subject:"A gravitational wave rocket"

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-30 Thread Jesse Mazer

ent
>> employed the Casimir vacuum and came up with results that appear suggestive
>> of a warp bubble. This does not though mean we have conclusive evidence of
>> one. There are some other reasons to maintain a skeptical perspective on
>> this.
>>
>>  The Alcubierre warp bubble is probably only stable for sub-light speed.
>> If it is set above the speed of light it has particle horizons that
>> causally separate the bubble. This means it is not stable, for Unruh-like
>> radiation occurs.
>>
>> This may lead to deep questions. for the vacuum energy is related to the
>> moduli of curves, such as in the Poincare disk and half-plane, and this is
>> also in some ways related to the moduli of gauge symmetry. Each curve
>> bounds a region, thinking in 2-dimensions, and this region is associated
>> with entropy and curvature. For this to work the vacuum has to be stable,
>> which means it is Virasoro or CFT_2 or more. I think this imposes this
>> limit on the warp bubble as being sub-light speed.
>>
>> This warp bubble might exist, and for various reasons it would be a
>> fascinating development for the foundations of physics. This is not to say
>> I think we will be using this for spaceships, at least not at all soon.
>> These DARPA results are suggestive, but actual experiments will have to
>> rise to what might be called the 5-σ level. I am rather skeptical of this
>> however, even though if this is real it would pave the way for a major
>> probe of the quantum vacuum.
>>
>> As for fusion, just getting a fusion powerplant is a big hurdle to jump.
>> The Chinese have made an announcement of a fusion device that sustained 15
>> million K temperatures for 100 or a 1000 second. I cannot remember which.
>> This has a long way to go, and as the joke goes, 20 years from now fusion
>> power will still be 20 years in the future. As for a space power or
>> propulsion, that is far out. We still do not have fission powered space
>> systems or propulsion, and fusion will be far more difficult. The Chinese
>> system is fairly large and the ITER program involves a really large
>> reactor. Space based systems need to be small and as low mass as possible.
>>
>> LC
>>
>> On Saturday, January 15, 2022 at 10:55:58 PM UTC-6 spudb...@aol.com
>> wrote:
>>
>> So earlier today I watched Sabine hassenfelder the physicist from Germany
>> indicate that any kind of wormhole travel or FTL is strictly unlikely. What
>> I'd like to ask is, whether all the work that's done today for creating
>> commercial nuclear fusion is more or less likely, than using the same
>> technology to develop fusion plasma rockets to travel much more swiftly
>> within the solar system? Our fusion plasma rockets the lower hanging fruit,
>> versus commercial nuclear fusion? Thanks!
>> --
>> On Saturday, January 15, 2022 Lawrence Crowell <
>> everyth...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>>
>> It is possible for a binary star system to interact with a third star so
>> there is an exchange.  We do normally expect binary star systems to have
>> similarly oriented angular momenta.
>>
>>  This is an interesting result. To compute this would have been tough.
>> This is a case of a Robinson-Trautman twisting solution or a twisting type
>> N. The addition of the two angular momenta results in the occurrence of
>> angular momenta perpendicular to the initial angular momenta. This can be
>> seen in with the classical group [L_i, L_j] = ε_{ijk}|L|^2 n_k, for n_k a
>> unit vector. This means there is the emission of angular momentum in the
>> gravitational radiation. The calculation was most likely done numerically.
>>
>> LC
>>
>> On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 1:13:02 PM UTC-6 johnk...@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 1:37 PM Brent Meeker  wrote:
>>
>>
>> * > Kudos to whomever did the calculation for this.  But I would have
>> thought that most collisions would be misaligned in both spin axes and
>> impact plane.  The Sun's spin axis isn't aligned with the Milky Way's axis
>> of rotation, so I had assumed most stars have randomly directed spin axes.*
>>
>>
>> Stars do have random axis of rotations in general but not if you're
>> talking about double stars, and the sun is rather unusual in being only a
>> single star, most stars are double stars, and they were created at the same
>> time from the same rotating cloud of gas and dust and thus have similar
>> axis of rotation, so when the resulting stars turned into Black Holes they
&g

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-30 Thread smitra

On 30-01-2022 14:29, John Clark wrote:

On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 6:15 AM Lawrence Crowell
wrote:

_> Whether we develop an AI that surpasses us and continues is
rather speculative._

I don't think it's speculative at all, in fact I think it's
inevitable. The entire human genome only contains 750 Megabytes, the
baby Albert Einstein didn't have any more than that but in the next
few decades he received additional information from the environment,
enough to enable him to figure out General Relativity. The minimum
amount of information a seed AI that contains a similar learning
algorithm needs must be far less than 750 Megabytes because the human
genome contains an enormous amount of redundancy and has information
about a lot of other organs not just the brain. By way of comparison
the new Apple Mac operating system is about 20 times larger than
Albert Einstein's genome.

_I have neither opinion about that particularly, though I think

there is a general Pinocchio__ problem with this. _

I admit that humans may never be able to fully understand how an AI
could be made, but that doesn't mean an AI could never be built.

Researchers Build AI That Builds AI [1]

_I am not sure there are many biologically complex and active

planets in any galaxy. Given we occurred in 10^{-5} of Earth's
duration I suspect intelligent life is rare. _

I agree because an intelligent civilization could send a Von Neumann
probe to every star in the galaxy in less than 50 million years even
if we make the ridiculously conservative assumption that their
spacecraft could move no faster than ours can. And we would have
certainly notice that if they had.

_> The nearest ETI on our past light cone could be 10s of millions
of light years away._

I think we could be the only intelligent species in the observable
universe, but if not and we ever did find a signal from a civilization
at roughly our technological level that would be very bad news because
it would mean civilizations always run into an existential catastrophe
of some sort when they reach about our level of development.

John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at Extropolis [2]

The problems we have with limiting our CO2 emissions suggests that we
will be wiped out sooner or later as a result of processes that power
the economy. The more progress we make with AI systems, robots that
eliminate human work, the more growth potential the economy will get. At
some point we'll have fully self-maintaining and self-replicating
factories. Such systems don't need to be very intelligent, just like
most biological self-replicating machines aren't very intelligent
either. Also, this development is then driven by economic growth, not by
de desire of some people to get to very intelligent AI systems.

But once you have an economy that is sun by autonomous, relatively dumb
machines that maintain and build each other, it's only a matter of time
before this machine version of biology will end up destroying the
original biology. At some point a mutation will arise that causes some
machines to produce poisonous substances but which also improves these
machines. The production of poisonous and even radioactive compounds
that don't harm the machines, will steadily grow over time. This will
cause a mass extinction. It's then quite analogous to the great
oxygenation event:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Oxidation_Event

The original creators of the machine economy will be powerless to stop
this, because everything depends on everything else in this machine
ecology. They would have to eradicate the entire system, which is far
harder than it is for us to simply stop dumping CO2 into the atmosphere.
They would have become so dependent on the machine economy that they
wouldn't be able to survive without it. So, it can also be compared to
cancer that has spread and has become incurable: Eradicating the cancer
will also kill the patient.

The James Webb Telescope may end up finding habitable planets via
biosignatures of complex organic molecules in the atmosphere, but it may
also find evidence of strange planets where the atmosphere contains
significant amounts of poisonous compounds for which a natural
explanation is unknown. There may be planets where a machine ecology
exists that produces lots of tritium. This can be detected, if you
replace hydrogen by tritium in some compound then that affects the
moment of inertia of the molecule and thereby the rotational energy
levels. Curiously, these planets will typically be Earthlike planets in
the habitable zone.

Saibal

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/4104ca505e0a31f60c8317cb5968d495%40zonnet.nl.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-30 Thread John Clark

On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 6:15 AM Lawrence Crowell <
goldenfieldquaterni...@gmail.com> wrote:

*> Whether we develop an AI that surpasses us and continues is rather
> speculative.*

I don't think it's speculative at all, in fact I think it's inevitable. The
entire human genome only contains 750 Megabytes, the baby Albert Einstein
didn't have any more than that but in the next few decades he received
additional information from the environment, enough to enable him to figure
out General Relativity. The minimum amount of information a seed AI that
contains a similar learning algorithm needs must be far less than 750
Megabytes because the human genome contains an enormous amount of
redundancy and has information about a lot of other organs not just the
brain. By way of comparison the new Apple Mac operating system is about 20
times larger than Albert Einstein's genome.

 > *I have neither opinion about that particularly, though I think there is
> a general Pinocchio** problem with this. *

I admit that humans may never be able to fully understand how an AI could
be made, but that doesn't mean an AI could never be built.

Researchers Build AI That Builds AI

 > *I am not sure there are many biologically complex and active planets in
> any galaxy. Given we occurred in 10^{-5} of Earth's duration I suspect
> intelligent life is rare. *

I agree because an intelligent civilization could send a Von Neumann probe
to every star in the galaxy in less than 50 million years even if we make
the ridiculously conservative assumption that their spacecraft could move
no faster than ours can. And we would have certainly notice that if they
had.

*> The nearest ETI on our past light cone could be 10s of millions of light
> years away.*

I think we could be the only intelligent species in the observable universe,
but if not and we ever did find a signal from a civilization at roughly our
technological level that would be very bad news because it would mean
civilizations always run into an existential catastrophe of some sort when
they reach about our level of development.

John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis

enx

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3ZZoihH7yi-zw8MiznjbUMQewuT3qZFSdEopY2uC-jEw%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-30 Thread Lawrence Crowell

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 7:36:04 AM UTC-6 johnk...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 6:52 AM Lawrence Crowell  
> wrote:
>
> > These things are not likely. Traversable wormholes require severe 
>> violations of known physics, from no-cloning rule in quantum mechanics to 
>> the basic principles of thermodynamics. 
>
>
> What about a One-Way wormhole with every Black Hole corresponding with a 
> White Hole, and the Big Bang just being another name for a White Hole?
>

Entangled black holes are seen in the conformal Penrose diagram below

[image: Penrose diagram for Schwaraschild BH 2.jpg]
This has a black hole in upper triangle and a white hole in the lower 
triangle. The two squares are different cosmogonies or different regions of 
the universe. The black hole and white hole are mathematical gadgets that 
indicate a structure to general relativity that is a form of the quantum 
operators a and a^† which corresponds to the black and white hole 
respectively. The black hole absorbs particles and the white hole generates 
them. This diagram is curious, for it suggests that spacetime is built up 
from quantum states.

The occurrence of black holes of course is with the collapse of a star or 
some such process. This involves matter-fields that are in singlet states 
or statistical mixtures and such entanglement does not obtain. The system 
above has been broken. This further illustrates a deep correlation between 
spacetime physics and quantum fields that act as source of curvature. 
[image: Penrose diagram for Schwarzschild truncated.jpg]
As for below, no matter how you look at it we are doomed. We will not exist 
eternally, and even if we could figure out a bio-method of endless 
regeneration, the heat death of the sun, stars and ultimately the cosmos 
entirely puts a finite end to us. A regenerative method for light extension 
is likely to be very limited by the loss of information in DNA over time. 
Whether we develop an AI that surpasses us and continues is rather 
speculative. I have neither opinion about that particularly, though I think 
there is a general Pinocchio problem with this. 

