interior temperature with heat-exchangers, put brutally simply, they are constantly keeping one side cool and one side warm, not absorbing and dumping heat somewhere else, or into space somehow.

>>53300523
>implying transhuman virtual people even bothered going into space after they found a nearly 100% efficient source of energy and created a perfect virtual reality where time nor material distance mean much.

>>53300574

>You need a medium to transfer heat

No you don't.

>Conduction
>Convection
>Radiation

Having a medium is the most efficient way. But in the deep space, you can only get rid of wasted heat by radiation.

>>53300574
>You need a medium to transfer heat
Did you grow up in a cave? Have you never felt the warmth of sun on your face?

>>53300244
I watch Isaac as well fellow Anon.

>>53296009
I would assume that if your FTL works by accessing some sort of subspace you can configure some sort of system to dump the heat into said subspace avoiding the need for large external radiators.

File: le shinebox meme.jpg (28KB, 506x316px)

28KB, 506x316px

>>53296009
>When I was on the ISV Venture Star I wanted to eat manicotti
>I compromised. I ate grilled soylent off the radiator
>I wanted to fuck a woman
>I compromised. I jerked off into the matter-antimatter engine

>>53300523
>tfw no spaceship gf

>>53300580
Just going by statistics and probability there would always be an outsider willing to do such a thing unless physically restrained by everyone else.

>>53300036
>thinking you can reliably track let alone hit targets over such distances

>>53300523
i found that by far the weirdest concept in eclipse phase was the idea that i could potentially play a spaceship as my character
honestly, there was nothing else quite as jarring to me as that.

>>53296569
>reversing entropy
Yeah, no.
What do they teach you at schools?

>>53302076
You can reverse local entropy while increasing total entropy in the universe, anon.

>>53302058
Why is that jarring, anon? It's a perfectly natural step in AI, to give them ships to drive. Then why is it so different to make digitized humans the pilot?

>>53301984
if you have ftl sensors and enough processing power...

>>53300640
fucking laughed really loud anon.

>>53299548
>FTL
>violate causality
>infinite energy and matter
>violates thermodynamics

Yep.

>>53300138
>ever bothering to build a sphere
A swarm sure, but you just need enough power generation power some kugelblitz and use those for power generation, feeding matter into them as needed. Then just build some space habitats near your kugelblitz, don't bother trying to build a sphere around your star, doing so would be pointless and a pain in the ass.

>>53302269
Only the first one is true and it doesn't have to be a problem.

>>53302279
Violating causality automatically enables free energy anon.

1. you have 2 energy
2. you spend 1 energy unit to go back in time to step 1.
3. you have 3 energy. you spend 1 energy to go back, now you have 4 energy...
4. copy-paste as long as you need because it takes 0 time to do the loop.

>>53302269
Hiw FTL violates causality though? You just arrive a bit earlier than the light of your rocket engines, but that's not time travel.

>>53302122
Yes, you know how? By producing more energy. That you need to vent somewhere after that.
You can't heat your bullets to temperature higher than the background temperature. Unless you mean you want to dump them through the reactor and then fire them once they get hot. Well, I guess this could work.
But if you want to vent this way, say, 20 kWh (energy produced in a central heating of an average house in an hour) you need about 10 kg of almost molten iron. Now, for an engine of an oil tanker it's 300 000 tonnes of molten iron. About 5 000 tonnes an hour (100 000 hp, 50% efficiency).
I don't know where you intend to store it.

>>53302388
Correction, 5000 tonnes a minute, 300 000 an hour

Radiators add options magic heatsinks don't.

Imagine you meet another ship in orbit:
>keep radiators extended as sign of peace
>keep radiators extended for maximizing rate of laser fire at risk of getting shot off
>retract radiators behind armor shutters to maximize short-term survivability at cost of more heat long-term
>giant energy-weapon-cooling radiators vs lower-heat shorter-range kinetics
>emergency life support radiators

They're like sails in a piratical setting.

>>53302350
It is. You're thinking in Newtonian mechanics, which is not how the universe works. In relativity, the speed of light in a vacuum isn't just the speed of light, it's the speed of information.

Going faster - no matter how the actual mechanics work - is outrunning information. It's like a computer process being pulled out of the registry and re-inserted at a different spot on the timeline.

Think of each lightcone as its own universe. By leaving it, you're cloning yourself into a new universe at a new point on the timeline.

>>53302388
>Unless you mean you want to dump them through the reactor and then fire them once they get ho
This is what the anon was talking about to begin with.
>I don't know where you intend to store it.
Space age nanomaterials.

>>53302456
So how traveling at light speed makes my computer calculate faster? I don't understand it.

If we're doing hardish scifi would huge ships need fucking massive radiators like on the ISS or what?

I want to have heat as part of my dieselpunk world for the spaceships, maybe the ships have radiators on the hull but can extend large ones to get rid of heat quickly etc, but for very large ships, carriers and w/e the radiator panels would need to be giant.

What cooling systems could you have? Liquid nitrogen?

File: 102612_p6_detail.jpg (266KB, 600x399px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 600x399px

>>53300574
So what are these things on the ISS labeled Radiators smart guy.

>>53300580
>>53301137
My ideal posthuman existance is as a spaceship drifting srome start to star soaking up data on the universe.

>>53302456
We're talking about alcubierre/wormhole "cheat" FTL, right? Just so we aren't dealing with the additional problems of trying to conventionally accelerate past c.

Surely if such a method of travel is possible, then c isn't the speed of information?
I'm really failing to see how you could practically violate causality with something like Traveller's J-Drive

>>53302483
Imagine a curve on a graph, with space on one axis and time on the other. That's a universe. You can be at any point on the curve - it's like a bandwidth cap, that trades off between the two values. Go really far in space and you'll go a little slower in time, and vice versa. That's time dilation.

If you stay on the curve (representing the properties of a relativistic universe) yet somehow circle around off the positive/positive quadrant to get a bigger value for space than c permits, then you have to have a negative value for time to add the two up to meet the bandwidth cap.

>>53302488
this gives a nice limit for ship size. heat generation is proportional to mass, which is proportional to volume, but surface is only increases with square, not cube. after a point there is no way to transfer heat fast enough and building the radiators would get to ridiculous proportions. like it.

to answer your question: yes. you need to radiate away all the waste heat, meaning all the heat that you didn't turn into movement (for you or your projectile, be it hunks of iron or photons) in a primitive setting where matter generation and other bullshit doesn't play.

>>53302554
Yeah but time just passes faster or slower to you, it's not time travel where you can go back before you started your travel? You go just in one direction not loop around.

>>53302488
The smart way to do it is with a magnetic droplet radiator: spray molten iron directly into space, then use a powerful magnet to pull it back once the droplets cool down enough to solidify. It's lighter, harder to damage, and makes your ship look like kind of some giant robot phoenix when it's running.

>>53302539
Conventionally accelerating past c is physically impossible. It takes exponentially more energy until you hit that limit, which would require infinite energy.

Visser radiation and directed acyclic graphs are a good-enough handwave for wormholes. They don't make the problem go away though - they create an artificial universal reference frame ("empire time") for the wormhole network.

A go-faster drive that takes a few weeks can violate causality like this:
1. take off from planet A in 2017 local time
2. arrive at planet B in A2017, B2013
3. fly back to planet A at B2013/A2009

>>53302575
The big discovery of relativity was that the speed of C is the same for everyone.

If you go faster, that means someone in a different place goes slower.

>>53302592
I can see where you're coming from, but surely you'd reach B2017 + 1 week-ish?
Now I'm not trying to imply a universal frame of reference, but a bigger(faster?) one.
If matter/energy/information from our universe can enter subspace/hyperspace/?-space and return, then practically speaking wouldn't the speed of information in our universe be whatever the speed-of-light equivalent is in the FTL-universe?

Still doesn't work for warp drives though

My dick has near-relativistic speed and mass.

>>53302668
I hear wearing two condoms helps with premature ejaculation.

>>53296569
>railguns work with magnets
>heat disables magnets

>>53302568
Fucks sake I want space battleships.

Is it literally impossible to cool these huge ships some other way? Could we discover some sort of coolant that works really well?
>>53302587
That sounds interesting.

