Jump to content


Photo

For science!


  • Please log in to reply
92 replies to this topic

#41 Ash

Ash

    Foxtrot Oscar.

  • Undead
  • 15,526 posts
  • Location:England
  • Projects:Robot Storm
  •  Keep calm and carry on.

Posted 30 November 2009 - 12:35 AM

To be fair, they HAD to use a more sensitive camera to catch it. 1) They couldn't us a flash because it would pollute the sky and 2) Not using a flash would mean that the camera wouldn't catch the light as well.

Posted Image
This one's probably more 'realistic' for the photo, and I'm sure you'll agree it's still pretty damn impressive. I would imagine that your view of that skyscape with the naked eye would be somewhere between the two, since the human eye is vastly more sensitive. It will respond to one photon of light. The camera requires significantly more than that.

#42 Bart

Bart

  • Network Admins
  • 8,524 posts
  • Location:The Netherlands
  • Division:Revora
  • Job:Network Leader

Posted 30 November 2009 - 01:08 AM

2) Not using a flash would mean that the camera wouldn't catch the light as well.

Eh, on the cheapest cameras maybe. In any decent (no, not very expensive) camera you can tune the sensitivity the way you want, with our without flash :p

I would imagine that your view of that skyscape with the naked eye would be somewhere between the two, since the human eye is vastly more sensitive. It will respond to one photon of light. The camera requires significantly more than that.

But on the camera, you can have it catch light longer. For normal photos this will cause massive motion blur, but stars don't move that fast :p
bartvh | Join me, make your signature small!
Einstein: "We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."

#43 Ash

Ash

    Foxtrot Oscar.

  • Undead
  • 15,526 posts
  • Location:England
  • Projects:Robot Storm
  •  Keep calm and carry on.

Posted 30 November 2009 - 01:15 AM

Hmm, I will admit I'm not particularly versed in photography, I just figure from what I know/think. Sure, the first pic is a 360 panorama...but still, regardless of camera sensitivity, it's pretty damn impressive view, and I wouldn't imagine your naked-eye view would be THAT much worse. :p

#44 Vortigern

Vortigern

    Sumquhat quisquis.

  • Division Leaders
  • 4,654 posts
  • Location:Oxfordshire, England.
  • Projects:Workin'...
  •  ...like a workin' man do.
  • Division:Role-Playing Games
  • Job:Division Leader

Posted 03 December 2009 - 11:09 PM

Right, smart guys. New question:

Space travel. How far have we got?
I hope I am a good enough writer that some day dwarves kill me and drink my blood for wisdom.

#45 Pasidon

Pasidon

    Splitting Hares

  • Network Admins
  • 8,880 posts
  • Location:Da Moon
  • Projects:YouTube
  •  Actual Celebrity
  • Division:Community
  • Job:Community Admin

Posted 03 December 2009 - 11:45 PM

Space programs are under fire recently... but with the research on gravitational corridors (I'm gitty about them), we can use them like hyperspace railways. All we need is a good seven years to design a shuttle capable of using them for prolonged flight.

YT_Sig.jpgoutput_Fkd6it.gifFB_Sig.jpg


#46 Ash

Ash

    Foxtrot Oscar.

  • Undead
  • 15,526 posts
  • Location:England
  • Projects:Robot Storm
  •  Keep calm and carry on.

Posted 04 December 2009 - 12:17 AM

Basically, interstellar travel is impossible. Or rather, impractical. There's only so fast we can propel something before the fuel weight outstrips the amount of power that fuel could potentially provide. And given the nearest star being 4 light years away, even travelling at lightspeed would be impractical. So we would need to travel at many multiples of c before we could accomplish anything meaningful? How bad is that? The fastest thing in the universe we can think of (well, except tachyons but they're just defying the laws of everything by even existing), and travelling as fast as it would still be way way too slow! The space probes are crazy stupid in that regard. Pioneer 10 was the first object made by man to leave our solar system (Voyager 1 has since overtaken it as farthest-away object, but let's start with the little guy first - the numbers are fucking baffling enough with Pioneer, as you'll see), was launched on July 15 1972. At the time of its last response (December 30, 2005 - after that it went dead. P10's record was lost in March 2006), it was 89.7Astronomical Units away. 1AU = 150m kilometres. That puts it at 13,455,000,000kilometres out, travelling at 12.51km/s (0.000041c).

Now, compare the big numbers.

Light speed = 1,079,000,000
P10's distance = 13,455,000,000
So, that's 13 light years roughly. In thirty-three years? Consider an object with considerably more mass, going considerably slower (it would actually have to, to prevent human occupants basically being turned into a fine paste by the ridiculous G-forces of going at the 28,000mph that P10 is travelling at)...