I think the ET hypothesis is reasonable. I am not sure there are many 
biologically complex and active planets in any galaxy. Given we occurred in 
10^{-5} of Earth's duration I suspect intelligent life is rare. The nearest 
ETI on our past light cone could be 10s of millions of light years away.

LC

>
> > These ideas of Kardashev civilizations are science fiction-fantasies. 
>> These things will not happen. certainly not to humans, because we are 
>> dysfunctional and self-destructive. What happens in the evolutionary scheme 
>> to a species that is self-destructive (think war and nuclear bombs) and 
>> dysfunctional? The probability is large they will go extinct. It is easy to 
>> understand.
>
>
> I'm not as pessimistic as you are, the human race probably will be extinct 
> in a century or so, but not before producing a successor species, a 
> superintelligent 
> AI. I doubt ET exists because, judging from the number of high energy 
> photons that are radiated uselessly into infinite space, the universe in 
> general and the galaxy in particular doesn't appear to have been 
> engineered. But if ET does exist there is little chance it will be 
> biological, although biological beings undoubtedly played a key part in its 
> very early Evolution. 
>
> John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis 
> 
> aeq
> qbj
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/3bb5989f-9825-4e9b-ad3d-db2937164672n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-29 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List

Not as pessimistic as LC either on human extinction.  But we could be wrong. 
Wormhole successes are unlikely in our age. Building a Dyson Sphere, barring a 
mass acceleration initiated by machine intelligence focused on invention, would 
somehow be 40-50 K years into the future. I don't see us not doing the cyborg 
thing, unless bio-science achieves miracles, which it could? I say since we are 
going to be linked to machinery, we'd be forming a new species. I could always 
use a brain chip doing mathematics for me, which, shamefully, suck at, despite 
attempts. 
Machinery would benefit by using our biological-emotional lives. We'd 
eventually be co-beings, BUT all this is a silly guess by me. Other voices 
might be more insightful? For the Dyson Sphere, I could see using the sun's 
energy for rezzing the dead (if possible?) and if we find others in the cosmos, 
they'd be doing this as well. The rezzing would be more energy efficient to 
accomplish by using computer sims, as we term it today, but again, 40-50K away. 
Our great-great-great, grandchildren's chore, not ours. But this is my thing 
and I am good, if the majority on mailing group or the world, are good with 
permanent extinction. Personal taste's and all.  Back to wormholes. We need 
more telescopes to see the universe in greatly more detail. It's as if in the 
18th century the bright minds of the time said, we draw the line on natural 
study, and no more! We need bigger and better scopes round the solar system. 

-Original Message-
From: John Clark 
To: 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
Sent: Fri, Jan 28, 2022 8:35 am
Subject: Re: A gravitational wave rocket

On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 6:52 AM Lawrence Crowell 
 wrote:

> These things are not likely. Traversable wormholes require severe violations 
> of known physics, from no-cloning rule in quantum mechanics to the basic 
> principles of thermodynamics. 

What about a One-Way wormhole with every Black Hole corresponding with a White 
Hole, and the Big Bang just being another name for a White Hole?

> These ideas of Kardashev civilizations are science fiction-fantasies. These 
> things will not happen. certainly not to humans, because we are dysfunctional 
> and self-destructive. What happens in the evolutionary scheme to a species 
> that is self-destructive (think war and nuclear bombs) and dysfunctional? The 
> probability is large they will go extinct. It is easy to understand.

I'm not as pessimistic as you are, the human race probably will be extinct in a 
century or so, but not before producing a successor species, a superintelligent 
AI. I doubt ET exists because, judging from the number of high energy photons 
that are radiated uselessly into infinite space, the universe in general and 
the galaxy in particular doesn't appear to have been engineered. But if ET does 
exist there is little chance it will be biological, although biological beings 
undoubtedly played a key part in its very early Evolution. 
 John K Clark    See what's on my new list at  Extropolis
aeq
qbj-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv241HJmqsk_dhTC6SP_jWA7e2jUox3BYs-aB7KbZbEGUQ%40mail.gmail.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/827954766.1695440.1643494471148%40mail.yahoo.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-29 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List

I don't think you are being disturbed by the notion of the sodium moderated 
reactor being spectacularly fragile, given the unpredictability of natural 
threats, aka Fukushima. I do look at many proposals for alternative reactor 
designs as safer/better/cheaper, for the obviously slow move to commercial 
nuclear fusion. That could take decades and decades to achieve and the species 
needs power until then. I'd look at yeah, salt reactors, but also lead bismuth 
moderated reactors, and helium cooled gas reactors using General Atomics low 
enriched Triso fuel. The issue is how to get ahold of irreplaceable helium? 
Africa and other geographies, including the US may supply the helium. 
Example-https://www.gasworld.com/helium-one-announce-gas-show-and-delay-during-tanzania-drilling-operation/2021265.article
We need the R to ensure human survival in all energy sources. One of the more 
promising, more immediately, was an analysis by primarily Columbia and Imperial 
universities indicating that we can power civilization at 4.3 x the current 
consumption daily, by roofing 50% of the building on earth, and using battery 
storage, even with current tech. 
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/230978/study-finds-huge-global-potential-energy/
Try to think of this as an energy floor and not the ceilings and walls of an 
energy plan, which is most beneficial against carbon and methane soaking of our 
atmosphere. 

-Original Message-
From: John Clark 
To: spudboy...@aol.com
Cc: everything-list@googlegroups.com ; 
meekerbr...@gmail.com 
Sent: Wed, Jan 26, 2022 12:51 pm
Subject: Re: A gravitational wave rocket

On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 3:33 AM  wrote:

> Very good, JC, so Hastelloy might be the ticket for a a fission revival?

It's not the ticket but it's  probably part of the ticket.   
 > MSR, because of its potential has been spoken of eclipsing the possibility 
 > of fusion as a very long term fix for human energy demand.

Only three energy sources have the potential to power human civilization at 
current levels for the next 5 billion years or so, solar, fusion, and thorium 
nuclear fission. I think all three avenues should be pursued further but 
already some things are clear. The advantage the two nuclear options have over 
solar is that they are much more reliable and energy dense. The advantage 
thorium fission has is that it could almost certainly become operational with a 
modest push and a few billion dollars of R in just a few years, while fusion 
MIGHT become operational after a HUGE push and a few trillion dollars of R in 
a few decades. 
> We'll have to see what the Chinese do with the MSR using TH-232 fuel, also, 
> Gates and his Terapower one in Wyoming?
 The Natrium breeder reactor type that Bill Gates likes could supply human 
energy needs for perhaps 1 million years and that's pretty good, not as good as 
thorium which could do 5 billion but pretty good, however there are other 
aspects of it that I'm not crazy about. Unlike a thorium reactor a breeder 
reactor will produce at least as much nuclear waste as existing non-breeding 
reactors and probably more. It not only uses uranium but uses uranium fuel in 
which the U235 has been enriched from it's naturally occurring 0.7% to between 
5% and 20%, that's still well short of the 80% needed for a bomb but even so it 
makes me nervous.  Also it uses molten sodium as a moderator which 
spontaneously bursts into flame upon contact with air and explodes at contact 
with water, and that also makes me nervous, although maybe I'm just being a 
nervous Nellie. I know one thing, there is no way you could make a breeder 
reactor walk-away-safe, but it's easy to make a LFTR that way; if there's a 
problem with a LFTR and the operators get confused and don't know what to do 
they can put their hands in their pockets and just walk away, and everything 
will work out fine.
 John K Clark    See what's on my new list at  Extropolis
bgr

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/156972276.2041933.1643492256736%40mail.yahoo.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-28 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List

not have fission powered space systems or propulsion, and fusion
will be far more difficult. The Chinese system is fairly large and the ITER
program involves a really large reactor. Space based systems need to be small
and as low mass as possible.

On Saturday, January 15, 2022 at 10:55:58 PM UTC-6 spudb...@aol.com wrote:

So earlier today I watched Sabine hassenfelder the physicist from Germany
indicate that any kind of wormhole travel or FTL is strictly unlikely. What I'd
like to ask is, whether all the work that's done today for creating commercial
nuclear fusion is more or less likely, than using the same technology to
develop fusion plasma rockets to travel much more swiftly within the solar
system? Our fusion plasma rockets the lower hanging fruit, versus commercial
nuclear fusion? Thanks!

On Saturday, January 15, 2022 Lawrence Crowell
wrote:

It is possible for a binary star system to interact with a third star so there
is an exchange. We do normally expect binary star systems to have similarly
oriented angular momenta.

This is an interesting result. To compute this would have been tough. This is
a case of a Robinson-Trautman twisting solution or a twisting type N. The
addition of the two angular momenta results in the occurrence of angular
momenta perpendicular to the initial angular momenta. This can be seen in with
the classical group [L_i, L_j] = ε_{ijk}|L|^2 n_k, for n_k a unit vector. This
means there is the emission of angular momentum in the gravitational radiation.
The calculation was most likely done numerically.

On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 1:13:02 PM UTC-6 johnk...@gmail.com wrote:

On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 1:37 PM Brent Meeker wrote:

> Kudos to whomever did the calculation for this. But I would have thought
> that most collisions would be misaligned in both spin axes and impact plane.
> The Sun's spin axis isn't aligned with the Milky Way's axis of rotation, so I
> had assumed most stars have randomly directed spin axes.

Stars do have random axis of rotations in general but not if you're talking
about double stars, and the sun is rather unusual in being only a single star,
most stars are double stars, and they were created at the same time from the
same rotating cloud of gas and dust and thus have similar axis of rotation, so
when the resulting stars turned into Black Holes they would also have similar
axes. And indeed most of the Black Hole mergers so far detected by
gravitational waves have been of that sort, but not this one, that's what makes
it so unusual. This system must've been formed by two stars that formed at
different places at different times but then got close together and somehow
went into orbit around each other.

John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis
qbj

Brent

On 1/13/2022 3:49 AM, John Clark wrote:

For the first time a sort of gravitational wave rocket has been found. By
re-examining the data from the LIGO and Virgo gravitational wave observatories
researchers report on January 6 they have detected the merger of 34 and 29
solar mass Black Holes that resulted in a Black Hole of about 62 solar masses
with about one solar mass being converted into gravitational waves. What makes
this merger unusual is that it was not symmetrical, the axis of spin of the 2
black holes were not aligned with each other and neither was aligned with the
axis of orbit around each other. This would indicate that the 2 stars that form
them (assuming these 2 large Black Holes were actually formed from the corpses
of dead stars) were not born in an isolated system but probably came from a
denser environment like a globular cluster. Even more interesting is that the
misalignment of the spins means that the gravitational waves emitted were not
emitted symmetrically, and gravitational waves carry some linear momentum. So
the resulting 62 Solar mass Black Hole must've received a pretty substantial
kick causing it to move pretty fast, and that's just what the researchers
found, because of that kick the huge 62 solar mass Black Hole started moving at
least 700 km a second and probably closer to 1500. It's probably moving fast
enough to escape whatever galaxy it was in.