>>53302613
But you still can't go back to your past, right?

>>53302708
That's not how railguns work, they work with magnetism, not magnets.You can actually form the rails and projectile from plasma and they will work just fine.

>>53302708
Linear motors actually do work with molten metal. It's sometimes used in industrial processes.

>>53302761
I did fuck up there, what I tried to say had more to do with the molten metal that was mentioned.

>>53302708
Not electromagnets, friendo.

>>53296009
Yeah, but the magnitude thereof depends on how much heat the ship produces

>>53302786
>Not electromagnets, friendo.
I was talking about the fact that you can't use magnetism to fire molten metal at your enemies but worded it badly.

File: ftl&time memery.png (245KB, 1346x2700px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 1346x2700px

>ftl

>>53297641
>not using free energy to power your space drill ships through the cosmic glacier

Tust du even VRIL?

Doesnt Dark Energy violates thermodynamics? There are .any things that we dont know.

>>53302129
>if you have ftl sensors and enough processing power...

lol are you just pulling random words out of your ass? How would those sensors work? What king of input put those sensors read? What kind of information would your target give off that's ftl? There's very loose sci-FI and then there's nonsense. What you said is Lucas tier nonsense.

>>53302943
>What king of input put those sensors read?
Motherf... I meant "What kind of input would those sensors read?"

>>53302710
Of course you can. That's the simplest exploit, see >>53302324. You can loop yourself/your ship until every cubic meter of the universe is filled with copies. Then you can power your ships by using their own clones as fuel, feed yourself with cannibalism by killing yourself from one second ago, have clone orgies, you name it.

>>53302709
you can bind energy in chemical processes. there are endoterm processes that take up energy, simplest would be melting ice or boiling water. that buffers heat somewhat, but sooner or later you have to release it. so battles have time limits, after a while your ship will simply cook if you don't extend the radiators, be it rigid structure or sprayed metal.

>>53302943
we talk about hitting targets from lighthours away. we are obviously past hard science fiction.

>>53303069
There's a difference between spitballing about ftl travel and talking about some kind of ftl sensor. Like what does that even mean? A light sensor sensors light. What does a ftl sensor sensor? It's just random tech words put together.

>>53302710

You need to achieve imaginary mass.

>>53302710

Inside a Black Hole, time and space switch positions. You will always end up in the singularity, but you can move throught any time in exchange of getting closer to the singularity.

>>53303096

Tachyon collapse.

>>53303143
Are you serious? Please explain to me how you convert tachyon collapse into a targeting solution for a fast-moving target that's a couple light hours away.

>>53303176

A tachyon with an electric charge would lose energy as Cherenkov radiation.

>>53303189
That didn't answer my question in any way. How do you use the properties of tachyons to determine a proper targeting solution for a target moving at ftl speed that's several light hours away?

File: Maria Orsic.jpg (38KB, 441x659px)

38KB, 441x659px

>>53302912
>that feel when this qt3.14 Nazi sorceress is chilling in the Aldebaran system with the clone of Hitler while we argue about relativity
I guess we should all just get high as fuck, contact psychic aliens through meditation, and draw up space ship designs through automatic writing.

Who cares if nobody understands how it works?

Okay give me a concrete example so I can wrap my mind around this: you have a FTL capable space ship. How you use it to win the next week's lottery?

>>53303096
ok, lets come up with shit, with more or less plausibility.

the mentioned tachyons might be a solution for example. if we have all kinds of tachyons, with differing speeds over c, they represent different information from the future (as they travel backwards in time). their interaction with the future ship gives you an accurate position of them in the future.

you have higher dimensions above the spacetime, which are too small to travel through but can be used to sensor. in these, distance can be arbitrarily small or large between two points in spacetime.

above this it really gets into bullshittery.

I like radiators in my Sci-Fi, but you don't need them.

If you told one the ship minds of The Culture that their ship shouldn't work because of radiators, I'm sure they'd have their drone projection smile sweetly and say something trite about "fields"

>>53303265
1. wait one week, find out the winning numbers.
2. travel back in time, leave a note about the numbers
3. ????
4: PROFIT

since your travels, if you do it carefully won't affect the randomness which guides the numbers that come up, now you know which numbers will be drawn.

>>53303288
now I'm a really big fan of Banks's scifi (although Against a Dark Background is my favourite, it's just so mindfucking, the thousands of years of history, ruins, nuclear shit and what it generates, Earth might turn out very similar), it's really handwavy. It's hard from one aspect, namely that it is consistent with it's own handwaving, but the Culture is provably not living in a relativistic universe.

>>53303265

Quantum entaglement seems to do this. See the quantum eraser. The problem is that the information is encrypted, due the random nature of the particle-wave, until you send the message.

>>53303314
Banks does seem to be a big proponent of the "Sci-Fi as a lens on our own society" school. He clearly gets a hard-on over mega-structures, but I get the feeling he'd have thought excessive details get in the way of his stories. Something like the Hydrogen Sonata for instance, do you really need to know how field displacement works to take in a meandering discussion as to the nature of democracy and society. I love it.

Now radiators; they belong in the other big school of sci-fi... I don't know what I'd call it, maybe the Arthur C Clarke school of "here's some crazy shit, what would it do to us as a species"?

>>53303385
In my head I always compare him to Frank Herbert. Both of them concerned themselves more with the social effects of tech than the actual tech. Although Herbert wrote more esoteric stuff, which simply means his established tech level didn't justify the jumbo that happens, unlike Banks whose tech level is so high it is literally magic, which justifies almost anything. As long as you are consistent with it. If not, you get space fantasy, which is not my genre.

Love to compare it with other high tech settings, like the Xeelee for example. Baxter is a scientist, that shows, he knows his shit somewhat, but he is really bad at imagining how a society would work with that history and technology. Also he makes ridiculous faults that an elementary student would figure out it's bullshit, but his big picture physics seems to check out.

>>53303294
>the answer is always 'draw the rest of the fucking owl'-tier
this is why you ftl time travel fags are considered memers and idiots

>>53303069
Maybe I'll just have the ships release heat after battle but have the heat transfer be faster so giant radiators are not needed constantly.

>>53303265
>>53303454
With an Alcubierre drive, chart a course in spacetime that results in negative time displacement (which, with FTL, is every direction in space) - fly into orbit, fly in circles, zigzags, and lines, until you have traversed enough distance that the negative time matches up to how far back you want to go.

With a teleporter, you simply teleport directly into the past. This is a bit tautologous, but all coordinates in spacetime are spacetime coordinates because spacetime is one entity, not two. Plug the desired spacetime address into your Battlestar Galactica drive and teleport to the year before the Cylons revolt.

>>53303454
it was already explained to you if you travel over c (in reference to Earth), you effectively travel back in time and arrive back on a previous Earth.

>>53302819
Guh. I remember that faggot who kept refuting his own version of RT whenever someone else tried to explain to him how the real RT works.

>>53303429
Not read any Baxter aside from the ones he wrote with Pratchett; worth a look? I personally wasn't blown away by the "The Long Earth" stuff.

Bating controversy; I love the first Dune book, its super imaginative, truly epic... however its second place behind "Ringworld" for me in terms of horribly outdated and highly questionable personnel politics.

>>53303706
Baxter is more interesting for his "grand ideas" than the literary value of his work, but well worth a read if you're into mind blowing spatial and temporal scale sense of wonder and actual reflexion in your science fiction.

>>53303706
Baxter is horrible. He is really oldschool, as in, the characters are flat as a sheet of paper, they try to teach you, and his stories are shit. If you really enjoy the big, universal ideas, you might get over these. I read three books, it was more than enough for me to not read more.

>>53303003
A simple rule akin to "future events are stochastic, past events are deterministic", similar to what Einstein, Novikov and many others have suggested makes paradoxes impossible and prevents the cannibalization of past iterations of objects in the way you described.

>>53303784
In terms of power and scale the Xeelee and Photino Birds of the Xeelee Sequence books shit all over each and every other civilisation imagined by any SF author out there. And then both civilisations are wimps compared with the Downstreamers of the Manifold Trilogy.

