{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
9/11/2015 4:05:44 PM
26
[url=http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SciFiWritersHaveNoSenseOfScale]SciFi writers have no sense of scale.[/url] Or mass, for that matter.
Now just try to wrap your mind around just how much power you would need to even move something like that.
English
-
If the Hive have broken the Bekenstein Bound then they either have access to infinite physical storage capacity or infinite power. If it's infinite power...
-
Oryx is a god
-
Edited by Aschloch: 9/11/2015 5:21:33 PMActually, once in space and mostly free from the gravitational pull of another object, (I say mostly because you are never actually free completely) it takes very little energy to propel even an extremely heavy object due to the fact that the opposing force is very minimal. The extreme amount of force to, say, lift a rocket off of earth, is needed simply to break from the large amount of gravity present between the Earth and the rocket. Once the objects generate a greater degree of separation, the force needed to move the object becomes exponentially less. The more force you use to propel the object would merely determine it's acceleration once in space. That being said, it would be an unbelievable undertaking to have built something like this on a planet, then send into space, but it seems unlikely that if you had the technology to build this structure, you wouldn't just built it in space anyway.
-
Edited by Saintman42: 9/11/2015 7:13:28 PMApply Newton's third law. F=ma. (Force of ship) = (Force of propellant) Think of this as recoil in a gun. Yes it works the same in space. Gravity doesn't affect recoil. So plugging in mass and acceleration in the above equation you get: (Mass of ship)*(Desired acceleration of ship) = (Mass of propellant)*(Acceleration of propellant). In space, going in a straight line, and not worrying about orbital mechanics, you would need either a ton of fuel to propel the ship or some propellant that moves crazy fast in the opposite direction of the ship. What you may be talking about "once in space" has to do with conservation of momentum, or Newton's first law. You won't be able to slow down that giant ship if you can get it going AND there's no opposing force.
-
If the ship is at a stop, a=0....therefore, regardless of how much it weighs, F=0. Any force applied to that object would move it. And as I stated above, and what you simply seemed to restate in your post, the amount of force applied to the object determines it's acceleration, not whether it could be moved or not. As long as the ship is not accelerating (changing velocity), a force upon that object of even the slightest amount would cause the object to have an acceleration.... I'm not trying to say opening a valve on a compressed oxygen tank will take you to a different galaxy. I'm just saying that even the tiniest amount of force on the object will, in fact, move it.
-
Well, if nothing got in your way to slow you down (gravity, etc) , if you opened oxygen tank and set yourself off in the general direction of another galaxy, you could probably reach one. Not, of course, accounting for the fact that that galaxy is not in the same place as it appears to be when viewed from your starting point, nor will it be there in however many millions of years it takes you to arrive at the place you aimed yourself at.
-
Common misconception, but not really. The Space Shuttle in LEO had a weight of zero, but still had a mass of 90 metric tons. If an astronaut were to push on it in orbit, there would be no effect on the spacecraft. About the same as if you were to do the same on Earth. In fact, the only effect would be you pushing off of it due to Newton's third law.
-
I should also note Newton's first law. If there is no force acting against the movement of the shuttle, then it would never stop or slow down, assuming perfect vacuum. In which case, if space poses almost no force against an object in motion, then the force needed to cause the object to accelerate, in space, is very small.
-
Edited by Aschloch: 9/11/2015 6:11:17 PMYou aren't completely wrong as Newton's third law applies, but the forces you speak about are opposing in a different direction than a rocket would be on a shuttle. If an astronaut pushed on a shuttle, Newton's third law would state the shuttle pushes back onto the astronaut. I agree with that. But now imagine the astronaut as the opposing force of space (minimal), and now apply a force to the shuttle in the direction of the astronaut, as a rocket would. There isn't much in the way of the shuttle and Newton's second law is then applicable.
-
If a rocket exerts 10 lbs of force on a shuttle, or an astronaut does, it makes no difference. The shuttle barely moved because it has a lot of mass. Mass is still relevant in space. The bigger the Dreadnaught is, the more force required to move it, even though any minimal force will technically still move it an equally minimal amount and it won't ever stop. Let's take two of your rockets. I'll put mine on the back of the shuttle, and you put yours on the Dreadnaught. Which one of us is going to go faster? We'll both move infinitely, but I'll be doing it a lot faster than you.
-
I agree mass is still relevant, but you said it yourself, the ship moved. That's all I stated, with very little force the shuttle will move. Your desired acceleration will depend on amount of force required. On earth (or any other planet) vs. in space, the difference of force required is much less in space.
-
Fair enough. Would you like to weigh in on the Bill Nye issue as well?
-
no comment
-
Did I just watch an episode of Bill Nye? Because it feels like it.
-
LMAO. Any idea why the news continuously has him on to talk about how every storm is related to global warming? Is there any way it could be more obvious that they're just about ratings not news? Also, this video of a CNN anchor asking if meteors are caused by global warming: [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnHYkQdAr5U[/url]
-
You mean....they're not!?!? Seriously though, news anchors and US politicians are a bunch of buffoons. Or they're constantly trolling us, I can never decide. I like Bill Nye, not a real scientist but his knows some stuff. I particularly enjoyed him when he was brought in over "deflategate".
-
The part of "deflategate" I enjoyed was changing the channel. I can't tell you how little I care about Tom Brady's balls. Not an NFL fan (grew up in Jax, so even when I tried to be...) and definitely not a Patriots fan. Even when I'm interested, I think our news coverage is just way over the top repeating itself and beating a dead puddle that used to be a horse.
-
Edited by Renovatio K: 9/11/2015 7:54:32 PMNot a football fan either, but I caught that video. We'll make a scandal out of anything though. Some say our favorite part time is baseball, but it's definitely dead horse beating. Edit: past time not part time. No economic jokes here.
-
Edited by CopicX: 9/11/2015 5:15:20 PMMAGIC!..... SPACE MAGIC!
-
Not very much seeing how it is in space lol. No gravity?!?! Duh.
-
It's called inertia. Duh.
-
There's dead trees on mars implying that it has an atmosphere. That's currently impossible as it's believe that its core is solidified and there is no electromagnetic field to deter the Sun's radiation. So... cool beans.
-
Edited by GUARD1ANG3L: 9/11/2015 5:06:49 PMEnough power that if you blew it up it would destroy Saturn and then through a chain of events our solar system. (Shield brothers strike)
-
And I'm pretty sure that's a lowball estimate.
-
Lol probably