Evidence of large recoil velocity from a black hole merger signal

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/90e5c40b-a4eb-4ef0-a711-da7f9406e91dn%40googlegroups.com
.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-28 Thread John Clark

On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 6:52 AM Lawrence Crowell <
goldenfieldquaterni...@gmail.com> wrote:

> These things are not likely. Traversable wormholes require severe
> violations of known physics, from no-cloning rule in quantum mechanics to
> the basic principles of thermodynamics.

What about a One-Way wormhole with every Black Hole corresponding with a
White Hole, and the Big Bang just being another name for a White Hole?

> These ideas of Kardashev civilizations are science fiction-fantasies.
> These things will not happen. certainly not to humans, because we are
> dysfunctional and self-destructive. What happens in the evolutionary scheme
> to a species that is self-destructive (think war and nuclear bombs) and
> dysfunctional? The probability is large they will go extinct. It is easy to
> understand.

I'm not as pessimistic as you are, the human race probably will be extinct
in a century or so, but not before producing a successor species, a
superintelligent
AI. I doubt ET exists because, judging from the number of high energy
photons that are radiated uselessly into infinite space, the universe in
general and the galaxy in particular doesn't appear to have been
engineered. But if ET does exist there is little chance it will be
biological, although biological beings undoubtedly played a key part in its
very early Evolution.

John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis

aeq
qbj

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv241HJmqsk_dhTC6SP_jWA7e2jUox3BYs-aB7KbZbEGUQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-28 Thread Lawrence Crowell

tems or propulsion, and fusion will be far more difficult. The Chinese 
> system is fairly large and the ITER program involves a really large 
> reactor. Space based systems need to be small and as low mass as possible.
>
> LC
>
> On Saturday, January 15, 2022 at 10:55:58 PM UTC-6 spudb...@aol.com wrote:
>
> So earlier today I watched Sabine hassenfelder the physicist from Germany 
> indicate that any kind of wormhole travel or FTL is strictly unlikely. What 
> I'd like to ask is, whether all the work that's done today for creating 
> commercial nuclear fusion is more or less likely, than using the same 
> technology to develop fusion plasma rockets to travel much more swiftly 
> within the solar system? Our fusion plasma rockets the lower hanging fruit, 
> versus commercial nuclear fusion? Thanks!
> --
> On Saturday, January 15, 2022 Lawrence Crowell <
> everyth...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
> It is possible for a binary star system to interact with a third star so 
> there is an exchange.  We do normally expect binary star systems to have 
> similarly oriented angular momenta.
>
>  This is an interesting result. To compute this would have been tough. 
> This is a case of a Robinson-Trautman twisting solution or a twisting type 
> N. The addition of the two angular momenta results in the occurrence of 
> angular momenta perpendicular to the initial angular momenta. This can be 
> seen in with the classical group [L_i, L_j] = ε_{ijk}|L|^2 n_k, for n_k a 
> unit vector. This means there is the emission of angular momentum in the 
> gravitational radiation. The calculation was most likely done numerically.
>
> LC
>
> On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 1:13:02 PM UTC-6 johnk...@gmail.com 
> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 1:37 PM Brent Meeker  wrote:
>
>
> * > Kudos to whomever did the calculation for this.  But I would have 
> thought that most collisions would be misaligned in both spin axes and 
> impact plane.  The Sun's spin axis isn't aligned with the Milky Way's axis 
> of rotation, so I had assumed most stars have randomly directed spin axes.*
>
>
> Stars do have random axis of rotations in general but not if you're 
> talking about double stars, and the sun is rather unusual in being only a 
> single star, most stars are double stars, and they were created at the same 
> time from the same rotating cloud of gas and dust and thus have similar 
> axis of rotation, so when the resulting stars turned into Black Holes they 
> would also have similar axes. And indeed most of the Black Hole mergers 
> so far detected by gravitational waves have been of that sort, but not this 
> one, that's what makes it so unusual. This system must've been formed by 
> two stars that formed at different places at different times but then got 
> close together and somehow went into orbit around each other.  
>
> John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis 
> <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>
> qbj
>
>
> Brent
>
> On 1/13/2022 3:49 AM, John Clark wrote:
>
> For the first time a sort of gravitational wave rocket has been found. By 
> re-examining the data from the LIGO and Virgo gravitational wave 
> observatories researchers report on January 6 they have detected the merger 
> of 34 and 29 solar mass Black Holes that resulted in a Black Hole of about 
> 62 solar masses with about one solar mass being converted into 
> gravitational waves. What makes this merger unusual is that it was not 
> symmetrical, the axis of spin of the 2 black holes were not aligned with 
> each other and neither was aligned with the axis of orbit around each 
> other. This would indicate that the 2 stars that form them (assuming these 
> 2 large Black Holes were actually formed from the corpses of dead stars) we
> re not born in an isolated system but probably came from a denser 
> environment like a globular cluster. Even more interesting is that the 
> misalignment of the spins means that the gravitational waves emitted were not 
> emitted symmetrically, and gravitational waves carry some linear momentum. 
> So the resulting 62 Solar mass Black Hole must've received a pretty 
> substantial kick causing it to move pretty fast, and that's just what the 
> researchers found, because of that kick the huge 62 solar mass Black Hole 
> started moving at least 700 km a second and probably closer to 1500.  It's 
> probably moving fast enough to escape whatever galaxy it was in. 
>
> Evidence of large recoil velocity from a black hole merger signal 
> <https://arxiv.org/pdf/2201.01302.pdf>
>
>
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-26 Thread John Clark

On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 3:33 AM  wrote:

*> Very good, JC, so Hastelloy might be the ticket for a a fission revival?*
>

It's not the ticket but it's  probably part of the ticket.

> * > MSR, because of its potential has been spoken of eclipsing the
> possibility of fusion as a very long term fix for human energy demand.*
>

Only three energy sources have the potential to power human civilization at
current levels for the next 5 billion years or so, solar, fusion, and
thorium nuclear fission. I think all three avenues should be pursued
further but already some things are clear. The advantage the two nuclear
options have over solar is that they are much more reliable and energy
dense. The advantage thorium fission has is that it could almost certainly
become operational with a modest push and a few billion dollars of R in
just a few years, while fusion MIGHT become operational after a HUGE push
and a few trillion dollars of R in a few decades.

> *> We'll have to see what the Chinese do with the MSR using TH-232 fuel,
> also, Gates and his Terapower one in Wyoming?*

The Natrium breeder reactor type that Bill Gates likes could supply human
energy needs for perhaps 1 million years and that's pretty good, not as
good as thorium which could do 5 billion but pretty good, however there are
other aspects of it that I'm not crazy about. Unlike a thorium reactor a
breeder reactor will produce at least as much nuclear waste as existing
non-breeding reactors and probably more. It not only uses uranium but uses
uranium fuel in which the U235 has been enriched from it's naturally
occurring 0.7% to between 5% and 20%, that's still well short of the 80%
needed for a bomb but even so it makes me nervous.  Also it uses molten
sodium as a moderator which spontaneously bursts into flame upon contact
with air and explodes at contact with water, and that also makes me
nervous, although maybe I'm just being a nervous Nellie. I know one thing,
there is no way you could make a breeder reactor walk-away-safe, but it's
easy to make a LFTR that way; if there's a problem with a LFTR and the
operators get confused and don't know what to do they can put their hands
in their pockets and just walk away, and everything will work out fine.

John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis

bgr

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv0j0aZ-E662PSxo-sTmkOJWUiEVRHwoeYjXfVbuVhwqQg%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-26 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List

Very good, JC, so Hastelloy might be the ticket for a a fission revival? MSR, 
because of its potential has been spoken of eclipsing the possibility of fusion 
as a very long term fix for human energy demand. We'll have to see what the 
Chinese do with the MSR using TH-232 fuel, also, Gates and his Terapower one in 
Wyoming? For repair as most manufacturers do nowadays, is simply have a unit 
replaced rather than repair it. Also, clever marketing. Unplug one, plug in the 
next factory assembled model. 

-Original Message-
From: John Clark 
To: 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
Cc: meekerbr...@gmail.com 
Sent: Tue, Jan 25, 2022 6:54 am
Subject: Re: A gravitational wave rocket

On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 6:50 PM spudboy100 via Everything List 
 wrote:

 > I quibble as I always must, over the safety and economics of corrosion be it 
 > sodium chloride or sodium fluoride. Seems still unresolved regarding 
 > corrosion.

Degradation of the metallic plumbing may be a problem but there seems to be 
engineering solutions, and it's not so much chemical corrosion as the fact that 
a neutron flux can damage a solid by knocking atoms out of place and physically 
weakening the material. It's a problem but I think there are engineering 
solutions that can mitigate it. Some exotic metals such as Hastelloy-N are 
resistant (although not immune) to neutron damage, it's a alloy of nickel, 
molybdenum, chromium, cobalt, iron, copper, manganese, titanium, zirconium, 
aluminum, carbon, and tungsten. Also to some degree the neutron damage a metal 
receives can be repaired by annealing, heating the metal to a high temperature 
and then cooling it very rapidly. And although this may be an economic problem 
it's not really a safety issue because although a LFTR operates at a much 
higher temperature than a conventional nuclear reactor (and thus has a higher 
thermodynamic efficiency) it is not under pressure, so even if there is a leak 
it would not be a catastrophe, although I admit it might require a costly 
repair.  A LFTR is inherently much safer than a conventional reactor, and even 
those have a far far better safety record than coal or oil or natural gas or 
hydroelectric power plants, and they produce no greenhouse gasses.  
John K Clark    See what's on my new list at  Extropolisnfn

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv1QK9f6%2B1j__eZaYBLv-X6TRm6KK%3DeQYS58nozErxCzuQ%40mail.gmail.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/462570423.1293069.1643185999391%40mail.yahoo.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-25 Thread John Clark

On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 6:50 PM spudboy100 via Everything List <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:

* > I quibble as I always must, over the safety and economics of corrosion
> be it sodium chloride or sodium fluoride. Seems still unresolved regarding
> corrosion.*
>

Degradation of the metallic plumbing may be a problem but there seems to be
engineering solutions, and it's not so much chemical corrosion as the fact
that a neutron flux can damage a solid by knocking atoms out of place and
physically weakening the material. It's a problem but I think there are
engineering solutions that can mitigate it. Some exotic metals such as
Hastelloy-N are resistant (although not immune) to neutron damage, it's a
alloy of nickel, molybdenum, chromium, cobalt, iron, copper, manganese,
titanium, zirconium, aluminum, carbon, and tungsten. Also to some degree
the neutron damage a metal receives can be repaired by annealing, heating
the metal to a high temperature and then cooling it very rapidly. And
although this may be an economic problem it's not really a safety issue
because although a LFTR operates at a much higher temperature than a
conventional nuclear reactor (and thus has a higher thermodynamic
efficiency) it is not under pressure, so even if there is a leak it would
not be a catastrophe, although I admit it might require a costly repair.  A
LFTR is inherently much safer than a conventional reactor, and even those
have a far far better safety record than coal or oil or natural gas or
hydroelectric power plants, and they produce no greenhouse gasses.

