• 10 Posts
  • 72 Comments
Joined 10 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 28th, 2023

help-circle










  • I’m not rlly that aware of how boring works, so I’ll take ur word for it there I suppose.

    Any moon mining is going to be expensive because it’s the moon. That kind of travel is going to be expensive.

    For this tho, u don’t have to “travel” anywhere. U just build a one time installation on the moon, which would be expensive. Once it’s built, u just launch stuff from the moon using a railgun like system with enough velocity to deorbit it, use the earth’s atmosphere to slow down enough that the material doesn’t vaporize on a crash landing in a designated location. This would most likely be how we would get our material in the future.



  • Sure, u won’t need to mine the moon to do this. But resources would be incredibly cheap WHEN we start mining the moon.

    I disagree with the energy part though. I’m pretty sure we would need A LOT of energy to dig continent spanning tunnels. How many drills would we run out of? How much energy would be required to recycle these drills?

    The point is, the resources required for Hyperloop construction would be cheaper when we uk… Increase their supply (by nuclear fusion or lunar mining). It would thus be kinda economical then, no?





  • Naah it’s just a fun thought experiment lmao. Don’t care about Mr. Douchebag.

    As for the elevated rail thing- we would have to demolish A LOT of on ground infrastructure for that, no? Elevated makes sense for metros n stuff because of smaller turning radii. But for an absolutely straight tube? Ehhh.

    Also, we need to factor in vertical turning radii as well, no? Elevation changes r quite drastic on the earth’s surface. Building elevated means building crazy tall pillars and stuff (which also have to be earthquake resistant). Also, we would definitely need to build a lot of tunnels either ways (through hills, mountains, or simple plains whose elevation changes r too steep for our hypersonic vehicle)



  • I can’t see any more efficient ways of getting people from place A to B faster. Hypersonic speeds can’t be achieved on the earth’s surface due to its atmosphere. Therefore, I see only two ways to go about it:

    1. Spaceships that exit and reenter earth’s atmosphere.
    2. Hypersonic trains in a vacuum chamber, I.e., a Hyperloop .

    I did compare this above. Like… Wouldn’t Hyperloops be safer and a lot more efficient than spaceships? Basically, the trains vs flights debate of the future.




  • Ok, so there’s a problem in physics. General relativity and quantum mechanics both beautifully describe the universe at very large and very small scales respectively. However, they disagree with each other (general relativity breaks down when applied to quantum objects).

    Many physicists since a long time have been believing that string theory would be the theory that would unify quantum mechanics and general relativity to get the theory of everything.

    Why do so many ppl believe this? It’s because the math of string theory is very elegant. Why is it elegant? It’s because it strongly hints at unification.

    But this is the problem - there is zero experimental evidence for string theory. In fact, certain requirements for string theory to be true have not been proven to be true yet (and have started to become less and less likely as experiments have progressed). This is why, string theory is just this incredibly complicated and mathematically intense theory without any practical applications.

    The mathematician here hates her math to be practically applied. However, when she’s told that it’s being applied in string theory, she’s relieved as she knows that it won’t ever be practically applied. That’s the joke lmao