File: EATCS.png (328KB, 786x493px) Image search: [Google]

328KB, 786x493px

>>53302488
The big "wings" on the ISS are solar panels. Its radiators are quite a lot smaller (they're pointing downwards in this picture).
Radiators get much more effective if they temperature is higher, the relationship between their surface area and the ship's power consumption isn't linear. The ISS's radiators have to mostly deal with low level waste heat coming from the life support system and other electronics. In a high tech ship these low temperature radiators would have to be a system separate from high temperatures ones (otherwise, some of the waste heat would flow back into the living quarters).

Heat sinks are temporary solutions that could in typical realistic scifi settings be used for hours before the heat contained in them would need to be radiated to space if the ship does any kind of manouvering, dodging or firing of weapons. The heat sinks could also be ejected as an immediate solution if the ship were to begin to overheat, but that would make them single-use devices.

>>53296078
Just use Faster Than Dark FTL drive and wave those

>>53304790
Explain yourself.

>>53304790

Faster than Dark is a pretty cool setting but the FTL is just as handwavium as any other out there.

Not if it's a stealth ship.

Then it would have an internal heatsink instead.

>>53304801
FtD just states that you can't change the past using FTL. If you try to, or your travel will lead to paradox without your meaning, it will just fail. One of explanations in-universe is that every paradox destroys the universe in which it occured, so only those who manage to miss it stay.

>>53303223
Gantz tech trasfer.

>>53304536
Thanks, how long does it take to radiate the heat?

>>53305774

Depends on a shitload of variables. Surface areas, materials being used, amount of energy being radiated over given time, etc.

>>53305882
For the ISS wikipedia is saying
>The EATCS is capable of rejecting up to 70 kW

Which doesn't particularly help, and I can't find much about the radiators, let alone how long it takes to cool the station down. Do you think that means 70kw per 'cycle'?

>>53296009
I, too, played Mass Effect.

>>53296009
Just put an A/C in your ship and have the exhaust port for it outside.

>>53306135
But then you'll be venting all your air outside, which seems undesirable for species that need to breathe.

>>53306164
You wouldnt need to vent much air, space is cold. Just bring some space inside instead to replace the air.

Ro wat about putting like a giant hoover thing on the front like in Red Dwarf and while you suck that stuff through your ship make it hot and dump it into your engines?

>>53306073
Kilowatts is a kilo-joules per second, so this is a measure of the "flow" of energy, not capacity. The measure of energy is in kilowatt-hours

>>53305774
Could this be of any use:
https://helios.gsfc.nasa.gov/qa_sp_ht.html

File: well shit.jpg (28KB, 300x562px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 300x562px

>>53306206

>>53306455
The gassy bits, just fly through gas clouds and stuff liek in Homeworld.

>>53305774
Liquid droplet radiators (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_droplet_radiator; http://www.5596.org/equations.html ) are the gold standard for dissipating large quantities of heat in space.

>>53306381
That's why I said it doesn't particularly help
>>53306396
That was interesting thank you

Does NASA answer questions if you send them an email? I'm curious about the ISS's cooling.

>>53306761
What do you want to know? I can ask one of the smarter people who worked on iss or shuttle if I don't know.

>>53306381
>The measure of energy is in kilowatt-hours

It's a measure of energy, but you really should default to joule.

>>53306761
>That's why I said it doesn't particularly help

It helps. You're just incapable of understanding the answer. Go get a passing grade in high school physics and try again.

>>53306854
Could you just ask them if what this anon says is feasible for large spacecraft
>>53304536
in regards to using heat sinks as a temporary solution.

If the ISS retracted its radiators would it be able to store heat before retracting and expelling the heat?
>>53307028
I don't know the capacity of the though

If you want to be realistic, they can be no warfare in space

>>53307212
*tips fedora*

>>53307212
War isn't always about resources, sometimes it's about really hating some other motherfucker because fuck those guys.

>>53300574
>You need a medium to transfer heat
>mfw

>>53307285
then both sides destroy each other fleets within hours and fill the orbit with debris, making spacetravel impossible for the next few decades
end of a typical space war

>>53307449
Maybe they have space bin lorries with huge magnets that suck all the debris up.

>>53307159
You could try Atomic Rockets, they seem reasonably right and probably have something on radiators in there somewhere
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/

>>53307581
magnets only work over a short distance, and only on stuff that actually gets attracted to magnets

File: 1452050535320.jpg (2MB, 2505x1884px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2505x1884px

>>53307449
Kessler syndrome is just an opportunity to make space garbage collection profitable

>>53307581
The proper way to deal with space debris is pretty much with lasers and massive space ships/asteroids. You basically just want to burn them, cause them to jet away due to burning in some place, or draw them off with gravity.

>>53307159
You need really big radiators to get rid of life support heat because of it's low temperature. The high temperature radiators for the hotter stuff can be smaller. Storing heat gets dangerous because you always have to get rid of it somehow. Expelling those heat exchangers would be absurdly expensive both because of the manufacturing cost and the cost of transport to the ship. The heat being stored is also going to have an effect on the habitable areas. Sitting in the ISS with no heat radiators would mean you cook pretty quickly. Each person uses about 7 kw of life support.

The better question is why run without radiators...

>>53303294
>2. travel back in time, leave a note about the numbers
You're going to need to explain a little further how "ship goes to alpha centauri in an hour instead of 20 years" somehow allows it to go back in time in a non-rhetorical way. If it jumps back to earth, it's still 2 hours gone by. If a faster ship can do the trip in 10 minutes, then it'll take 50 for the original ship to arrive. If a slow ship takes 20 years to arrive, the original ship will have been there for 20 years - 1 hour.

At what point, exactly, does any ship gain access to "now I can shoot my grandfather" style time travel.

File: radiatoraward.jpg (51KB, 490x680px)

51KB, 490x680px

Fuck yea, radiators

>>53307212
Oh, you know nothing. Or you think all space combat looks Star Wars and Star Trek.
Which is the same thing.
Space combat is like submarine combat, but you can see exactly where every other sub is unless they are physically blocked from your sensors. There is no stealth in space, only deception. Information is what will decide battles. If I know your patrol route, I can use a cold jet mass block from light hours away and hit you. You can, of course, make my knowledge useless by dodging or changing your path.
If I know your sensor signature (the combined knowledge of the various wavelengths of radiation you output), I can find you anywhere, and target. Unless you Futz with it, make it harder to get a lock. So I have to get close enough to get a visual lock, make your interference useless. But that let's you do the same to me. So now we're locked in an arms race, making our sensors and interference better than each other, extending our range to where a simple velocity change will mess up our projectiles.
So now we need control over them. That means missiles, but we can always physically carry more countermeasures than a missile can carry equipment to burn through them. So, carry more missiles, which means more mass.
Here's an idea - drones. A swarm of drones that carry their own weapons and equipment, fly in close, then let loose while dodging enemy fire.
Speaking of which, the video game Mission Critical had awesome space combat.
But how will space combat go? Like the most unsubtle sub's in the world playing aircraft carrier.

>>53307659
Wow this is a great website, cheers
>>53307772
>The better question is why run without radiators
I would imagine they would retract them in combat to protect them, they'd get blown off easily.

Are there alternative radiator designs to the extendable panels?

>>53307842
What's with these meme sensors? You don't need wavelengths of radiation to lock onto a heat source. Then there's this rock that short range proximity sensor would pick up pretty easily unless you're saying it's too fast for a reaction. Are you saying your rock will also have no rotation?

>>53307793
Basically it goes something like this:
>on Monday fly away from Earth at such velocity that your clocks start running at half speed
>arrange for a friend to send you the numbers by FTL channels on Sunday, which for you is Wednesday because your clock is running slow
>send the message back by FTL channels
From your frame of reference, you're standing still and Earth is moving, so your clock is fine and theirs are running at half speed, so for you it's only Tuesday on Earth when you send the message back.

>>53307842
Space combat wouldn't really work, because there is no way you can defend yourself in against projectiles.
Imagine you are on a trajectory from earth to mars, and then some asshole decides to shoot you down.
Since he knows your trajectory, he calculate where and when to hit you.
Even if you know that the projectile is coming for you, you dont really have much room for dodging, because if you change your trajectory too much, you are gonna miss mars and die alone in space

>>53307922
Well space combat is pretty far fetched but if you imagine the vastness of space and the relative size of your ship and your ship plus your radiators from 10000 km away it's not as big of a deal as you would think. There is also the potential a radiator does not extend so you could get screwed that way. It's just more engines and gears to move it around.