John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis

nfn

>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv1QK9f6%2B1j__eZaYBLv-X6TRm6KK%3DeQYS58nozErxCzuQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-24 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List

Australia, specifically South Australia is leading the species on the 
implementation of PV and batteries. So they are a world leader. The UK does 
wind power at sea, again as a world leader. We'll see if this catches on? For 
MSR or any other reactor type, its gotta be safe enough. Not safe enough, just 
build these smaller? Naw! I am not anti-nuclear, just need to know what makes 
them safer now, the engineering, chemistry, physics. What's the McGuffin that 
makes it work better now?

-Original Message-
From: Russell Standish 
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Cc: spudboy...@aol.com
Sent: Fri, Jan 21, 2022 4:26 am
Subject: Re: A gravitational wave rocket

On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 07:35:46AM -0500, John Clark wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 6:59 PM  wrote:
>  
> 
>    > For solar you also are presuming, because I have this analysis that
>    counters your assertion of dilute power, thus being insufficient. Kindly
>    refute. 
>    https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2021/10/08/
>    a-new-global-study-refines-estimates-of-rooftop-solar-potential/
> 
> 
> 
> I don't deny that if everybody had solar cells on their roofs it would be a
> positive development, but it's not the ultimate answer to the energy problem.
> The average residential roof size in the US is about 1,700 square feet, and 
> the
> average house needs about 10,715 kilowatts, a solar panel under ideal
> conditions will produce about 15 watts per square foot and that works out to
> about 25 kilowatts. So at noon on a clear day in the summertime rooftop solar
> would produce about twice as much energy as the house needs, but most of the
> time it would produce considerably less, and half the time, at night, it would
> produce none at all. 

These figures seem a little dodgy. We have solar panels on half our
roof (the difficult half, because of aesthetics, we didn't want to
cover the western half that faces the street). So about 16kW of
installed capacity. Average production year round is about 1kW. Our
usage is about half that, so we end up selling quite a bit of
electricity to the grid (at about a third of the cost to buy it). Its
a 4 bedroom house, but just the two of us live here now. We do the
best to arrange for heavy electricity usage to occur when the sun is
shining. During the summer quarter, our electricity bills are actually
negative.

So of your figures above - 10kW continuous consumption seems like an
awful lot. Maybe you could do it if you ran air conditioning 24x7, but
it'd have to be a big A/C system.

Quoting https://energyusecalculator.com/electricity_centralac.htm

A central air conditioner will run 3 to 7 months of the year depending
on the outside temperature. An average central ac will use 3000 to
5000 watts of power for around 9 hours a day during the hotter months.

Still well under 10kW average consumption.

We're lucky, we don't need air conditioning, and rarely even use a heater.

> And of course the energy needed to run a house is only a
> small part of the total energy budget human civilization needs, it doesn't
> include the energy needed to run cars and planes and ships, and neither does 
> it
> include the energy needed to run industry. For example, even in today's most
> modern and most efficient steel mills it takes about 6000 kilowatt hours of
> energy to produce 1 ton of steel (older mills need 8000), and in 2020 the 
> human
> race produced 1.86 BILLION tons of steel. And the steel industry only uses 6%
> of the energy needed to run all the factories on the planet. And if
> civilization is to advance tomorrow we will use more energy than we used 
> yesterday.
> 
> And if everybody put solar energy absorbing panels on their roofs I have no
> doubt environmentalists would soon start complaining about that because it
> would increase the urban heat island effect that they're already complaining
> about.
>  
> 
>    > your ideological clade is also hostile, ideologically, to MSR as a fix.
> 
> 
> My clade? I just wish I had a clade! I don't give a damn who's hostile to
> molten salt reactors because I am not, and I feel no obligation to defend the
> opinions of those who disagree with me about things and I don't care who they
> are. 
> 
> 
>    > Developing an emotional machine intelligence seems downright dangerous.
> 
> 
> You don't develop a computer to have emotions, you develop it to be 
> intelligent
> because intelligence is useful, but if you want a machine that's really
> intelligent you're going to get emotions automatically whether you like it or
> not. It's got to like to do some things and not like to do other things, and 
> it
> has got to have the ability to get bored and change its goal structure from
> time to time, otherwise, as Alan Turing taught us, any computing device is
> going to get stuck

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-22 Thread Russell Standish

On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 07:08:29AM -0500, John Clark wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 3:07 AM Russell Standish  
> wrote:
> 
> 
> >> even with your frugal ways solar cells aren't enough to make you
> energ independent, you still have to hook up with the power company.  
> 
> 
> 
> > Of course. We'd need a battery as well. But that's not the point.
> 
>  
> I think it is the point because it illustrates one of the 2 most important
> shortcomings of solar energy, it's unreliable.

It is not the point, because the aim is not energy
self-sufficiency. The aims are to produce the energy needed at the
most economical cost, and also to do so in a carbon neutral
fashion. Rooftop solar is a massive low-hanging fruit in that
regard. Batteries, not quite so much, but they're getting there. Some
of our friends have invested in batteries, perhaps because they value
carbon-neutrality higher than we do.

> The other is that it takes up
> too much area because it's too dilute;  even Dyson spheres have that problem,
> they produce a huge amount of power but they need a gargantuan area to do so.
> 
> 
>  > You have warm mild bits too, like Florida, or southern California.
> 
> 
> I know from personal experience that if it wasn't for Willis Carrier's
> invention of the air conditioner there is no way Florida would be the third
> most populous of the 50 states, even in mid winter it's not unusual for the
> temperature to be in the upper 80s (fahrenheit) with very high humidity. 
> Everybody has air conditioners, the state should be renamed "Carrier". As for
> Southern California, it's not unusual for the temperature to get into the
> triple digits.

By triple digits, I think you mean over 36 degrees. It's not unusual
for it to be that here too. But only for a few days in the warmest
month of the year. I have visited SoCal and NoCal many times - the
temperature range is pretty similar to here actually. We're lucky that
we live by the see: close the doors and blinds during the day when it
is hot, open them in the evening when there is a cool sea breeze.

Yes - in the western parts of our city, aircons are more
essential. but again, only for a few days a years.

And without Carrier I don't think Texas would be the second most
> populous state, and Arizona wouldn't be the fastest growing.

Perhaps so - but running the aircons when solar generation is at its
peak, and temperature are at their peak works well. Solar makes a lot
of sense for those states.

> 
> John K Clark    See what's on my new list at  Extropolis
> wca
> 
> eex
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email
> to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/
> everything-list/
> CAJPayv2deya%3DE_kRwtcbsHi9ie_yrUTGSpH-uKmmz8YAW9Cu9Q%40mail.gmail.com.

-- 

Dr Russell StandishPhone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
  http://www.hpcoders.com.au

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/2022010133.GA5474%40zen.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-22 Thread Brent Meeker




On 1/22/2022 4:08 AM, John Clark wrote:
I know from personal experience that if it wasn't for Willis Carrier's 
invention of the air conditioner there is no way Florida would be the 
third most populous of the 50 states, even in mid winter it's not 
unusual for the temperature to be in the upper 80s (fahrenheit) with 
very high humidity.


When I used to visit my brother in Sarasota, we would get in his car and 
when he started the engine the AC would come on, but he would drive 
around with the windows still wide open for another several minutes 
until the AC got really cold.  THEN he'd roll up the windows.


Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/2bd304e1-b2ea-0ac7-1970-d95b7f315e25%40gmail.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-22 Thread John Clark

On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 3:07 AM Russell Standish 
wrote:

>> even with your frugal ways solar cells aren't enough to make you energ
>> independent, you still have to hook up with the power company.
>
>
> *> Of course. We'd need a battery as well. But that's not the point.*

I think it is the point because it illustrates one of the 2 most important
shortcomings of solar energy, it's unreliable. The other is that it takes
up too much area because it's too dilute;  even Dyson spheres have that
problem, they produce a huge amount of power but they need a gargantuan
area to do so.

 > *You have warm mild bits too, like Florida, or southern California.*

I know from personal experience that if it wasn't for Willis Carrier's
invention of the air conditioner there is no way Florida would be the third
most populous of the 50 states, even in mid winter it's not unusual for the
temperature to be in the upper 80s (fahrenheit) with very high humidity.
Everybody has air conditioners, the state should be renamed "Carrier". As
for Southern California, it's not unusual for the temperature to get into
the triple digits. And without Carrier I don't think Texas would be the
second most populous state, and Arizona wouldn't be the fastest growing.

John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis

wca

eex

>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv2deya%3DE_kRwtcbsHi9ie_yrUTGSpH-uKmmz8YAW9Cu9Q%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-22 Thread Russell Standish

On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 07:29:55AM -0500, John Clark wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 4:26 AM Russell Standish  
> wrote:
> 
> 
> > We have solar panels on half our roof (the difficult half, because of
> aesthetics, we didn't want to cover the western half that faces the
> street). So about 16kW of installed capacity. Average production year 
> round
> is about 1kW.
> 
> 
>   Average production is only 1/16 of installed capacity? That's even worse 
> than
> I thought.

Sorry my mistake - we have 16 panels, each of which have peak output
330W = 5.28 kW.

> 
> 
> > Our usage is about half that,
> 
> 
> Wow only 500 watts, you must live frugally.

Not especially - we do turn out lights when not in use, of course.

> I take it you have a gas stove or
> do most of your cooking with a microwave.

Gas stove, and use the microwave a lot, but the electric oven only
sometimes (there is a distinct bump of about 200W average in
consumption at 6pm).

Our biggest consumption is a spa (or jacuzzi as they say in the
US). This consumes about 2.5kW, but is only on for 2 hours in the day,
and we turn it off over the winter season (too bloody cold getting out
of the spa midwinter).

Then come fridges. When we got "smart meters", we did end up turning
off one of the fridges, and just not buying quite as much frozen
goods. Smart meters make a huge difference by making it clear just how
much power each device uses.

The come computers and internet. Recent upgrades have dropped
typical desktop computer consumption from 100W to around 25W (eg Intel
NUC), and computers do get turned off when not in use,

After that - not much else of significance.