As for colonising our own solar system, it's a slowish process but not beyond our current technology level. Greenhouses, algae tanks and a fission reactor would sort the oxygen out. Water's the main constraint though recyc and the odd top-up delivery could probably make even that sustainable. The moon's what, a couple of days away for human travel (Apollo 11 launched on July 16, the lunar module landed on July 20)? Mars is a couple of months, max. Which is all well and good considering just how much stuff you'd have to take there. To send it all in one go would be a ridiculous endeavour, requiring a rocket more powerful than we could feasibly produce. So, you'd have to build your expeditionary stuff in orbit, not unlike the way Mir and Skylab were, and the ISS currently is. Then your crews gotta get up there. And they have to be in transit for months, and then land on Mars. Oh, sure, you could send follow-up teams but those initial crews are going to be the ones doing the colonising (and you need people for that shit - you can't automate the building of colony modules...).

So, yeah. Colonising the Moon or Mars is doable for sure. It's that, logistically speaking, it'd be the biggest nightmare the human mind has ever begun to contemplate. The Normandy beach landings in 1944 were logistically absurd. Even colonising the Moon would make them look like a trip to the fucking supermarket. I would not want to be the poor bastard who planned the Mars colony...

#47 Pasidon

Pasidon

    Splitting Hares

  • Network Admins
  • 8,880 posts
  • Location:Da Moon
  • Projects:YouTube
  •  Actual Celebrity
  • Division:Community
  • Job:Community Admin

Posted 04 December 2009 - 01:26 AM

Basically, interstellar travel is impossible. Or rather, impractical.

The only thing impossible is impossibility.

There's only so fast we can propel something before the fuel weight outstrips the amount of power that fuel could potentially provide.

Gravitational Corridors...

YT_Sig.jpgoutput_Fkd6it.gifFB_Sig.jpg


#48 Vortigern

Vortigern

    Sumquhat quisquis.

  • Division Leaders
  • 4,654 posts
  • Location:Oxfordshire, England.
  • Projects:Workin'...
  •  ...like a workin' man do.
  • Division:Role-Playing Games
  • Job:Division Leader

Posted 04 December 2009 - 12:45 PM

So we're nowhere on the warp drive front?
I hope I am a good enough writer that some day dwarves kill me and drink my blood for wisdom.

#49 Archon

Archon

    Ethereal Chaos

  • Members
  • 555 posts
  • Location:United States
  • Projects:Wars of Arda mod
  •  Expert Marksman

Posted 04 December 2009 - 01:20 PM

Apparently not. Sadly.
_______Posted Image_______Posted Image

#50 Vortigern

Vortigern

    Sumquhat quisquis.

  • Division Leaders
  • 4,654 posts
  • Location:Oxfordshire, England.
  • Projects:Workin'...
  •  ...like a workin' man do.
  • Division:Role-Playing Games
  • Job:Division Leader

Posted 04 December 2009 - 01:42 PM

I'm curious, Archie, where do you think God lives? If we go too far into space will we run into Him and incur His wrath? As a Christian, shouldn't you be against space travel, as we're looking to abandon the planet God entrusted to us?
I hope I am a good enough writer that some day dwarves kill me and drink my blood for wisdom.

#51 Bart

Bart

  • Network Admins
  • 8,524 posts
  • Location:The Netherlands
  • Division:Revora
  • Job:Network Leader

Posted 04 December 2009 - 04:07 PM

to prevent human occupants basically being turned into a fine paste by the ridiculous G-forces of going at the 28,000mph that P10 is travelling at)..

You could travel at ten times light speed and the G-forces would still be 0. They are caused by change of speed (e.g. acceleration, turning), not speed it self.
bartvh | Join me, make your signature small!
Einstein: "We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."

#52 Archon

Archon

    Ethereal Chaos

  • Members
  • 555 posts
  • Location:United States
  • Projects:Wars of Arda mod
  •  Expert Marksman

Posted 04 December 2009 - 05:51 PM

I'm curious, Archie, where do you think God lives? If we go too far into space will we run into Him and incur His wrath? As a Christian, shouldn't you be against space travel, as we're looking to abandon the planet God entrusted to us?

Vort, seriously. Let's just cool it, k? :p
_______Posted Image_______Posted Image

#53 Vortigern

Vortigern

    Sumquhat quisquis.

  • Division Leaders
  • 4,654 posts
  • Location:Oxfordshire, England.
  • Projects:Workin'...
  •  ...like a workin' man do.
  • Division:Role-Playing Games
  • Job:Division Leader

Posted 04 December 2009 - 06:42 PM

Sorry, religious people make me cranky. :p
I hope I am a good enough writer that some day dwarves kill me and drink my blood for wisdom.

#54 Ash

Ash

    Foxtrot Oscar.

