http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.makers.honda?hl=en
rec.autos.makers.honda@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Anti-matter - 4 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.makers.honda/t/685ee9c91d1ef52b?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Anti-matter
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.makers.honda/t/685ee9c91d1ef52b?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 7 2011 12:09 pm
From: Dillon Pyron
Thus spake "Tinkerer" <invalidaddress@invalidaddress.invalid> :
>
>"Steven L." <sdlitvin@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:mdudnSNecLNuvdfQnZ2dnUVZ_jOdnZ2d@earthlink.com...
>>
>>
>> "robert_c72@hotmail.com" <robert_c72@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:ii51md$3sv$1@news.eternal-september.org:
>>
>>> On 1/30/2011 7:27 PM, Joe Snodgrass wrote:
>>> > What's the best way to make anti-matter for your rocket engine? An
>>> > accelerator. That's why Clarke's spaceship was so long in the 2001
>>> > movie.
>>>
>>> All this time I thought it has fission powered engines (and general
>>> electrical power generation as well) and the long boom was supposed to
>>> reduce the crew's radiation exposure.
>>
>> Not quite true either.
>>
>> In Clarke's original conception (as expressed in his novelization), the
>> spaceship Discovery had giant radiating fins attached along the long boom,
>> to dissipate the enormous heat from the fission engines.
>>
>> But Kubrick decided that this would make the ship look like some giant
>> insect, and so the wings came off, leaving just the long boom.
>>
>>
>>
>
>I had no idea that Honda were making these. Wish I'd found out before I
>settled on the CRV. ;o)
Bet you couldn't get the sucker into your garage, though. Even a
double deep. Or even park it in your half mile long driveway.
--
- dillon I am not invalid
An object's desireability to a dog is directly
proportional to its desireability to another dog.
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 8 2011 1:44 pm
From: "Steven L."
"Mike Dworetsky" <platinum198@pants.btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:D7adncQMycn2gtTQnZ2dnUVZ8iidnZ2d@bt.com:
> Joe Snodgrass wrote:
> > On Jan 30, 8:02 pm, robertva <robert_...@hotmail.invalid> wrote:
> >> On 1/30/2011 7:27 PM, Joe Snodgrass wrote:
> >>
> >>> What's the best way to make anti-matter for your rocket engine? An
> >>> accelerator. That's why Clarke's spaceship was so long in the 2001
> >>> movie.
> >>
> >> All this time I thought it has fission powered engines (and general
> >> electrical power generation as well) and the long boom was supposed
> >> to reduce the crew's radiation exposure. There wold also need to be
> >> some serious volume for consumables storage, with two crewmen eating
> >> and breathing for the entire voyage. There would also need to be
> >> some place to store the air pumped out of that huge bay every time
> >> they used a pod.
> >
> > Unless it were a pulsed engine. You spend a few days building up your
> > anti-matter supply and then, PCHOOM!!, fire all of the guns at once
> > and explode into space. I'm still working on why you'd want to do
> > that, but I do know that one of the Skunk Works' classified projects
> > at Area 51 is a pulsed conventional engine. They must like 'em pulsed
> > for some reason.
>
> Thermodynamics still applies; it would take more energy to produce the
> antimatter than you would get out of it, because the manufacturing is not
> 100% efficient [partly because production results in various particles that
> leak away and carry energy]. Better to apply that energy to producing
> propulsion directly than producing antimatter.
>
> A pulsed conventional engine (like the WW2 V1 flying bombs) is very basic
> technology, very cheap to manufcture, but remarkably enough, it still
> requires a fuel tank to be filled up before launch; they don't manufacture
> the fuel on board during flight, in between pulses.
In the 1950s, the Pentagon funded a research project, Orion, to build a
starship that could be powered by the explosion of a series of atomic
bombs, one after the other. A "pusher plate" made of special materials
would shield the starship cabin from the atomic explosions, and act as a
shock absorber to smooth out the impulses. A dispenser not unlike that
in a Coca-Cola vending machine would drop atomic bombs out the
spaceship, one after the other. These would explode against the pusher
plate, one at a time, propelling the ship forward.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_%28nuclear_propulsion%29
Orion was cancelled when the U.S. signed the Outer Space Treaty which
forbade nuclear testing in space.
-- Steven L.
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 8 2011 1:46 pm
From: "Steven L."
