Christopher Posted September 3, 2016 Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 In our current press climate that focuses on the "next big scare/distraction" this might have been overlooked. But the Ozone Hole is finally closing:http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/06/antarctic-ozone-hole-healing-fingerprints/ https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/30/ozone-layer-hole-appears-to-be-healing-scientists-say http://abcnews.go.com/International/antarcticas-ozone-hole-shrinking-study-shows/story?id=40277104 There was a bit of a odd dip, but that most likely caused by volcano activity in Chile and only affected those specific months of those specific years. But overall the hole is decreasing/forming later consistently over years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spence Posted September 3, 2016 Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 I'm just gonna leave this here. http://www.iflscience.com/technology/rumored-emdrive-paper-suggests-the-controversial-thruster-actually-works/ But I wish the educated newsies writing these articles would stop saying it requires no fuel. Electric motors required no fuel too if you want to go there. The concept does require energy, so it is like an electric motor in that regard. What it doesn't need is reaction mass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted September 3, 2016 Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 But I wish the educated newsies writing these articles would stop saying it requires no fuel. Electric motors required no fuel too if you want to go there. The concept does require energy, so it is like an electric motor in that regard. What it doesn't need is reaction mass. They are writing so normal people understand it too, not just scientists. And "Fuel" in "Space" in general means reaction mass. With Ion Thrusters it is technically know as propellant. But for common people, "fuel" does fit the bill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spence Posted September 3, 2016 Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 They are writing so normal people understand it too, not just scientists. And "Fuel" in "Space" in general means reaction mass. With Ion Thrusters it is technically know as propellant. But for common people, "fuel" does fit the bill. er...well..maybe... it just rubs my one functioning brain cell wrong... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeropoint Posted September 4, 2016 Report Share Posted September 4, 2016 Fuel and reaction mass are the same thing in a chemical rocket, like we're used to, so it's very easy for people to start conflating the two concepts. Technically, "fuel" is the substance that supplies the energy, and "reaction mass" is the substance that gets ejected from the rocket. The EM drive, if it works, will obviously require fuel, but not requiring reaction mass is the huge, huge advantage that it would have over any other form of space propulsion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xavier Onassiss Posted September 4, 2016 Report Share Posted September 4, 2016 But I wish the educated newsies writing these articles would stop saying it requires no fuel. Electric motors required no fuel too if you want to go there. The concept does require energy, so it is like an electric motor in that regard. What it doesn't need is reaction mass. Yeah, reading the linked article was painful. I only got as far as "propulsionless engine" before ROFLMAO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted September 4, 2016 Report Share Posted September 4, 2016 Fuel and reaction mass are the same thing in a chemical rocket, like we're used to, so it's very easy for people to start conflating the two concepts. Technically, "fuel" is the substance that supplies the energy, and "reaction mass" is the substance that gets ejected from the rocket. The EM drive, if it works, will obviously require fuel, but not requiring reaction mass is the huge, huge advantage that it would have over any other form of space propulsion. And apparently "reaction mass" is often called "propellant" before it has been ejected too, like in the case of Ion Drives. Kind of like the difference between Magma/Lava. For the scientists involved it is propably so refreshing to be able to explain the problem that they are solving to laymans, that they could not care less for the proper wording. One of the biggest issues with science right now is that you need to be a scientist to even understand what the problem is, why it might be worth to solving and thus why a solution approach might be interesting. Nobody understood what you could learn from Quantum Physics back in the day. What use could Quantum Tunneling ever be for the average person? The counter question is: Do you have a SD card, USB stick, SSD or other Flash Medium? Then you can literally hold the use in your hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmjalund Posted September 4, 2016 Report Share Posted September 4, 2016 Schrodinger's cat could use Quantum Tunnelling to escape from it's death trap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted September 4, 2016 Report Share Posted September 4, 2016 Schrodinger's cat could use Quantum Tunnelling to escape from it's death trap Oh, I totally forgot that example: Schroedinger needed to invent the cat example to even make sense out of a part of Quantum Physics for Laymans (in this case, Heisenbergs Uncertainty principle). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted September 5, 2016 Report Share Posted September 5, 2016 Rosetta found it's Lander Philae again, or rather mission control did. It was found on a Photograph made last Friday, but downloaded only over the weekend. Apparently Philae bounced off the surface a repeatedly and finall found rest in a rockformation. Unforunately with the Antenna's and Solar Panels pointing in the wrong direction: https://twitter.com/esa/status/772800879057567744 While it will not change anything about the mission, having at least found it might be beneficial for a next attempt at landing on a comet. pinecone and tkdguy 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkdguy Posted September 8, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2016 Sending a submarine to Titan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L. Marcus Posted September 8, 2016 Report Share Posted September 8, 2016 I approve heartily, and have but one demand: the submarine must be yellow. tkdguy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted September 8, 2016 Report Share Posted September 8, 2016 I approve heartily, and have but one demand: the submarine must be yellow. But it will not be a manned Submarine, so nobody will be living in it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L. Marcus Posted September 8, 2016 Report Share Posted September 8, 2016 I will -- in my mind! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolgroth Posted September 9, 2016 Report Share Posted September 9, 2016 Sending a submarine to Titan That is actually really interesting. I am looking forward to seeing this plays out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted September 9, 2016 Report Share Posted September 9, 2016 Star Trek introduced Transparent Alluminium to SciFi. Now it was found in the real world:http://screenrant.com/star-trek-transparent-aluminum-real/ pinecone 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cancer Posted September 13, 2016 Report Share Posted September 13, 2016 Rosetta found it's Lander Philae again, or rather mission control did. It was found on a Photograph made last Friday, but downloaded only over the weekend. Apparently Philae bounced off the surface a repeatedly and finall found rest in a rockformation. Unforunately with the Antenna's and Solar Panels pointing in the wrong direction: https://twitter.com/esa/status/772800879057567744 While it will not change anything about the mission, having at least found it might be beneficial for a next attempt at landing on a comet. Image also available at APOD. tkdguy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted September 17, 2016 Report Share Posted September 17, 2016 Star Trek introduced Transparent Alluminium to SciFi. Now it was found in the real world: http://screenrant.com/star-trek-transparent-aluminum-real/ That is no more "Transparent Aluminium" than common-or-garden window glass is "Transparent Calcium". It's a compound of aluminium. That's all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted September 17, 2016 Report Share Posted September 17, 2016 That is no more "Transparent Aluminium" than common-or-garden window glass is "Transparent Calcium". It's a compound of aluminium. That's all. The full name is "Aluminium Oxynitride". It is classified as a "Ceramic compound": Still, "Transparent Aluminium" has a nice ring to it. Why not use it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolgroth Posted September 17, 2016 Report Share Posted September 17, 2016 People have wanted "transparent aluminum" since the days of Star Trek. Anything that even vaguely resembles it is going to have the name attached to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted September 18, 2016 Report Share Posted September 18, 2016 The full name is "Aluminium Oxynitride". It is classified as a "Ceramic compound": Still, "Transparent Aluminium" has a nice ring to it. Why not use it? I'm fully aware of what it is, which is why I asserted that it is not transparent aluminium. The biggest reason not to use the Trekkie fantasy name is because it's misleading. Calling it a "transparent metal" implies that the compound posesses important metallic physical properties like ductility and electrical conductivity, which it does not. You cannot make "transparent aluminium" foil, or use it for cabling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted September 18, 2016 Report Share Posted September 18, 2016 I'm fully aware of what it is, which is why I asserted that it is not transparent aluminium. The biggest reason not to use the Trekkie fantasy name is because it's misleading. Calling it a "transparent metal" implies that the compound posesses important metallic physical properties like ductility and electrical conductivity, which it does not. You cannot make "transparent aluminium" foil, or use it for cabling. And Hotdogs do not actually contain heated dogmeat. Yet nobody with basic cultural knowledge and trust in fellow human beings ever thought they would. There are ample cases were a common use name and the real properties do not match up. Everybody working scientifically with knows the proper name is "Aluminium Oxynitrid" and it is a ceramic compound. Not Transparent Aluminium, ALON or whatever the hell else new name was thought up most recently. If you want to argue about the "purity of langauge", you have a few dozen older fish to fry first. And realy it does serves any purpose - every generation will find new words to insert into existing languages, just to make it more complex. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkdguy Posted September 20, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 20, 2016 ESA will use lasers to study wind Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinecone Posted September 20, 2016 Report Share Posted September 20, 2016 ESA will use lasers to study wind "Can you get me some Windmills, with frikken Lasers on their heads?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted September 21, 2016 Report Share Posted September 21, 2016 A piece of the Chineses Space Station Tiangong ("Heavily Palace") 2 was launched on 15th of September sucessfully. However, it looks like the Heaven will fall on our heads in the near future. China apparently lost control over Tiangong 1: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-space-station-tiangong-1-crash-tiangong-1-out-of-control-a7319916.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.