Talk-Polywell.org

I'm not criticizing them for it. It's good that someone's started from a clean sheet and done it. There have been attempts before, but European politics killed OTRAG, and Sea Dragon just never got traction (and may have been too big in any case). DIRECT P2 seems to have... well, I won't comment on t...

NASA has disappointed me for more than 30 years with empty promises and political decisions over rational decisions. Time to let the private industry take over. No, it's time to fully fund NASA and try to shake some of the politics out. (Not necessarily in that order...) I bet there are tons of eng...

FH and the Block-1 SLS are comparable, so FH is a substitute in that range of payloads. Not really. SLS Block 1 can throw Orion (or a similar-mass module) to the vicinity of the moon. Falcon Heavy in fully-expendable mode may be able to do the same with Dragon, but Dragon is significantly smaller a...

The fact remains no one who knows what it is wanted it. The Senate didn't make up the design; they simply specified what NASA fed them. This is known. For instance, the 130 tons is from Mars design studies. expected to cost $40B over the next 12 years Factually incorrect, and not by a small amount....

I'm sorry but that's all rubbish. SLS is the only launcher able to go to cislunar space with one rocket. It will still cost many times more to go to the moon with SLS than it would with a pair of Falcons. No existing upper stage has the duration or the rendezvous capability to send a payload that h...

My post was relatively accurate, if offensive. And I edited it with real information. Yours was nothing but angry noise. Both of them would have resulted in a delete-and-ban on NSF... For a while now I've been deliberately ignoring NASA-related talk on this forum, because I didn't want to be drawn i...

Which version of my response did you read?

Either way, I can certainly see how you might have managed to get yourself kicked off NSF...

Like I said (and like you apparently didn't parse correctly) - people on NSF who criticize SLS usually (not always) have some idea of what they're talking about. This board, unfortunately, is still mostly at the clueless blogger level... 97% savings with Falcon Case in point. I had an extended respo...

[*facepalm*] You know, on NSF, people who criticize SLS usually have half a clue what they're talking about... Falcon Heavy is not and never will be a substitute for SLS. Especially after reusability has taken its toll on the payload capacity, assuming they get reusability to work at all (which isn'...

Stalin did.

So, for one to understand so it may be explained to chrismb, you are saying that you can use a conventional understanding of physics to disprove a claim against a 'new' piece of physics which doesn't conform to current understanding. One might suspect chrismb would say 'you're having your cake, AND...

You're dodging the question. ... Let us assume that the spacecraft is midway between the two galaxies, at exactly their mean velocity. Assuming no warp field, the two galaxies will collide at the position of the spacecraft in an amount of time T. From the perspective of one galaxy, the spacecraft is...

Okay, so the example was poorly worded.

Now take each object as a reference in turn, and tell me what the boost does in each case.

I'm sorry, GIThruster, but you're disregarding Galilean invariance here, and that makes you almost certainly wrong. There is no known physical reason not to pick either of the galaxies as stationary. This is the whole point of the idea of a reference frame. If this "boost" idea is to make any sense ...

In any event, I doubt fusion's low system power density will ever make it a better option than TRITON and given the interplanetary nature of the mission, objections to fission fall away pretty fast. Fusion has a lower reactor power density than fission, not a lower system power density. Power conve...