"moviePig" <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote in message
news:3c8a0b4c-0fb8-4e63-a3a9-2ce70cc0363e@y35g2000prc.googlegroups.com:
> On Jan 31, 10:35�am, Anim8rFSK <ANIM8R...@cox.net> wrote:
> > In article
> > <11cfab6d-ee73-4337-9578-7dc781219...@o8g2000vbq.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> >
> >
> > �moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
> > > On Jan 31, 12:43�am, Anim8rFSK <ANIM8R...@cox.net> wrote:
> > > > In article <8qmqalFfq...@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > �Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
> >
> > > > > calvin <cri...@windstream.net> wrote:
> >
> > > > > >On Jan 30, 7:27�pm, Joe Snodgrass <joe.s...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > >> What's the best way to make anti-matter for your rocket engine? �An
> > > > > >> accelerator. �That's why Clarke's spaceship was so long in the 2001
> > > > > >> movie.
> >
> > > > > >The real reason was that they wanted it to be shaped like
> > > > > >a bone, like the one thrown in the air early in the movie.
> >
> > > > > I don't think that was really all that important. �They did the scene
> > > > > cutover between the bone and the Pan Am shuttle to orbit.
> >
> > > > Huh? �The cut from the bone is to an orbiting atomic bomb. �And like so
> > > > much of 2001, there's no way to know that without doing outside reading.
> >
> > > I suppose one certainly could have inferred it. �But I gotta say, at
> > > first blush, it seems actually to weaken the metaphor (... ironically,
> > > by strengthening it).
> >
> > Is there a metaphor? �I thought the message was just "4 million years
> > later, humans are still tossing their weapons in the air" and/or "hey,
> > gang, look, a match cut!"
>
> It's a 'match cut' that spans a million(?) years of humanity's
> physical and mental evolution -- rendered humorous by sudden silence
> and and lack of 'dissolve'. The metaphor I've always taken from it is
> that all of mankind's prideful achievement comprises no more than an
> extrapolation of his received gift for tinkering with ever more
> complex toys. In comparison, your 'weapons' interpretation is
> obviously much more specific... and, unfortunately, pretty
> plausible...
As I've always said: The radical scientific theories of today, are the
weapon systems of tomorrow.
-- Steven L.
== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 8 2011 2:17 pm
From: Halmyre
In article <wLmdnT550NXUJMzQnZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
sdlitvin@earthlink.net says...
>
> "Mike Dworetsky" <platinum198@pants.btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:D7adncQMycn2gtTQnZ2dnUVZ8iidnZ2d@bt.com:
>
> > Joe Snodgrass wrote:
> > > On Jan 30, 8:02 pm, robertva <robert_...@hotmail.invalid> wrote:
> > >> On 1/30/2011 7:27 PM, Joe Snodgrass wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> What's the best way to make anti-matter for your rocket engine? An
> > >>> accelerator. That's why Clarke's spaceship was so long in the 2001
> > >>> movie.
> > >>
> > >> All this time I thought it has fission powered engines (and general
> > >> electrical power generation as well) and the long boom was supposed
> > >> to reduce the crew's radiation exposure. There wold also need to be
> > >> some serious volume for consumables storage, with two crewmen eating
> > >> and breathing for the entire voyage. There would also need to be
> > >> some place to store the air pumped out of that huge bay every time
> > >> they used a pod.
> > >
> > > Unless it were a pulsed engine. You spend a few days building up your
> > > anti-matter supply and then, PCHOOM!!, fire all of the guns at once
> > > and explode into space. I'm still working on why you'd want to do
> > > that, but I do know that one of the Skunk Works' classified projects
> > > at Area 51 is a pulsed conventional engine. They must like 'em pulsed
> > > for some reason.
> >
> > Thermodynamics still applies; it would take more energy to produce the
> > antimatter than you would get out of it, because the manufacturing is not
> > 100% efficient [partly because production results in various particles that
> > leak away and carry energy]. Better to apply that energy to producing
> > propulsion directly than producing antimatter.
> >
> > A pulsed conventional engine (like the WW2 V1 flying bombs) is very basic
> > technology, very cheap to manufcture, but remarkably enough, it still
> > requires a fuel tank to be filled up before launch; they don't manufacture
> > the fuel on board during flight, in between pulses.
>
> In the 1950s, the Pentagon funded a research project, Orion, to build a
> starship that could be powered by the explosion of a series of atomic
> bombs, one after the other. A "pusher plate" made of special materials
> would shield the starship cabin from the atomic explosions, and act as a
> shock absorber to smooth out the impulses. A dispenser not unlike that
> in a Coca-Cola vending machine would drop atomic bombs out the
> spaceship, one after the other. These would explode against the pusher
> plate, one at a time, propelling the ship forward.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_%28nuclear_propulsion%29
>
Kubrick was considering this as a method for Discovery's propulsion in
2001:ASO, but decided that he'd already had enough of exploding nukes.
--
Halmyre
The more you know the less the better
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.autos.makers.honda"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.makers.honda?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.autos.makers.honda+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.makers.honda/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
No comments:
Post a Comment