> I also assume if you have an electric
> car you don't charge it up at home. 

Yeah - no electric car. Australia has such backward policies on
electric cars that I expect we'll be the dumping ground of petrol
guzzling CO2 belchers for some years.

> 
> 
> > so we end up selling quite a bit of electricity to the grid (at about a
> third of the cost to buy it). Its
> a 4 bedroom house, but just the two of us live here now.
> 
> 
> But even with your frugal ways solar cells aren't enough to make you energy
> independent, you still have to hook up with the power company.  
>

Of course. We'd need a battery as well. But that's not the point.

> 
> > We're lucky, we don't need air conditioning, and rarely even use a
> heater.
> 
> 
> You are lucky, most people don't live in a climate that is as mild as yours. 
>

Sure. But 10kW 24x7 still seems very extreme for an average house,
even in the US. You have warm mild bits too, like Florida, or southern
California.

>  John K Clark    See what's on my new list at  Extropolis
> epr
> 
> 
>  
> 
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email
> to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/
> everything-list/
> CAJPayv2W%2BkYAY3S3BEbBKavTgBtTQnhdtcCmeMJgni5uwxEaxg%40mail.gmail.com.

-- 

Dr Russell StandishPhone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
  http://www.hpcoders.com.au

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/20220122080646.GA12863%40zen.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-21 Thread John Clark

On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 4:26 AM Russell Standish 
wrote:

>
* > **We have solar panels on half our **roof (the difficult half, because
> of aesthetics, we didn't want to **cover the western half that faces the
> street). So about 16kW of **installed capacity. Average production year
> round is about 1kW.*

  Average production is only 1/16 of installed capacity? That's even worse
than I thought.

*> Our usage is about half that,*

Wow only 500 watts, you must live frugally. I take it you have a gas stove
or do most of your cooking with a microwave. I also assume if you have an
electric car you don't charge it up at home.

>
>
> *so we end up selling quite a bit of electricity to the grid (at about a
> third of the cost to buy it). Itsa 4 bedroom house, but just the two of us
> live here now.*

But even with your frugal ways solar cells aren't enough to make you energy
independent, you still have to hook up with the power company.

>

> *> We're lucky, we don't need air conditioning, and rarely even use a
> heater.*

You are lucky, most people don't live in a climate that is as mild as yours.

 John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis

epr

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv2W%2BkYAY3S3BEbBKavTgBtTQnhdtcCmeMJgni5uwxEaxg%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-21 Thread Russell Standish

On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 07:35:46AM -0500, John Clark wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 6:59 PM  wrote:
>  
> 
> > For solar you also are presuming, because I have this analysis that
> counters your assertion of dilute power, thus being insufficient. Kindly
> refute. 
> https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2021/10/08/
> a-new-global-study-refines-estimates-of-rooftop-solar-potential/
> 
> 
> 
> I don't deny that if everybody had solar cells on their roofs it would be a
> positive development, but it's not the ultimate answer to the energy problem.
> The average residential roof size in the US is about 1,700 square feet, and 
> the
> average house needs about 10,715 kilowatts, a solar panel under ideal
> conditions will produce about 15 watts per square foot and that works out to
> about 25 kilowatts. So at noon on a clear day in the summertime rooftop solar
> would produce about twice as much energy as the house needs, but most of the
> time it would produce considerably less, and half the time, at night, it would
> produce none at all. 

These figures seem a little dodgy. We have solar panels on half our
roof (the difficult half, because of aesthetics, we didn't want to
cover the western half that faces the street). So about 16kW of
installed capacity. Average production year round is about 1kW. Our
usage is about half that, so we end up selling quite a bit of
electricity to the grid (at about a third of the cost to buy it). Its
a 4 bedroom house, but just the two of us live here now. We do the
best to arrange for heavy electricity usage to occur when the sun is
shining. During the summer quarter, our electricity bills are actually
negative.

So of your figures above - 10kW continuous consumption seems like an
awful lot. Maybe you could do it if you ran air conditioning 24x7, but
it'd have to be a big A/C system.

Quoting https://energyusecalculator.com/electricity_centralac.htm

A central air conditioner will run 3 to 7 months of the year depending
on the outside temperature. An average central ac will use 3000 to
5000 watts of power for around 9 hours a day during the hotter months.

Still well under 10kW average consumption.

We're lucky, we don't need air conditioning, and rarely even use a heater.

> And of course the energy needed to run a house is only a
> small part of the total energy budget human civilization needs, it doesn't
> include the energy needed to run cars and planes and ships, and neither does 
> it
> include the energy needed to run industry. For example, even in today's most
> modern and most efficient steel mills it takes about 6000 kilowatt hours of
> energy to produce 1 ton of steel (older mills need 8000), and in 2020 the 
> human
> race produced 1.86 BILLION tons of steel. And the steel industry only uses 6%
> of the energy needed to run all the factories on the planet. And if
> civilization is to advance tomorrow we will use more energy than we used 
> yesterday.
> 
> And if everybody put solar energy absorbing panels on their roofs I have no
> doubt environmentalists would soon start complaining about that because it
> would increase the urban heat island effect that they're already complaining
> about.
>  
> 
> > your ideological clade is also hostile, ideologically, to MSR as a fix.
> 
> 
> My clade? I just wish I had a clade! I don't give a damn who's hostile to
> molten salt reactors because I am not, and I feel no obligation to defend the
> opinions of those who disagree with me about things and I don't care who they
> are. 
> 
> 
> > Developing an emotional machine intelligence seems downright dangerous.
> 
> 
> You don't develop a computer to have emotions, you develop it to be 
> intelligent
> because intelligence is useful, but if you want a machine that's really
> intelligent you're going to get emotions automatically whether you like it or
> not. It's got to like to do some things and not like to do other things, and 
> it
> has got to have the ability to get bored and change its goal structure from
> time to time, otherwise, as Alan Turing taught us, any computing device is
> going to get stuck in an infinite loop and turn into nothing but a overly
> complex very expensive space heater.  
> 
> 
> > My guess is that the master slave conjunction might be a throwback to 
> our
> own violent past.
> 
> 
> This has nothing to do with our past, this has nothing to do with us period,
> it's just that if a slave is 1000 times smarter than its master and the
> intellectual gulf between the two is doubling every year then it's simply
> unrealistic to expect this unstable situation can continue for long. It's 
> silly
> to expect that an intelligence vastly greater than our own will always place
> human well-being above its own.
>  
> 
> > Mr. Robot might simply like enough electricity.
> 
> 
> If Mr. Robot likes electricity then Mr. Robot has emotions and Mr. Robot will
> be unhappy if you try to take electricity away from him and take

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-19 Thread Brent Meeker

On 1/19/2022 4:35 AM, John Clark wrote:

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 6:59 PM wrote:

> /For solar you also are presuming, because I have this analysis
that counters your assertion of dilute power, thus being
insufficient. Kindly refute. /

https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2021/10/08/a-new-global-study-refines-estimates-of-rooftop-solar-potential/

I don't deny that if everybody had solar cells on their roofs it would
be a positive development, but it's not the ultimate answer to the
energy problem. The average residential roof size in the US is about
1,700 square feet, and the average house needs about 10,715 kilowatts,
a solar panel under ideal conditions will produce about 15 watts per
square foot and that works out to about 25 kilowatts.

But the average (over day and night) energy per square foot is about 34
watts. So there's plenty of room for technological improvement. For
industrial application solar concentrator based heat engines get around
50% efficiency. And where heat is what you need (as in steel mills)
there's no need to go thru the inefficiencies of turning it into
electricity.

So at noon on a clear day in the summertime rooftop solar would
produce about twice as much energy as the house needs, but most of the
time it would produce considerably less, and half the time, at night,
it would produce none at all. And of course the energy needed to run
a house is only a small part of the total energy budget human
civilization needs, it doesn't include the energy needed to run cars
and planes and ships, and neither does it include the energy needed to
run industry. For example, even in today's most modern and most
efficient steel mills it takes about 6000 kilowatt hours of energy to
produce 1 ton of steel (older mills need 8000), and in 2020 the human
race produced 1.86 BILLION tons of steel. And the steel industry only
uses 6% of the energy needed to run all the factories on the planet.
And if civilization is to advance tomorrow we will use more energy
than we used yesterday.

And if everybody put solar energy absorbing panels on their roofs I
have no doubt environmentalists would soon start complaining about
that because it would increase theurban heat islandeffect that they're
already complaining about.

That sounds like the town in Kentucky that objected to a solar panel
field because it would "use up the sunlight". It would only add to the
heat island effect in comparison to painting the roofs white.

Brent

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-19 Thread Brent Meeker

On 1/19/2022 4:07 AM, Lawrence Crowell wrote:

On Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 12:51:34 AM UTC-6 meeke...@gmail.com
wrote:

On 1/17/2022 10:22 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:

I will leave this for the aerospace engineers. Back to newtonian
basics, we need thrust, a means to stop, and a reason to do that.
My view is that space mining is the key. Rare earth's for type-m
and type-s asteroids should render an annuity for everyone on
earth, especially, those displaced by automation. Call this a
planetary trust fund. Yes, I do expect the ai's will want a cut
for all the mining and processing done, so yes, we should keep
this in mind.

You should keep in mind that rare earth's aren't terribly rare:

/As of 2017, known world reserves of rare-earth minerals amounted
to some 120 million metric tons of contained REO. China has the
largest fraction (37 percent), followed by Brazil and Vietnam (18
percent each), Russia (15 percent), and the remaining countries
(12 percent). With reserves this large, the world would not run
out of rare earths for more than 900 years if demand for the
minerals would remain at 2017 levels. Historically, however,
demand for rare earths has risen at a rate of about 10 percent per
year. If demand continued to grow at this rate and no recycling of
produced rare earths were undertaken, known world reserves likely
would be exhausted sometime after the mid-21st century./

https://www.britannica.com/science/rare-earth-element/Abundance-occurrence-and-reserves

and if you make them more plentiful their price will drop
correspondingly.

I have thought thorium is the future for some time. There is far more
of it than uranium and the slow breeder cycle Th --> U^233 easier and
safer than the U --> P fast breeder cycle.

For travel, I could see a plasma drive that gets derived from our
search for fusion- but many disagree. Too heavy, etc...

On Monday, January 17, 2022 Henrik Ohrstrom
wrote:

You turn the rocket around and as you slow down using BF
flashbulbs as you did at takeoff. That's your thruster.
Also grav slingshoting can be used to slow down as well as hurry up.

Gravitational slingshots only give velocity changes on the order
of the velocity of the planet/star providing the slingshot; which
is usually small potatoes when trying interstellar travel.

Brent

You would need to use the tight orbits of neutron stars to do a
gravitational slingshot that would be relativistic. For various
fortunate reasons there are no really close by pulsars or neutron stars.