>>53307922
That's the beauty of the droplet radiator. Because the cloud has no physical structure, it can't be damaged unless you score a direct hit on the nozzle. The most damage you can do is wasting a few kilograms of coolant.

>>53308045
>quick burn for a second or two, slowly move sideways
>hours later, the projectiles miss you by miles
>move back sideways, your vector is the same as before the manouver

It's not exactly rocket science

>>53296009
>Not just using refrigeration
What are you dumb?

>>53308082
>Shoot a big magnet right through the coolant
Or
>Shoot a big "net" right through the coolant

>>53308115
the projectile would be a small rocket that can adjust its trajectory.
It can react to your movements, and since it doesn't carry any unnecessary weight like life-support-system and doesn't actually need to reach mars, you will never be able to outmaneuver it

>>53308176
LOOK AT THIS SPACE NET

>>53308176
>shoot the big magnet with a laser before it gets to you

>>53308188
Missiles can have higher g's, but spacecraft can generally avoid them the same way planes do. Stay outside the NEZ, then exploit the ships bigger fuel supply and more efficient engine to run the missile out of fuel.

Obviously this doesn't work vs giant ship-sized missiles; but that's where constellations of ordinary kinetic buses and laser stars come in.

>>53308257
>Shoot your laser with a rocket before it gets to my magnet
Anyway are we trying to melt the magnet?

>>53307960
You need more than thermal sensors in space, especially on a warship.
Oh, and guess what? Thermal is a wavelength of radiation. Heat, leaky EM from equipment, the radar installation, hell even the non-thermal output of the engine, all go into the sensor signature.
The rock is an example, but a military grade rock would have radar-absorbing materials, and probably be given enough time to cool down to close to background.
>>53308045
You can defend against projectiles. The simplest way is to generate a miss, by testing to track the projectile, then add enough d/v to place its trajectory even just a few inches away - no shockwave in space, so it might as well be a mile.
The second way is to hit it with a laser, and dump enough energy per second to break it apart. While total original mass of the projectile remains roughly unchanged, its now split into lighter pieces. Less mass, less force, easier for armor to deal with. F=m*a.
The third way is to fire your own projectile at the incoming. Fragments both, knocks fragments off course for you, same effect as number two but harder. Sorta. Maybe.
You can do it easily, just carry some extra fuel to readjust your trajectory after defending.

>>53300129
Not necessarily true for wormholes and such. Take two connected wormholes, keep one and send the other one away moving at relativistic speeds.
Time dilation happens. Lets say the wormhole was moving at 10% of light speed. Every second that passes in the wormholes reference frame is ~570s for the stationary wormhole, almost 10 minutes.
Wormhole moves at relativistic speed for 10s, then stops (instantly, somehow...). Anyone who walks through the stationary wormhole is now traveling ~95m into the past

Almost any kind of faster than light travel permits time travel. Even if the wormhole only moved at normal speeds, it would still experience (ludicrously tiny) amounts of time dilation, and thus permit time travel.

>>53308281
Well a missile is always going to be cheaper than a ship capable of the same dV, so when you have say 30 missiles bearing down on a target, point-defence could get overwhelmed.
But then that's warfare, so that anon upthread is wrong

File: rtn_136811.jpg (1MB, 4256x2832px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4256x2832px

>>53308045
>there is no way you can defend yourself in against projectiles

Blast them into tiny pieces with one of these

>>53308281
why do you assume that the space ship would have a bigger fuel supply? It needs to acclerate a whole ship, the people inside it, the stuff it transports, and it still needs to be able to get back into the trajectory to reach its destination.
Meanwhile, the missile is just the engine and a fuel can

>>53308290
Just raise it above its superconducting temperature, or alternatively point and laugh if they're dumb enough try it with ferrous magnets.

>>53308296
and the guys on earth can keep on fireing projectiles/missiles at you for months until you ran out of fuel/ammunition
You are quiet literally a sitting duck and there is nothing you can do agains it

>>53308299
Time dilation effects the reference frame of the observer undergoing fractional/c travel. It does not actually send your reference frame into the past, it just means your clocks don't match.

>>53308352
Typically, people have missiles ferried on a bus launched by a spacecraft.

If your assuming the missile is an equally sized spaceship, sure. But a bigger (and more efficient) engine or one with better exhaust velocity introduces a lot of variables. It's easy to imagine orbital missile depots with hydrazine-fueled buses vs interplanetary ships with NERVA or NTR rockets...

>>53308316
your ammo is limited.
the missiles that can be launched at you from earth are not

>>53308444
Hide behind the moon

>>53308188
Oh, but guided missiles have flimsy parts that they need for target acquistion
>shoot it down, dodge the debris, stay the course

Also, I just realized that this line of argument always invariably leads to a hundred post flamewar about missile buses launching a Soviet-style salvo in an attempt to overwhelm a point defence composed of laser and kinetic CIWS, citations to Cold War era military journals and anecdotes about Arab-Israeli naval battles played with Harpoon, and lots of autistic screeching about whether laser are shitty overheating power hogs or are awesome ammoless guns of doom, so whether you were convinced by my space battle tactics, let's please just agree to disagree and not go there today.

>>53308045
One word, lasers. Tho desu they make it even worse unless very carefully balanced vs kinetics.

The sweet spot for interesting and non-suicidal space combat is kinda small.

>>53307842
>There is no stealth in space, only deception.
There is stealth in space, if you're using light/radio sensors you can reduce your albido till it becomes impractical to try and detect you at long ranges.

Trying to mask your energy output is harder, but you can still eject mass and heat from the opposite side of the ship, if you know which way you're enemy is.

Basically space combat would be dueling Vary Deadly Arrays.

A lot of this depends on tech levels, if you have ftl sensors, things change a lot.

>>53308444
>your ammo is limited.
Energy weapons man, I'm not a lowly kineticsfag like you

>>53308444
You don't have to survive the engagement.
You just have to get close enough that they can't avoid your debris.

>>53308444
Eventually the cost of the missiles will outweigh the cost of the ship, probably before the ship runs out of tiny pieces of ammo
Especially if you're being dumb and launching your missiles from Earth. What is a gravity well?

>>53308008
So it's not actual back to the future time travel since everyone is always moving forwards in time, it's just that some people who are moving at relativistic speeds are experiencing it slower than the rest of the universe so to them FTL is time travel, forwards only, but about as much time travel as being frozen for 100 years.

>>53308456
You can fire around the moon.

>>53308432
the missiles would be launched from earth
once it gets at your trajectory from launch vehicle, it only needs enough fuel to account for your evasive maneuvres.

>>53308488
kek

>>53308493
the missiles won't be much larger than your bullets.
And if your heavy ass spaceship can leave the gravity well, then those tiny missiles can do it aswell (with a launch vehicle)

>>53308390
Oh, the launch point is earth? One of the biggest stationary targets in the solar system? So every missile is predictable?
I lay a small field of debris along the required trajectory path. They either break up, or waste fuel going around, or get knocked off course and have to waste fuel.

>>53308563
they dont waste as much fuel as you do by carryign all that debris with you

>>53308548
>bullet sized missiles
Wut? You fucking idiot, that has so little mass its not funny. Do you expect an atmosphere to carry their boom to the ship too?
Now, why did you assume that all spaceships must launch from planets? Easier to build a fleet of shuttles and have orbit to orbit ships instead of wasting your mass and volume on multi-g engines and over 8kps of d/v for an interplanetary transport.

>>53308646
they dont make boom
they just hit you at several km/s and fuck your shit up

>Easier to build a fleet of shuttles
and how do you get those shuttels into space?

>>53308606
If the debris was part of my original mass load, I'm not wasting fuel as it has been accounted for. In fact, I just saved fuel by using it.
Also, why is earth spending so much money on launching so many missiles at a single ship that is getting harder to hit every minute?

>>53308740
So your plan is launch bullet sized rockets off of Earth's surface that then have the capability to manuever and track an evasive rocket ship.