  • Undead
  • 15,526 posts
  • Location:England
  • Projects:Robot Storm
  •  Keep calm and carry on.

Posted 04 December 2009 - 06:47 PM

Gravitational Corridors...

Ehm, what? Are you referring to wormholes? If so, they're totally theoretical. Or maybe you're clutching at straws of science fiction.

So we're nowhere on the warp drive front?

LOL, unless there really is a hyperspace realm, we've no chance. Even if we do, it would probably require the ability to go faster than light to get there. And as I explained, the engine that would make us reach that speed would be so massive that its mass would be a brick wall against going any faster. That's not including fuel.

You could travel at ten times light speed and the G-forces would still be 0. They are caused by change of speed (e.g. acceleration, turning), not speed it self.

That is rendered irrelevant by the fact you still need to get up to speed. G-suits won't protect you from the forces required to get you up to 24k in good time. And a stable acceleration gradient that would get you to that speed without turning the occupants to paste would probably add a fuck of a long time to your interstellar journey.

#55 Pasidon

Pasidon

    Splitting Hares

  • Network Admins
  • 8,880 posts
  • Location:Da Moon
  • Projects:YouTube
  •  Actual Celebrity
  • Division:Community
  • Job:Community Admin

Posted 04 December 2009 - 11:51 PM

Not wormholes... Gravitational Corridors are lines of gravitational force, mainly outlet by stars and butt-big planets. We can use them gain insane amounts of momentum without using excess fuel. They are like the roads of the universe.

So we're nowhere on the warp drive front?

BA HA HA! ... Eh, em. No honey.

YT_Sig.jpgoutput_Fkd6it.gifFB_Sig.jpg


#56 Bart

Bart

  • Network Admins
  • 8,524 posts
  • Location:The Netherlands
  • Division:Revora
  • Job:Network Leader

Posted 05 December 2009 - 01:32 AM

One day we might find a loophole in the laws of physics like in the Matrix, who knows.

Some time ago, a friend suggested something (don't know what) and I said it was impossible, because the laws of physics are the same everywhere, on every planet. I don't actually know why, but I was/am convinced of it.
Why should they be though? Anybody have a scientific answer to that?
bartvh | Join me, make your signature small!
Einstein: "We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."

#57 Pasidon

Pasidon

    Splitting Hares

  • Network Admins
  • 8,880 posts
  • Location:Da Moon
  • Projects:YouTube
  •  Actual Celebrity
  • Division:Community
  • Job:Community Admin

Posted 05 December 2009 - 01:48 AM

because the laws of physics are the same everywhere, on every planet.

Well... a strong statement for a race that's never had their species on another planet.

But we know factually that that isn't quite true. There's even a planet in the Horsehead Nebula that exerts gravity, meaning up is down in comparison to earth. But that's beyond the point... no other planet is at 9.8. There might be, but still. Physics is different on every world. Especially if it's close to a black hole.

YT_Sig.jpgoutput_Fkd6it.gifFB_Sig.jpg


#58 Ash

Ash

    Foxtrot Oscar.

  • Undead
  • 15,526 posts
  • Location:England
  • Projects:Robot Storm
  •  Keep calm and carry on.

Posted 07 December 2009 - 12:33 AM

We can observe physical laws affecting objects off our own world. Things like gravitational forces, etc. We can see orbits, we can see collisions, we can see object's motion.

Why would anyone assume they were different? Why shouldn't they be the same?

And what's this crazy horsehead planet? Got a source?

#59 Bart

Bart

  • Network Admins
  • 8,524 posts
  • Location:The Netherlands
  • Division:Revora
  • Job:Network Leader

Posted 07 December 2009 - 12:45 AM

But that's beyond the point... no other planet is at 9.8. There might be, but still. Physics is different on every world. Especially if it's close to a black hole.

That makes the amount of gravity different, not the physical laws that define the phenomenon of gravity. The gravitational force is simply determined by the mass, which is defined by an exact formula. A planet close to a black hole follows that same law, but objects around it are also affected by the black hole.
bartvh | Join me, make your signature small!
Einstein: "We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."

#60 Pasidon

Pasidon

    Splitting Hares

  • Network Admins
  • 8,880 posts
  • Location:Da Moon
  • Projects:YouTube
  •  Actual Celebrity
  • Division:Community
  • Job:Community Admin

Posted 07 December 2009 - 01:39 AM

Well... one can say the Laws are physics aren't the same on every planet, but they apply to the same boundaries and limitations... as long as it isn't close to a black hole obviously.

And what's this crazy horsehead planet? Got a source?

A planet in the Horsehead Nebula. Hmm... I'll see if I can find it again. Found it on accident on that Space Age site as a personal observational discovery. Hopefully they named it by now.

YT_Sig.jpgoutput_Fkd6it.gifFB_Sig.jpg





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users