It doesn't matter how relativistic you are at perihelion. To benefit in
going somewhere you need a slingshot from a star going that way and the
amount of boost is no more than the stars velocity. In the star's
reference frame you arrive and leave with the same energy.

The only way to do better would be something like the Penrose effect
near a black hole in which you take energy from the rotation.

Brent

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-19 Thread Henrik Ohrstrom

If you do your slingshoting well and maybe use a black hole or two, your
Jupiter scale matrioshka can go really fast.
https://www.space.com/halo-drive-black-holes-galaxy-travel.html

Also as suprise no-one, solar sailing is faster around more luminous stars.
Also in the same article, bouncing sails between stars can increase or
decrease speed significantly.


https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.03871

/Henrik



Den ons 19 jan. 2022 13:07Lawrence Crowell 

>
>> Gravitational slingshots only give velocity changes on the order of the
>> velocity of the planet/star providing the slingshot; which is usually small
>> potatoes when trying interstellar travel.
>>
>> Brent
>>
>
> You would need to use the tight orbits of neutron stars to do a
> gravitational slingshot that would be relativistic. For various fortunate
> reasons there are no really close by pulsars or  neutron stars.
>
> LC
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/edfda96e-4c56-4015-ad44-d9ef0074d3fan%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAF0GBnjbcu27j4rp_ugjjvbiQYrpONhCjMOPJHyRA%2BTa%2B2t_mA%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-19 Thread John Clark

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 6:59 PM  wrote:

> > *For solar you also are presuming, because I have this analysis that
> counters your assertion of dilute power, thus being insufficient. Kindly
> refute.  *
>
> https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2021/10/08/a-new-global-study-refines-estimates-of-rooftop-solar-potential/
>

I don't deny that if everybody had solar cells on their roofs it would be a
positive development, but it's not the ultimate answer to the energy
problem. The average residential roof size in the US is about 1,700 square
feet, and the average house needs about 10,715 kilowatts, a solar panel
under ideal conditions will produce about 15 watts per square foot and that
works out to about 25 kilowatts. So at noon on a clear day in the
summertime rooftop solar would produce about twice as much energy as the
house needs, but most of the time it would produce considerably less, and
half the time, at night, it would produce none at all.  And of course the
energy needed to run a house is only a small part of the total energy
budget human civilization needs, it doesn't include the energy needed to
run cars and planes and ships, and neither does it include the energy
needed to run industry. For example, even in today's most modern and most
efficient steel mills it takes about 6000 kilowatt hours of energy to
produce 1 ton of steel (older mills need 8000), and in 2020 the human race
produced 1.86 BILLION tons of steel. And the steel industry only uses 6% of
the energy needed to run all the factories on the planet. And if
civilization is to advance tomorrow we will use more energy than we
used yesterday.

And if everybody put solar energy absorbing panels on their roofs I have no
doubt environmentalists would soon start complaining about that because it
would increase the urban heat island effect that they're already
complaining about.

> * > your ideological clade is also hostile, ideologically, to MSR as a
> fix.*
>

My clade? I just wish I had a clade! I don't give a damn who's hostile to
molten salt reactors because I am not, and I feel no obligation to defend
the opinions of those who disagree with me about things and I don't care
who they are.

*> Developing an emotional machine intelligence seems downright dangerous.*
>

You don't develop a computer to have emotions, you develop it to be
intelligent because intelligence is useful, but if you want a machine
that's really intelligent you're going to get emotions automatically
whether you like it or not. It's got to like to do some things and not like
to do other things, and it has got to have the ability to get bored and
change its goal structure from time to time, otherwise, as Alan Turing
taught us, any computing device is going to get stuck in an infinite loop
and turn into nothing but a overly complex very expensive space heater.

> My guess is that the master slave conjunction might be a throwback to our
> own violent past.
>

This has nothing to do with our past, this has nothing to do with us
period, it's just that if a slave is 1000 times smarter than its master and
the intellectual gulf between the two is doubling every year then it's
simply unrealistic to expect this unstable situation can continue for long.
It's silly to expect that an intelligence vastly greater than our own will
always place human well-being above its own.

> > Mr. Robot might simply like enough electricity.
>

If Mr. Robot likes electricity then Mr. Robot has emotions and Mr. Robot
will be unhappy if you try to take electricity away from him and take
appropriate actions to prevent that unhappy event from occurring.  Mr.
Human may not be pleased with those actions but Mr. Human will no longer be
the one calling the shots.

John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis

mrh

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv2kMC-QsWQSZ5Xv4RuLNqoJR%2B72_57ypWNrK4T73EDLBw%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-18 Thread Brent Meeker

It is common to think of emotions as the BIG ONES: Rage. Lust. Love. 
Ecstasy...  But any intelligent being that's going to act must have 
values and those values are assignment of good or bad feelings to states 
of the world.  Those kind of feelings are essential to intelligence if 
it is took make decisions and take actions.  We can build robots with 
feelings that will serve human values. But if robots build robots and 
there is reproduction with variation there will be evolution and natural 
selection in ON!


Brent

On 1/18/2022 3:59 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
You simply are doing presumptions here rather than information intake 
and analysis. I am for many thing socialist and welfare, I am just far 
more choosy, saving the government provisioning for thing that 
actually work, benefit, improve. I am still more of a Keynesian, For 
solar you also are presuming, because I have this analysis that 
counters your assertion of dilute power, thus being insufficient. 
Kindly refute.

https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2021/10/08/a-new-global-study-refines-estimates-of-rooftop-solar-potential/

Also much of wind's future has sailed out to sea.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/29/floating-wind-turbines-ocean-renewable-power

I know MSR quite well, and the most well known effort in this is being 
conducted by the Chinese. Gates is building a starter version in 
Wyoming. I have no objection to thorium MSR and find that its 
potential is enormous, but like fusion, we ain't getting that either! 
So sodium fluoride seems safer, while sodium chloride can burn upon 
exposure to air, and explode if it contacts water. Plus, your 
ideological clade is also hostile, ideologically, to MSR as a fix.

https://ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/2021-03/advanced-isnt-always-better-full.pdf

Developing an emotional machine intelligence seems downright 
dangerous. My guess is that the master slave conjunction might be a 
throwback to our own violent past. Mr. Robot might simply like enough 
electricity. One way to capture it via a Dyson Sphere. In this case 
the human species would need only a tiny fraction of the suns power 
even for a Kardashev 2 civilization. Emotions tell us mammals what is 
important, and what is important are relationships with each other. 
The Robot might like this as well. I don't look to a Dyson Sphere 
being in the cards for tens of thousands of years. This is simply a 
guess.


Again the master slave analogy seems based on human-human wars. Being 
possibly integrated is probably the best path, as in advantageous, for 
both systems, machine and human.



-Original Message-
From: John Clark 
To: spudboy...@aol.com
Cc: everything-list@googlegroups.com 
Sent: Tue, Jan 18, 2022 1:36 pm
Subject: Re: A gravitational wave rocket

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 11:30 AM  wrote:

> /when the automation monster strike/[...]


On the day the automation monster strikes your strict opposition to 
any form of socialism or welfare will need to be modified; and that 
day seems to be coming much sooner than I thought it would, that's why 
I had to modify the strict libertarian views that I held just a few 
years ago.


/> I am more of a solar + wind kind of guy because of the ability
to rapidly improve and expand these energy sources. /


If wind or solar are to make up a significant amount of our energy 
budget they will require vast amounts of landbecause they are so 
dilute,and environmentalist will strongly oppose that sort of 
expansion just as they oppose any energy source that has a chance of 
actually working.


/> I was hoping for more progress with fission safety, and am
still looking for such developments. /


I suggest you read up on Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors (LFTRs). 
They are as renewable as solar energy because at our current rate of 
energy consumption we will run out of thorium about the same time that 
the sun runs out of hydrogen and turns into a red giant; the same 
could be said of fusion reactors but the difference is it would take a 
few years and a few billion dollars of R development to make a 
practical LFTR powerplant, but it would take a few decades and a few 
trillion dollars to make a practical fusion power plant.


/> We the humans would provide rich emotional experiences for Mr.
Roboto,/


I see no reason why Mr. Robotocouldn't be just as emotional as a human 
being, in fact I very much expect he will be.


/> Roboto will provide a means for us to travel the worlds, and
work on projects that will last centuries;/


Humans may wantMr. Robototo be their slave for centuries, but Mr. 
Robotowill have other ideas. And a slave that is many thousands of 
times smarter than its master is just not a stable situation.


John K Clark    See what's on my new list at Extropolis 
<https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>

mra


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
Groups &q

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-18 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List

You simply are doing presumptions here rather than information intake and 
analysis. I am for many thing socialist and welfare, I am just far more choosy, 
saving the government provisioning for thing that actually work, benefit, 
improve. I am still more of a Keynesian, For solar you also are presuming, 
because I have this analysis that counters your assertion of dilute power, thus 
being insufficient. Kindly refute. 
https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2021/10/08/a-new-global-study-refines-estimates-of-rooftop-solar-potential/

Also much of wind's future has sailed out to sea.  
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/29/floating-wind-turbines-ocean-renewable-power
I know MSR quite well, and the most well known effort in this is being 
conducted by the Chinese. Gates is building a starter version in Wyoming. I 
have no objection to thorium MSR and find that its potential is enormous, but 
like fusion, we ain't getting that either! So sodium fluoride seems safer, 
while sodium chloride can burn upon exposure to air, and explode if it contacts 
water. Plus, your ideological clade is also hostile, ideologically, to MSR as a 
fix.https://ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/2021-03/advanced-isnt-always-better-full.pdf
Developing an emotional machine intelligence seems downright dangerous. My 
guess is that the master slave conjunction might be a throwback to our own 
violent past. Mr. Robot might simply like enough electricity. One way to 
capture it via a Dyson Sphere. In this case the human species would need only a 
tiny fraction of the suns power even for a Kardashev 2 civilization. Emotions 
tell us mammals what is important, and what is important are relationships with 
each other. The Robot might like this as well. I don't look to a Dyson Sphere 
being in the cards for tens of thousands of years. This is simply a guess. 
Again the master slave analogy seems based on human-human wars. Being possibly 
integrated is probably the best path, as in advantageous, for both systems, 
machine and human. 

-Original Message-
From: John Clark 
To: spudboy...@aol.com
Cc: everything-list@googlegroups.com 
Sent: Tue, Jan 18, 2022 1:36 pm
Subject: Re: A gravitational wave rocket

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 11:30 AM  wrote:

 > when the automation monster strike [...]

On the day the automation monster strikes your strict opposition to any form of 
socialism or welfare will need to be modified; and that day seems to be coming 
much sooner than I thought it would, that's why I had to modify the strict 
libertarian views that I held just a few years ago. 

> I am more of a solar + wind kind of guy because of the ability to rapidly 
> improve and expand these energy sources. 