>>53308409
I think you're mixing up time dilation with daylight savings

>>53308740
You sir, are an idiot who doesn't actually understand what we are discussing here, and if I wasn't on a tablet I would have an appropriate reaction image to show my disgust.

>>53308740
Space elevator

>>53308800
>Also, why is earth spending so much money on launching so many missiles at a single ship that is getting harder to hit every minute?
Because its war and destroying your ship is a military goal for the nation that fights against yours

>>53308806
missiles that can adjust their trajectory in case you try to evade them

File: 20160605_113631 (1).jpg (2MB, 2448x3264px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2448x3264px

anyone? cmon i cant be the only one playing this...

>>53308895
lol
as soon as the war begins, your space elevator is gone

>>53308511
The problem is that from the perspective of the moving observer, he's standing still and everyone else is moving, so he sees that they're experiencing time more slowly. What this means is that when he sends the message back, either it arrives on Tuesday or his frame of reference is wrong. The second result makes more intuitive sense, but it means we have to throw out Relativity.

>>53308806
It's not as hard as you seem to be thinking. The mass you're moving is significantly smaller than most space ships.

>>53308895
Couldn't you use the same space elevator to get missiles into orbit. You could even just leave them drifting up there until you need to use them.

>>53303003
https://exhentai.org/g/820001/d2165a8f80/

File: interplanetary anti ground missile bus.jpg (70KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 640x480px

We seem to have different and confused ideas about missile sizes here...

Here's a NTR inter-planetary bombardment missile.

File: fifty gigaton warhead in orion bus.png (244KB, 1200x908px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 1200x908px

>>53308977
Doomsday Orion: when you need to fry a continent and nothing else will do.

>>53309008
That guy standing under the detonator is fucked

File: soda_can_of_death.png (137KB, 992x699px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 992x699px

>>53309008
This is what a "realistic" inter-orbital anti-spacecraft missile might look like. It's too small to get past a serious (several hundred MW) laser star, that would take scaling up to ICBM-size, or an equivalent amount in mass of the smaller missiles.

>>53308977

I wonder if we will skip warships altogether and we will just send interplanetary missiles.

I'm playing a space game with a bunch of friends, we've spent hours talking about space combat, much to the GM's chagrin.

The setting has gravitic drives, and ftl, communication. Basically every settlement has automated defenses that set up an area denial system. Anything traveling over the posted speed is attacked and ideally destroyed or deflected, automatically. The reason being that objects can be speed up to planet killer (or station killer) speeds, and the amount of time needed to react to it precludes human interaction.

Most travel in system isn't limited by how fast your ship can go, but how fast you can go without being fragged by a trigger happy AI.

>>53308948
In his frame of reference it does. In the receiving reference frame, it arrives later. Both frames are experiencing time differently, both are correct.

File: Aaa.png (2MB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1080x1920px

>>53308964
It certainly is not bullet sized. It would need sensors, computers, hypergolics...

Not that it matters since the earth is flat anyway.

>>53309065
problem is that we will likely want the planet of the guys we are fighting and that mean landing ground troops which means ships to ferry them to that solar system.

File: ss_afa08265d73ba8c73555755ee185b38c77b5d1bb.600x338.jpg (42KB, 540x338px)

42KB, 540x338px

Children of the Dead Earth

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjWEGlot35Y

>>53309044
kek'd

>>53309065
I'm thinking it'll be something like duelling missile swarms ala schlock mercenary's VDA.

Basically networked stationary missiles sharing sensor information to detect threats, then it's a question of whether you detected the other side early enough to accelerate and do something about it.

Why bother targeting a ship when you can just accelerate an asteroid to significant % of C and ram it into their planet?

>>53309180
Hey, my wife worked as a janitor at the Cali facility for a while.
Nice to see we have a pro and not just a bunch of enthusiastic amateurs in this this thread.

>>53309229

You can only do that if you have a Dyson Sphere.

>>53309180
Bullet is a bit of a misnomer, but yeah.

>>53309190
Yeah. A lot depends on what your goals are. I see a lot of MAD in the future.

You might see more covert/social warfare, as its difficult to remove anyone's MAD capabilities, even with a major tech/size/economic edge.

>>53309202
I have this game and if you're into hard sci-fi and super deep mechanics you should get it

(But be ready for troubleshooting this game loves to crash and not boot until you delete some random shit in your graphics card)

>>53309229
same reason why today we dont resolve every conflict with nukes

This is a great thread

>>53309229
Because RKKVs are great in theory, unworkable in practice. Too fragile, too slow to get up to speed, the process of getting it there is too visible (before you get to .05c the torch glare will be visible at interstellar ranges), and relativistic point defence isn't as hard as first thought.

>>53309229
Why would you go through soo much shit just to render all that work moot by destroying it

>>53309294
This.

>>53309318
Agreed.

>>53308299
No, it just means that less time has passed in the wormhole reference frame. The wormhole itself is 95 minutes younger than it should be, but the wormhole itself is just a door, what's on wither side of the door is unaffected.
I mean, you're not travelling at the speed of light in that example anyway, you're travelling at 10%. Unless you meant 110% of the speed of light, but your maths would be wrong in either case. There's no mathematics for FTL travel, because it's impossible, and @ 0.1c time dilation is 1.005 seconds to 1 second.
Wormholes could theoretically be used to travel back in time in some models, but it has nothing to do with them moving.

>>53296009
What did everyone think about The Expanse?

I thought it was pretty good, at least to a layman.

>>53302592
That assumes that time exists as a separate dimension to other three and not just an artificial measure of change. I don't think anyone to date was able to measure it directly.

If it exists it may allow for such a trick or maybe not. We don't know it's precise properties.

If it does not exist causality arises naturally and can't be violated due to non-existence of past and future.

File: 1342258336267.jpg (153KB, 640x512px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 640x512px

>>53296009
lol. Has no idea about ship propellant, thermodynamics, and coolant/heater uses in spacecraft.

Do you even engineer?

>>53309537
Are you referring to using the liquid fuel to cool?

>>53307285
>War isn't always about resources, sometimes it's about really hating some other motherfucker because fuck those guys.

Those tend to be somewhat limited, because as soon as your regime reveals that you're going to wipe out whoever pisses you off with WMD's at the drop of a hat, then nobody else wants to bother risking being the next person on your list and there's almost certainly potential for a replacement regime on your planet that's willing to play ball.

I'm trying to come up with a setting which is by no means hard sci-fi but built on ideas that are kind of scientifically possible/theoretically possible/sound sensible even if they're complete bullshit. Could I get some questions answered?
>Best propulsion method for a spaceship travelling at slower than light speeds? You see 'antimatter engines' thrown around a lot, but could a matter/antimatter explosion actually be directed to provide thrust?
>Any semi-feasible way of explaining artificial gravity, besides centrifugal force? Magnetic boots? I've heard that accelerating stuff towards c increases its mass: does it increase its gravity, too?: could artificial gravity be produced by a container at the center or 'bottom' of the ship, containing matter accelerated to the point its gravity it produces planet-like gravity?
>Is there any semi-plausible way of creating a wormhole/getting two bits of space to touch?

>>53309700
Most efficient: nuclear
Fastest: torchship
Aiming you want currently feasible propulsion...

Centrifugal force is the only way if you want to actually feel it. Make up a fantasy anti grav if you really need it.

Wormholes you will just have to make something up.

>>53309700
>antimatter rockets

The keyword here is gas core vs beam core [vs subcritical antimatter-catalyzed fission i.e. baby orion]. In a -core rocket, the amat reacts with normal matter propellant, but it's the heating up of the propellant that gives the bulk of the dV, not the explosion itself.

>Is there any semi-plausible way of creating a wormhole/getting two bits of space to touch?

In theory...mining natural, ephemeral ones from the quantum foam, and "inflating" them to a usable size by injecting extreme quantities of energy, then holding them open with exotic matter.

File: Fast Food Worker.png (377KB, 1280x1081px) Image search: [Google]

377KB, 1280x1081px

Always remember to remember that remembering, your waifu needs Anus. If she does not have an anus, her insides will roil and she will explode due to a build up of waste.