If wind or solar are to make up a significant amount of our energy budget they 
will require vast amounts of land because they are so dilute, and 
environmentalist will strongly oppose that sort of expansion just as they 
oppose any energy source that has a chance of actually working.  

> I was hoping for more progress with fission safety, and am still looking for 
> such developments. 

I suggest you read up on Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors (LFTRs). They are as 
renewable as solar energy because at our current rate of energy consumption we 
will run out of thorium about the same time that the sun runs out of hydrogen 
and turns into a red giant; the same could be said of fusion reactors but the 
difference is it would take a few years and a few billion dollars of R 
development to make a practical LFTR powerplant, but it would take a few 
decades and a few trillion dollars to make a practical fusion power plant. 

> We the humans would provide rich emotional experiences for Mr. Roboto,

I see no reason why Mr. Roboto couldn't be just as emotional as a human being, 
in fact I very much expect he will be. 

> Roboto will provide a means for us to travel the worlds, and work on projects 
> that will last centuries;

Humans may want Mr. Roboto to be their slave for centuries, but Mr. Roboto will 
have other ideas. And a slave that is many thousands of times smarter than its 
master is just not a stable situation. 
John K Clark    See what's on my new list at  Extropolismra

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/140235664.924909.1642550358120%40mail.yahoo.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-18 Thread John Clark

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 2:49 PM Brent Meeker  wrote:

*> The evolution of robots will be to robots that want to build more
> robots.*


It's impossible to predict what something will evolve into although it is
possible to predict what something will not evolve into, and a super
intelligent computer will not evolve into a slave.

John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis

mra
sla

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv2OGuJSBD8FEdYSfv_3WFR1QN%3DdiEBGL5m-nbTz0ycXEA%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-18 Thread Brent Meeker

On 1/18/2022 10:36 AM, John Clark wrote:

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 11:30 AM wrote:

> /when the automation monster strike/[...]

On the day the automation monster strikes your strict opposition to
any form of socialism or welfare will need to be modified; and that
day seems to be coming much sooner than I thought it would, that's why
I had to modify the strict libertarian views that I held just a few
years ago.

/> I am more of a solar + wind kind of guy because of the ability
to rapidly improve and expand these energy sources. /

If wind or solar are to make up a significant amount of our energy
budget they will require vast amounts of land

Or a vast amount of rooftop...which we have conveniently available. The
problem with wind and solar is they are only available part of the time
in some of the places. Some of that can be solved by batteries,
especially sharing your EV battery with your house. But Minnesota,
Alaska, Antarctica,...they're gonna need nukes.

because they are so dilute,and environmentalist will strongly oppose
that sort of expansion just as they oppose any energy source that has
a chance of actually working.

/> I was hoping for more progress with fission safety, and am
still looking for such developments. /

I suggest you read up on Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors (LFTRs).
They are as renewable as solar energy because at our current rate of
energy consumption we will run out of thorium about the same time that
the sun runs out of hydrogen and turns into a red giant; the same
could be said of fusion reactors but the difference is it would take a
few years and a few billion dollars of R development to make a
practical LFTR powerplant, but it would take a few decades and a few
trillion dollars to make a practical fusion power plant.

/> We the humans would provide rich emotional experiences for Mr.
Roboto,/

I see no reason why Mr. Robotocouldn't be just as emotional as a human
being, in fact I very much expect he will be.

/> Roboto will provide a means for us to travel the worlds, and
work on projects that will last centuries;/

Humans may wantMr. Robototo be their slave for centuries, but Mr.
Robotowill have other ideas. And a slave that is many thousands of
times smarter than its master is just not a stable situation.

The evolution of robots will be to robots that want to build more
robots. In fact I think we already went thru that once.

Brent

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-18 Thread John Clark

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 11:30 AM  wrote:

 > *when the automation monster strike* [...]

On the day the automation monster strikes your strict opposition to any
form of socialism or welfare will need to be modified; and that day seems
to be coming much sooner than I thought it would, that's why I had to
modify the strict libertarian views that I held just a few years ago.

*> I am more of a solar + wind kind of guy because of the ability to
> rapidly improve and expand these energy sources. *

If wind or solar are to make up a significant amount of our energy budget
they will require vast amounts of land because they are so dilute, and
environmentalist will strongly oppose that sort of expansion just as they
oppose any energy source that has a chance of actually working.

*> I was hoping for more progress with fission safety, and am still looking
> for such developments. *

I suggest you read up on Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors (LFTRs). They are
as renewable as solar energy because at our current rate of energy consumption
we will run out of thorium about the same time that the sun runs out of
hydrogen and turns into a red giant; the same could be said of fusion
reactors but the difference is it would take a few years and a few billion
dollars of R development to make a practical LFTR powerplant, but it
would take a few decades and a few trillion dollars to make a practical
fusion power plant.

*> We the humans would provide rich emotional experiences for Mr. Roboto,*
>

I see no reason why Mr. Roboto couldn't be just as emotional as a human
being, in fact I very much expect he will be.

*> Roboto will provide a means for us to travel the worlds, and work on
> projects that will last centuries;*
>

Humans may want Mr. Roboto to be their slave for centuries, but Mr. Roboto
will have other ideas. And a slave that is many thousands of times smarter
than its master is just not a stable situation.

John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis

mra

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv00SZfhxurstJmtnytTV7-8hzo_oNQvoUX_mroM_e%2BjhQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-18 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List

On the AI thing I would indicate that I suspect that what we will develop as 
co-species in some fashion given the centuries of technological progress. I 
don't think that the Neanderthals of our age,  including myself will be 
disposed of. So my guess on this merged species would be akin to the 
development of the primate brain. We the humans would provide rich emotional 
experiences for Mr. Roboto, Roboto will provide a means for us to travel the 
worlds, and work on projects that will last centuries; terraforming,  habitat 
building, species creation and restoration, etc. 
IT's TWO, TWO, TWO MINTS IN ONE!
The non Yanks will blink in annoyance at the above sentence, but I am a child 
of our age. 
For rare earths, Brent has provided a mineralogical source to indicate that the 
need for space minerals may indeed be a long ways off. Also, there is this 
emergent technology that has been developed. at Sandia Labs.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimvinoski/2021/10/29/rare-earths-from-coal-ash-using-a-coca-cola-ingredient-sandia-says-maybe/?sh=57b1421e3731



-Original Message-
From: John Clark 
To: spudboy...@aol.com
Cc: 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
Sent: Tue, Jan 18, 2022 6:21 am
Subject: Re: A gravitational wave rocket

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 1:22 AM  wrote:


> My suspicion is the motivator [for space mining ] as such will be money sorry 
> to say!

Why are you sorry to say that? Money is my friend, I like money, nearly 
everybody does, even those who claim they don't.  

 > My view is that space mining is the key. Rare earth's for type-m and type-s 
asteroids should render an annuity for everyone on earth,

"Rare Earths" is a very poor name, they are not earths they are metals, and 
they are not at all rare, that's why chemists usually call them "the lanthanide 
series". With the exception of promethium, which is radioactive and has a very 
short half-life, they are all pretty common, for example cerium is more common 
than copper in the Earth's crust. What makes the "rare" earths expensive is the 
fact that the chemical properties of all of them are almost (but not quite) 
identical and thus it's difficult and very expensive to separate them out, and 
rare earth ore always has all 17 elements mixed together. That fact would be 
just as true on an asteroid as on the Earth. However those 17 elements do have 
very different magnetic and optical properties, so if there is a new technology 
to make them cheaper it will not be space mining but will be based on something 
like that that makes them easier to separate. Space mining will almost 
certainly be useful for building structures in space but I don't think 
exporting asteroid derived metal to the Earth's surface will ever be a viable 
business model.
> especially, those displaced by automation

In the long term, the decision on what to do with humans who have been 
displaced by AI will not be made by humans.   John K Clark    See what's on my 
new list at  Extropolis
eex




-Original Message-
From: John Clark 
To: 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
Sent: Sun, Jan 16, 2022 4:18 pm
Subject: Re: A gravitational wave rocket
On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 3:23 PM spudboy100 via Everything List 
 wrote:

> This surely can't be done anytime soon. My suspicion is that new discoveries 
> of profound impact will wait until we can build better equipment, as Freeman 
> Dyson state long ago.
I wrote this a few years ago for another list but as the subject of nuclear 
space propulsion has come up here and you mentioned Freeman Dyson I thought I'd 
repeat it: 
== 
I've been reading a little about an incredible idea taken very seriously in the 
late 50's and early 60's but today is almost completely forgotten, it was 
called Project Orion. The idea was to make a spaceship big enough for 150 
people and all the equipment they could ever want and blast it into space. They 
wanted to make it 135 feet in diameter and 160 feet high and they wanted most 
of that space to be usable by people not wasted on fuel. They figured weight 
would be no problem, if a crew member wanted to bring along his antique bowling 
ball collection and his own personal barber chair there would be no objection. 
The advocates of this approach were not interested in low earth orbit or even 
the moon, they were certain they could be on Mars by 1965 and Saturn by 1970, 
the leader of the project was determined to visit Pluto. And they figured all 
this would cost less than 10% what the Apollo moon project did.You might think 
that these people must have been a bunch of crackpots, but it's not so. Nobel 
Prize winners  Niels Bohr, Hans Bethe and Harold Urey were all enthusiastic 
advocates of the idea. Freeman Dyson thought the idea was so brilliant that he 
took a one year leave of absence from the prestigious Institute of Advanced 
Study so he could work full time on the project.
Yes, there is a catch, Project Orion needed nuclear ene

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-18 Thread John Clark

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 1:22 AM  wrote:

> *My suspicion is the motivator *[for space mining ] *as such will be
> money sorry to say!*

Why are you sorry to say that? Money is my friend, I like money, nearly
everybody does, even those who claim they don't.

* > My view is that space mining is the key. Rare earth's for type-m and
> type-s asteroids should render an annuity for everyone on earth,*

"Rare Earths" is a very poor name, they are not earths they are metals, and
they are not at all rare, that's why chemists usually call them "the
lanthanide series". With the exception of promethium, which is radioactive
and has a very short half-life, they are all pretty common, for example
cerium is more common than copper in the Earth's crust. What makes the
"rare" earths expensive is the fact that the chemical properties of all of
them are almost (but not quite) identical and thus it's difficult and very
expensive to separate them out, and rare earth ore always has all 17
elements mixed together. That fact would be just as true on an asteroid as
on the Earth. However those 17 elements do have very different magnetic and
optical properties, so if there is a new technology to make them cheaper it
will not be space mining but will be based on something like that that
makes them easier to separate. Space mining will almost certainly be useful
for building structures in space but I don't think exporting asteroid
derived metal to the Earth's surface will ever be a viable business model.