>>53309700
>Any semi-feasible way of explaining artificial gravity
Something something graviton manipulation.

>>53296009
ITT everyone is 15 years behind on the latest ProjectRho assumptions

>>53309700
For all your wormhole needs.
http://www.webfilesuci.org/WormholeFAQ.html

tl;dr technically only naturally occurring wormholes can be expanded and literal creation of bridges in spacetime is impossible, but yes, wormholes can be made with exotic matter

File: illtakethehighroadandyoutakethelowroad1.jpg (65KB, 545x623px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 545x623px

>>53309446
Ah, I used http://keisan.casio.com/exec/system/1224059993 for the time dilation but I converted between m/s and km/s wrong. Bleh

The moving is purely so that one wormhole becomes 'older' than the other. Use a black hole instead if you want; park one entrance close to a black hole. Due to gravitational time dilation, that entrance experiences less time than the other
For arguments sake, say you make one wormhole entrance 5,000 years older than the other.
One entrance to a wormhole always leads to the other, even if you move one relative to the other. This also applies to time; if I enter a wormhole 10 minutes after it is formed, I exit the wormhole 10 minutes after it was formed, via the other entrance.
But in the above scenario, one end is much older than the other. Lets say I am someone who remained behind with the older wormhole (and somehow lived 5,000 years). When the other entrance returns from its trip round a black hole, I enter it. Because that entrance is 5,000 years younger, I emerge 5,000 years in the past, wherever the younger wormhole was at that point

>>53309700
Any semi-feasible way of explaining artificial gravity, besides centrifugal force? Magnetic boots? I've heard that accelerating stuff towards c increases its mass: does it increase its gravity, too?: could artificial gravity be produced by a container at the center or 'bottom' of the ship, containing matter accelerated to the point its gravity it produces planet-like gravity?

just accelerate at a constant 1g or so

>>53310136
You mean like earth does?

>>53310136

I fail to see the benefit to increase the mass of your ship until it can compite with a planet.

>>53310169
Acceleration of 1g is not the "same" as gravity pulling 1g.

>>53310157
>>53310169
what? the first bit was a quote but 4chan ate my
>

>>53310226
It was a joke about flat earth.

>>53310136
Just use centrifugal force for the section they need gravity in and use equipment like grip boots and such for everything else. In my setting a lot of the engineering work is done in space suits.

>>53310360
well you could argue that there are situations in which having a big spinning thingy in your ship isn't ideal (nor is spinning the whole ship)

>>53310628
You can argue that for anything, down to people wanting to go into space because earth will shoot an endless stream of super tiny missiles at your ship.

File: self-destruct.jpg (66KB, 960x720px)

66KB, 960x720px

Should a ship have a self-destruct mechanism?

>>53310839
not specifically made, but given the powersource, any person could make a ship self destruct.

>>53310839
Most ships will have a reactor with what is basically a built in self destruct. Why not add a few lines of code to let the commander make the decision instead of forcing someone in engineering to do it?

>>53310839
Only if it makes sense to have one.
Like a suicide ship or a ship that is so advanced that you build a self-destruct mechanism to prevent it from being closely examined by the enemy.
Also, as >>53310892 pointed out, spaceships are easy enough to destroy already, so they probably don't need one.

>>53310839

I like how in Alien it's just a matter of turning off the coolant units of the reactor.

>>53310839
Yes. NASA rockets use them. And future ones should too in case someone wants to suicide bomb a planet.

>>53311593
>NASA rockets use them
Neat. Paranoia about aliens?

>>53311736

You don't want a fuel-ridden, multi-ton booster to fall on someone's house.

>>53309745
I was planning on ships being nuclear powered, but how exactly does nuclear propulsion work?

>>53309826
So even in an antimatter engine, the antimatter annihilation is only a method of heating traditional fuels, rather than the energy released being used directly for propulsion?

>>53309935
Cheers lad, that's actually real helpful.

>>53310136
Stupid question, but you wouldn't feel acceleration in space, would you? When you feel the effects of acceleration, isn't that just feeling the medium you're travelling through (e.g. air) pressing against you? In a spaceship, no matter how fast it's travelling, given its interior is heading at that same speed you woudn't be feeling it, would you?

>>53310360
I just spent a little while thinking about a psuedo-science way of achieving artificial gravity, but then I stopped to think: what advantages would a space ship capable of replicating Earth-like gravity through some fictional method have over a space ship that just uses centrifugal force for stuff like living areas, or a spaceship which is zero G but uses stuff like grip boots? Are there any unpleasant side effects to centrifugal gravity, or compromises that would have to be made when it comes to space ship design?

>>53312375
When you feel acceleration, you're feeling your body press against itself.

>>53312375
>Stupid question, but you wouldn't feel acceleration in space, would you? When you feel the effects of acceleration, isn't that just feeling the medium you're travelling through (e.g. air) pressing against you? In a spaceship, no matter how fast it's travelling, given its interior is heading at that same speed you woudn't be feeling it, would you?

no? have you ever been in a car? a real one with a windshield, or a plane or even an elevator

>>53296009
>the people inside
Jokes on you, any realistic space exploring will be advanced robotics, and you know it.

>>53312441
>>53312450
Oh, geez, you're right, I am dumb.

>>53312498
robots are people too, you shitlord respect the robotprivileges

>>53312375
>So even in an antimatter engine, the antimatter annihilation is only a method of heating traditional fuels, rather than the energy released being used directly for propulsion?
Depends on the engine. Antimatter can be used in both thermal rockets and photon rockets.

>>53312498
>Jokes on you, any realistic space exploring will be advanced robotics, and you know it.
I kind of want to make a setting where robots take genetic infromation on slow ships to other systems to make more human colonies.

The colonies are invariably fucked up because no one really got a good handle on how to teach robots child rearing.

>>53312375
>how exactly does nuclear propulsion work?

There are various methods. The most simple one is the nuclear fission thermal rocket. Chemical rockets use fuel and an oxidizer to propulse the ship. Using a reactor heating a propellant reduces the weight and offers more energy.

Using thermonuclear bombs as propulsion is well within our technology. You carry dozens of nukes inside your ship. Every time you want to accelerate, you throw a nuke behind the ship. The explosion accelerates the ship. Indeed, it was tested with C-4. The results were even better than it was expected.

Fusion is better than fission, if we manage to make it work. It would need magnetic confinement to stabilise and direct the plasma. The fuel is the most abundant atom in the entire universe: hidrogen. An actual working fusion reactor would be a true energy revolution, the current prototypes consume more energy than they produce.

>>53309842
>sphereshit
Bad taste tbdesu

File: 130416_starshot_P.png (337KB, 432x432px) Image search: [Google]

337KB, 432x432px

>>53309700

Laser propulsion if you don't have nuclear reactors. Several ground-based or orbiting 100 gigawatts lasers accelerate a ship with a massive sails to a small percentage of C. You can also build multiple ones along the way for continuous acceleration.

>>53302423
Right here. All you goddamn autists are trying to sidestep radiators with super science when they're really fucking great detail for a setting.

These threads should all come with a tagline saying "watch at least three episodes of Isaac Arthur before posting"

>>53313489

>Laser railways.

>>53313608
Laser railroads sounds like a pretty neat sci-fi setting, especially for a Chinese-style water empire IN SPAAACE

>>53311832
Not to forget that if it's a military vessel, you don't want it to fall into enemy hands. So if it's clear you can't escape, evacuate the crew via escape pods and set the ship to self-destruct. In real life you have ships that have been intentionally sunk and tanks that have been abandoned and sabotaged with explosives to make them impossible for the enemy to scavenge.

>>53300523
Transhumanism is jewish bullshit disproven by even a cursory amount of knowledge of the topic. Don't mention it again.

>>53302269
>FTL violates thermodynamics
Nope.
>artgrav is infinite energy and matter
Do you know what a fucking wheel is, mate.

>>53303189
Radiation which is moving slower than light, so you're back to square one with that.

>>53302539
Not him (>>53302456), but as a theoretical physic major, he is absolutely right.

No matter how you travel faster than light, no matter that you use the Alcubierre drive or Quantum Teleportation or wormholes or something, if you FTL, you time travels.

Because, simply put (outside of lightcone explanations or things like that), the speed of light can be seen as the speed of synchronization between space-times. If you go faster than that speed, you're literally going faster than 'present'.

There's some non-causality breaking FTL possible with closed wormhole loops. That basically: >>53302592 . But it's not a really elegant solution, you're still time traveling, just not breaking causality in any meaningful way.

>>53309162
They're both correct but they're also both incompatible. That's why things start going wrong when they're allowed to interact.

>>53318989
>theoretical physic major

Who gives a shit? Come back when your degree is more than just speculation.

>>53318840
Elaborate.

>>53312375
>what advantages would a space ship capable of replicating Earth-like gravity through some fictional method have

If you have centrifugal gravity, you have to keep the rotation rate low enough to not give people sea sickness. Which means you have to make the rotating part large enough.
Generally rotation rates below 2 RPM are considered absolutely safe, 6 RPM - safe with some training and time to adapt.
The centrifugal forces also act on your rotating habitat itself. If you make it too large, it will fall apart.
The final problem is interacting with the rest of the world, which doesn't rotate. There are solutions for this, but they all have their issues.

If you just live in zero-G with grip boots, you can expect a multitude of health problems (calcium deficiency, muscle atrophy, nasal congestion, etc.) and many everyday tasks (eating, bathing and taking a dump among them) will be very inconvenient.

>>53319648
He did say "jewish". This proves everything.

>>53310839
Of course!
Preferably one that can be easily reached by the heroes.

File: tumblr_mzaq9vV9Iq1sp8tdco1_500.png (154KB, 500x368px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 500x368px

>>53319978
Fuck, forgot the image.

File: e0b.jpg (176KB, 612x903px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 612x903px

>>53300047
But in my universe causality is merely an illusion, and in fact shit just happens giving zero fucks about the past and the future which are also illusions that never existed or will exist, so there’s no issue with time travel paradoxes.

(I suspect real life is similar to my fictional construct, but it would be impossible to prove it)

>>53296009
What if you draw the heat into a weapon and project it at the enemy?

>>53296009
>giant testicles

>>53308316
>now you have a lot of small particles with the same velocity heading for you

>>53320662
You must spend energy to do that, and that energy would leave its own waste heat.

>>53319648
I'm all for genetic engineering, but do you really want Google putting microchips in your brain and replacing your dreams with mcDonalds advertisements? You know they would if they could.

File: aliencast.jpg (932KB, 1920x675px) Image search: [Google]

932KB, 1920x675px

How big should be the crew?

>>53319648
"Minds are data patterns" is dualism, which is a religious fantasy.

Materialism says that you are your brain, so if you copy it somewhere else, you personally will still rot.

Friendly reminder that the Venture Star spaceship from Avatar is arguably the most scientifically accurate spaceship ever depicted in a movie.

Read more here:
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/slowerlight.php#id--Go_Fast--Starships--Avatar_ISV_Venture_Star

>>53320916
Ship of Theseus. You gradually replace parts of your brain with computers until your whole brain is a computer.

Once the brain is fully-converted into a computer, you can freely copy, backup, fork, merge, etc.

Is this the new it's a wyvern, not a dragon shitposting? What part of fiction don't you understand?

>>53320999
Ship of Theseus/Moravecian uploading is only valid when continuity is real, but continuity is a psychological illusion, not a physical fact.

>>53321422
Congratulations, you're no longer you as several of your cells have died and been replaced already.
In fact, there never was a 'you'. 'You' don't exist.

File: 20170417061254_1.jpg (307KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 1920x1080px

>>53309202
Pointy noses are best ships.
Didn't play in a while as last update broke once again each and every single ship of my extensive collection, but it is well worth the price. Sure it is far from perfect, but it gives valuable trends, it should be a mandatory purchase for people writing in hard-SF warfare threads.

>>53322018
>tfw you discover you've been storing decane in a cloth sieve all this time

>>53322018
>NTR
Cuck be ye gone!

>>53322007
Welcome to Buddhism 101. Or nihilism.

Your clone is more "you" than the past you of 10 years ago.

>>53322256
>Welcome to Buddhism 101. Or nihilism.
I don't think you know absoutely anything about either Buddhism or Nihilism. In fact, I don't think you could have reffered any two philosophical "teachings" (Nihilism isn't actually a philosophy at all...) that could be further away from what was previously described.

>>53322256
This is just a matter of wordplay though. A 'you' is, in the end, a definition. There is no single real and objectively correct concept of 'you', because it was thought up by humans. Continual 'you' is a definition that is useful in practice, so it's reasonable to adopt it.

>>53322330
Hard emergence actually "solves" a lot of these issues. Consciousness, presumably cannot be simply understood as a "sum of it's constituents", just like a cyclone cannot be understood as merely a sum of air molecules. There is a pretty interesting theory that proposes existence of a patter as an entity existing "sui generis" very much like matter, which accounts for existence of both hard emergence, math as a self-contained entity, information as an intrinsic property of universe and some other hard-to-account for phenomena. However, it's scientifically untestable, and introduces a different problem related to relativity and infinite amount of frames of reference. But then again, we already encountered those in hard sciences.

>>53322330
>There is no single real and objectively correct concept of 'you'
Here's a 'you', right here.

>>53322330
Software version control is reasonably close to an objective 'you.'

You right now are Windows 7. Your freshly teleporter-cloned 15,000 strong army of you is Windows 7. The you of yesterday is WinXP, the you of tomorrow Win10.

>>53322495
Humans change at much more rapid rate than software though, so it's more like me of 1 second ago is 400 revisions old and the freshly teleporter-cloned 15,000 strong army of me is a mess of branches.

>>53296009
Easy solution from another thread. Basically the Romulans had it figured out:

Artificial blackholes. Dump your heat in it. Dump spoiled food in it. Hell, just plain take a dump in the damn thing. Somewhere in the universe there is a white hole making a godawful mess.

Alternately you could try fun with wormholes. Basic quantum entanglement, two points in space connected such that no matter how far apart they are instantaneous travel is always possible between them. Why wouldn't you install one in your ship? You're probably already using something like it for instantaneous communication. If it's only possible for energy to be fed into it you can power your ship with all the juice it needs with your homeworld or a colony. If you can throw matter into it you can also supply atmosphere, supplies, even additional crew. Your wormholes are only one-way? So what, just take two. Now you have an input and output wormhole. Send back stuff you find in space and of course you can send heat back.

Honestly the biggest issue with wormholes like this is you absolutely NEED a way to scuttle them since anyone who captures the ship has easy access to one of your worlds. Then again they have to be quick and/or stealthy and will likely only have one shot to attack because you're up against an entire planet on the other end. I'm sure there are other defensive options, some less scientifically feasible than others. You could also just be careful where you put it. The support for the mission could be on a moon or space station which would still have an easier time dealing with heat and supply issues since they're closer to home.

>>53322677
>dumping heat into a black hole
Star Trek ruined science fiction for a generation.

Black holes are giant evaporating masses. It takes mountains of energy to build them, and then they radiate mountains of energy back out, the smaller the faster. Petawatts of energy. Exawatts. It would be like trying to shovel coal into the nozzles of a rocket lifting off.

>>53322677
Speaking of white holes, why don't we see a lot of exploration of what they are in science fiction? Everyone knows Black holes and their inescapable pull, but White holes seem as equally scary with their infinitely expanding event horizons.

>>53322763
To be honest, the confirmation that all Black Holes indeed do radiate more energy than they absorb is a relatively recent one. Most scientists figured it probably has to be that way (as they would have to defile Entropy otherwise), but until recently all measuring suggested that at least most black holes do indeed absorb energy at much faster rate than they radiate it.
Only recently we had actually confirmed that Black Holes are everything but inescapable.

>>53322763
Micro black holes are a thing, anon. Hell, people were worried about CERN accidentally creating one and killing us all.

Why are you expecting a ship to for some reason use a full sized blackhole as a power source? That ship would have to be goddamn huge just to house the containment for the blackhole.

Got a problem with micro singularities? Take it up with Stephen Hawking.

>>53322864
I don't think nobody denies the existence of micro-black holes. What they deny is their utility as a heat-dump/sustainable energy source. Micro-black holes are insanely instable and require insane amounts of energy to be created and maintained: and they can be maintained for periods less the fraction of seconds. You can condense matter into extremely dense state with enough "pressure", but it will immediately expand as soon as the sheer amount of energy creating it is cancelled. It's not viable source of energy, and you can dump heat into it because it will immediately release that energy as soon as it destabilizises. Which again, is almost immediately.

>>53322763
It's Star Trek. Whole not as fantastic as Star Wars why are you acting like it even pretends to be hard scifi?

>>53322916
If you're already a space faring empire that has access to matter teleportation, matter replication, solid holograms, functioning nanites, force fields, anti-gravity, FTL, etc etc, you don't think they might be able to deal with the instability issues? Though if memory serves Romulan artificial singularities can be tricky. Especially if weird ass lifeforms try to incubate or whatever in the reactor and then their parents duplicate bodies for themselves to try to stop you, and also time gets frozen and can be sped up or reversed to fix the problem.

>>53322993
>If you're already a space faring empire that has access to matter teleportation, matter replication, solid holograms, functioning nanites, force fields, anti-gravity, FTL, etc etc, you don't think they might be able to deal with the instability issues?
First of all: that is presumptious as fucking hell. Nobody established those as given here.
Second of all, YES. Suspension of disbelief is still a thing. There is a difference between proposing a speculative science that requires suspension of disbelief and possibly ignoring some more elaborate concepts of science, and proposing a solution that just contradicts ANY common sense. There is NO fucking benefit to this. You'd be better off inventing pure technobabble than raping the readers basic knowledge of the world: you can get away a lot by introducing elements that don't exist, than using elements that exist but in complete contradiction to how they work.
You'd be better off ignoring heat management ALL TOGETHER than making up such bullshit like that you dump your heat into a black hole. You'd be better of inventing completely fictional, magical sources of energy like some kind of fictional exotic matter than claiming that you derive your energy from a micro-black hole.
It's just stupid: if you are NOT going to do some plausible speculation, then you don't need to acknowledge scientific problems like heat management in vacuum. And if you are going to acknowledge a technical problem like heat management, then don't do it by something as stupid as a black hole because that just produces WAY more questions than it answers.

>>53322916
The problem that you and the other anon(s?) are making is a classic one for these kinds of threads. You are acting like we're trying to solve real-world problems for real life. We're not. We're talking about solving real-world problems for fictional settings. People can bring up all the real-world physics they want but that won't help you if you're shouting that the Warp makes no sense outside of 40k. It isn't trying to, it isn't meant to. These are the exact kinds of threads that will produce some pseudo-scientific solutions that sound realish but require a lot of hand-waving if you try to pretend they could work in the real-world. Otherwise you run into things like >>53322993 because the setting is very likely to have a ton of unreal-world problems anyway. So why flip out when the solutions aren't entirely compatible with real life, especially when they conflict with the current vogue beliefs of our ever-evolving understanding of physics...in spaaaaace?

If we could actually solve this shit we'd be getting Noble Prizes and the like, not wasting our lives on 4chan.

>>53323135
>First of all: that is presumptious as fucking hell. Nobody established those as given here.
Dude, the very post that triggered this nonsense had it. Don't you know what the Romulans are from? Star Trek, dude. It's been kind of a popular thing for over half a century.

Check it for yourself, mate: >>53322677

This entire premise was based on the Romulan application of micro-singularities.

>>53323135
You sound massively triggered beyond all belief by fictional worlds. God damn, take it down a notch. Go outside, walk around in some fresh air, and if you still feel enraged by fiction then feel free to break your keyboard over your head.

>>53323171
>You are acting like we're trying to solve real-world problems for real life.
No, we are acting as if we are trying to be decent storytellers that are trying to produce a compelling fiction, especially for a rather specific type of audience.
This is the age-old problem that always pops up in world-building threads when we discuss geography.
It's not about solving real-life issues. It's about working with real-life knowledge (ours and that of the reader) and using it create a fiction that has the desired impact on the reader. The decision to consider real-world science is not a principal one, it's AN AESTHETIC one.
This is like arguing that you should not take real-world human psychology into account when writing a character in a (fantastic) fiction. Sure, it's a completely different world, it probably has magic and dragons and shit... but IF YOU IGNORE YOUR AUDIENCES INTUITION ABOUT THE LOGIC OF REAL-WORLD PEOPLE, YOU`LL END UP WITH CRAPPY AND UNLIKABLE STORY.

It's the endless problem of dumb people mistaking the issue of realism for the issue of belivability. The two are not the same. We are not arguing for REALISM. We are saying that if you already went as far as started establishing plausible sounding settings (down to such "mundane" details like heat management), you should actually remain consistent and understand the full narrative implications here: Addressing presumed question of the reader (based on his basic knowledge of physics) about where does the ship dump it's thermal radiation with something that is actually LESS PLAUSIBLE than saying just "heat is not an issue" makes the reader think the fiction is dumb, and takes him out of the experience. Plain and simple.

It's a narrative strategy, aesthetic choice, nothing more.

>>53323295
You're now making the classic 4chan problem which is basically the sibling to "stop liking what I don't like!"

What people can tolerate in fiction varies. That's why not everyone likes all the same things, which is good because otherwise entertainment could very well be pretty boring for lack of variety. If you don't like it, by all means don't watch it/play it, but freaking out if other people are fine with it is helping no one and making you look like a titanic spaz, especially when you're shrieking about raping people's knowledge of physics.

I don't know about you personally, though I have my suspicions, but most audiences can accept the rules of a fictional setting when they're told about them and will accept them as true even over the real world, because they know it is not the real world, it's fiction. You sound like a typical That Guy who comes to the gaming table for the first session and break into a tiresome monologue about how the rules of the game setting the DM chose is completely unrealistic and wrong and here's a stack of what you view as the only acceptable game modules and everyone can now thank you and bow down at your feet for making their world so much better for having been graced by your hot opinions. Spoiler alert, you'll be lucky if you get invited back for next session.

>>53323295
Pro-tip, the average layman is hardly likely to keep abreast of the latest findings in particle physics but can probably name every single one of the Kardashians and what they had to eat for breakfast that morning.

Even if they did I sincerely doubt the majority would be as triggered about as you are.

File: Picard_experiencing_temporal_narcosis.jpg (46KB, 703x549px)

46KB, 703x549px

>>53322837
True enough. The episode in question, Timescape, came out in 1993. God I feel old.

I personally don't see how relatively recent discoveries make the episode retroactively bad. Jurassic Park was a serviceable enough movie and book despite the fact that real world velociraptors are much smaller, and differences in atmospheric composition would have left the dinosaurs struggling to take in enough oxygen and the larger specimens might not be able to survive at all, let alone run without collapsing into a gasping heap. Now that we know the raptors and rex probably should have had feathers, well, this change in current understanding, a discovery that confirms older theories (in some cases anyway), doesn't exactly change my view of the movie, making it even better or worse.

>>53322779
I like them as endpoints to a blackhole, the "exhaust" as it were. They're pretty fantastic that way if they provide an exit point to another part of the universe, allowing travel to god knows where, or even provides an exit point to ANOTHER universe. Either one is an exciting prospect from a fictional perspective. Real world too, but with fiction it's a helluva lot easier to imagine people managing to survive entry and exit!

>>53322763

When? I'm pretty sure any decent Black Hole will not begin to lose energy until the Cosmic Background Radiation is much lower.

Since this thread was all into the quantum here and there:

https://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-have-achieved-direct-counterfactual-quantum-communication-for-the-first-time

Just a fun thing to share.

>>53322864
>>53324455
Micro black holes are the problem. Big black holes evaporate slow. The smaller, the faster the evaporation.

Micro black holes are basically weapons like a nuclear ramjet missile - frying everything along the flight path until they ramp up to detonation-tier output towards the end.

It's like using a nuclear blast as a heat sink. Worse technically, since the explosion is bigger. They'd make a great universal fuel for a high powered starship, so long as they are periodically topped up to avoid self-destruct.

Or for a colony ship, you could simply detach the black hole before deceleration and have it do a flyby of the target planet to sterilize all life before you land.

Black holes make great rocket fuel for thi