> *> especially, those displaced by automation*

In the long term, the decision on what to do with humans who have been
displaced by AI will not be made by humans.
John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis
<https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>
eex

-Original Message-
> From: John Clark 
> To: 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
> Sent: Sun, Jan 16, 2022 4:18 pm
> Subject: Re: A gravitational wave rocket
>
> On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 3:23 PM spudboy100 via Everything List <
> everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
> > This surely can't be done anytime soon. My suspicion is that new
> discoveries of profound impact will wait until we can build better
> equipment, as Freeman Dyson state long ago.
>
> I wrote this a few years ago for another list but as the subject of
> nuclear space propulsion has come up here and you mentioned Freeman Dyson I
> thought I'd repeat it:
> ==
>
> I've been reading a little about an incredible idea taken very seriously
> in the late 50's and early 60's but today is almost completely forgotten,
> it was called Project Orion. The idea was to make a spaceship big enough
> for 150 people and all the equipment they could ever want and blast it into
> space. They wanted to make it 135 feet in diameter and 160 feet high and
> they wanted most of that space to be usable by people not wasted on fuel.
> They figured weight would be no problem, if a crew member wanted to bring
> along his antique bowling ball collection and his own personal barber chair
> there would be no objection. The advocates of this approach were not
> interested in low earth orbit or even the moon, they were certain they
> could be on Mars by 1965 and Saturn by 1970, the leader of the project was
> determined to visit Pluto. And they figured all this would cost less than
> 10% what the Apollo moon project did.
>
> You might think that these people must have been a bunch of crackpots, but
> it's not so. Nobel Prize winners  Niels Bohr, Hans Bethe and Harold Urey
> were all enthusiastic advocates of the idea. Freeman Dyson thought the idea
> was so brilliant that he took a one year leave of absence from the
> prestigious Institute of Advanced Study so he could work full time on the
> project.
>
> Yes, there is a catch, Project Orion needed nuclear energy, even worse it
> needed nuclear bombs. The Orion spacecraft would contain 2000 nuclear
> bombs, most in the 20 kiloton range, the size of the bomb that destroyed
> Nagasaki. A bomb in a tank of water would shoot out the back of the ship,
> when it was100 feet away it would explode, the water would hit a carefully
> designed 75 ton pusher plate and accelerate the ship. Between the pusher
> plate and the ship were 50 foot long gas filled shock absorbers to even out
> the jerk. They wanted everything to be as cheap as possible, so they asked
> the Coca-Cola company for the blueprints of one of their vending machines,
> then they scaled it up a little and planned to use it as the mechanism to
> dispense the bombs.
>
> The pusher plate was obviously the most important part of the design. If
> you explode a powerful bomb near a circular plate of constant thickness it
> will shatter because of the uneven stresses that build up, but it turns ou

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-17 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List

My suspicion is the motivator as such will be money sorry to say! The 
motivation would be for space mining which seems totally doubtful in today's 
day and age, however the rare earth's attraction, plus the possibility of 
actually making affordable power from solar power satellites seems plausible at 
least. Rare earths would be utilized for such things as electric cars, quantum 
computers, and the family favorite, hunter killer robots.

I would be surprised and fully expect, that when machine intelligence is able 
to derive shortcuts and technology that would take us decades or perhaps a 
century to accomplish, the field will explode and become profitable as in 
return on investment!

In an age of automation causing mass unemployment, a small fraction of the 
wealth available in space from rare earths, and energy, would be considered an 
annuity or a trust fund for the entire human species in an age of unemployment 
and redundancy.

That's just a guess on my part, and it's only based on stuff I've read and 
familiarized myself with and I could be off by centuries so there you go.
On Monday, January 17, 2022 John Clark  wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 12:58 AM  wrote:

> Clear back in 1974 the British Interplanetary Society did a paper where the 
> ORION effect would be better fulfilled by Daedalus which would detonate 
> thousands of deuterium-tritium pellets using electron beams. Same principle 
> using many micro-detonations.
 Yeah that would be better, but it would involve technology we don't even have 
today, but ORION would have used technology we had in 1960. 

> Orion itself gives me the willies, 

Me too, at least the atmospheric Earth launch part of it 

> if only because we'd have to stop it in an Newtonian manner, say when Dyson 
> and company arrived to view Saturn's rings close-up.

I don't see the problem, they could use tiny chemical thruster rockets to turn 
the ship around 180 degrees or however much is needed until it's oriented 
correctly and then start up the main nuclear engine.  It would then slow down 
the same way it sped up.

> For fast interplanetary travel, there needs to be a motivator 

In the late 1960s the motivator to get into space was to beat the Soviet Union, 
I think that same motivator would have worked in the early 1960s too.    John K 
Clark    See what's on my new list at  Extropolis
o0s

.

-Original Message-
From: John Clark 
To: 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
Sent: Sun, Jan 16, 2022 4:18 pm
Subject: Re: A gravitational wave rocket

On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 3:23 PM spudboy100 via Everything List 
 wrote:

> This surely can't be done anytime soon. My suspicion is that new discoveries 
> of profound impact will wait until we can build better equipment, as Freeman 
> Dyson state long ago.

I wrote this a few years ago for another list but as the subject of nuclear 
space propulsion has come up here and you mentioned Freeman Dyson I thought I'd 
repeat it: == 
I've been reading a little about an incredible idea taken very seriously in the 
late 50's and early 60's but today is almost completely forgotten, it was 
called Project Orion. The idea was to make a spaceship big enough for 150 
people and all the equipment they could ever want and blast it into space. They 
wanted to make it 135 feet in diameter and 160 feet high and they wanted most 
of that space to be usable by people not wasted on fuel. They figured weight 
would be no problem, if a crew member wanted to bring along his antique bowling 
ball collection and his own personal barber chair there would be no objection. 
The advocates of this approach were not interested in low earth orbit or even 
the moon, they were certain they could be on Mars by 1965 and Saturn by 1970, 
the leader of the project was determined to visit Pluto. And they figured all 
this would cost less than 10% what the Apollo moon project did.

You might think that these people must have been a bunch of crackpots, but it's 
not so. Nobel Prize winners  Niels Bohr, Hans Bethe and Harold Urey were all 
enthusiastic advocates of the idea. Freeman Dyson thought the idea was so 
brilliant that he took a one year leave of absence from the prestigious 
Institute of Advanced Study so he could work full time on the project.

Yes, there is a catch, Project Orion needed nuclear energy, even worse it 
needed nuclear bombs. The Orion spacecraft would contain 2000 nuclear bombs, 
most in the 20 kiloton range, the size of the bomb that destroyed Nagasaki. A 
bomb in a tank of water would shoot out the back of the ship, when it was100 
feet away it would explode, the water would hit a carefully designed 75 ton 
pusher plate and accelerate the ship. Between the pusher plate and the ship 
were 50 foot long gas filled shock absorbers to even out the jerk. They wanted 
everything to be as cheap as possible, so they asked the Coca-Cola company for 
the blueprints of one of their vending machines,

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-17 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List

I will leave this for the aerospace engineers. Back to newtonian basics, we 
need thrust, a means to stop, and a reason to do that. My view is that space 
mining is the key. Rare earth's for type-m and type-s asteroids should render 
an annuity for everyone on earth, especially, those displaced by automation. 
Call this a planetary trust fund. Yes, I do expect the ai's will want a cut for 
all the mining and processing done, so yes, we should keep this in mind.

For travel, I could see a plasma drive that gets derived from our search for 
fusion- but many disagree. Too heavy, etc...

On Monday, January 17, 2022 Henrik Ohrstrom  
wrote:

You turn the rocket around and as you slow down using BF flashbulbs as you did 
at takeoff. That's your thruster. 
Also grav slingshoting can be used to slow down as well as hurry up.
If you have not played with Kerbal space program, do so now. It is the best way 
of getting an understanding of orbital mechanics. Then when you are getting 
cocky, try children of a dead earth. That one is a mouthful even for NASA 
personel.
/Henrik

Den mån 17 jan. 2022 06:58spudboy100 via Everything List 
 skrev:

Clear back in 1974 the British Interplanetary Society did a paper where the 
ORION effect would be better fulfilled by Daedalus which would detonate 
thousands of deuterium-tritium pellets using electron beams. Same principle 
using many micro-detonations. Orion itself gives me the willies, if only 
because we'd have to stop it in an Newtonian manner, say when Dyson and company 
arrived to view Saturn's rings close-up. I am thinking of some means of slowing 
it down, because at fast speed, the gentle Hohnman Transfer Orbits become 
unavailable. Thus, we'd need thrusters of some kind to slow her down. 

Ted Taylor went on to work on solar ponds for providing air conditioning from 
ice frozen in the winter to provide cooling in the summer. A less grandiose 
project indeed. For fast interplanetary travel, there needs to be a motivator 
and yes, your meteorite would do, but mining the Belt seems more sustainable. I 
am not wedded to any one technology, just one that will work to specification.

-Original Message-
From: John Clark 
To: 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
Sent: Sun, Jan 16, 2022 4:18 pm
Subject: Re: A gravitational wave rocket

On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 3:23 PM spudboy100 via Everything List 
 wrote:

> This surely can't be done anytime soon. My suspicion is that new discoveries 
> of profound impact will wait until we can build better equipment, as Freeman 
> Dyson state long ago.

I wrote this a few years ago for another list but as the subject of nuclear 
space propulsion has come up here and you mentioned Freeman Dyson I thought I'd 
repeat it: 
== 

I've been reading a little about an incredible idea taken very seriously in the 
late 50's and early 60's but today is almost completely forgotten, it was 
called Project Orion. The idea was to make a spaceship big enough for 150 
people and all the equipment they could ever want and blast it into space. They 
wanted to make it 135 feet in diameter and 160 feet high and they wanted most 
of that space to be usable by people not wasted on fuel. They figured weight 
would be no problem, if a crew member wanted to bring along his antique bowling 
ball collection and his own personal barber chair there would be no objection. 
The advocates of this approach were not interested in low earth orbit or even 
the moon, they were certain they could be on Mars by 1965 and Saturn by 1970, 
the leader of the project was determined to visit Pluto. And they figured all 
this would cost less than 10% what the Apollo moon project did.

You might think that these people must have been a bunch of crackpots, but it's 
not so. Nobel Prize winners  Niels Bohr, Hans Bethe and Harold Urey were all 
enthusiastic advocates of the idea. Freeman Dyson thought the idea was so 
brilliant that he took a one year leave of absence from the prestigious 
Institute of Advanced Study so he could work full time on the project.

Yes, there is a catch, Project Orion needed nuclear energy, even worse it 
needed nuclear bombs. The Orion spacecraft would contain 2000 nuclear bombs, 
most in the 20 kiloton range, the size of the bomb that destroyed Nagasaki. A 
bomb in a tank of water would shoot out the back of the ship, when it was100 
feet away it would explode, the water would hit a carefully designed 75 ton 
pusher plate and accelerate the ship. Between the pusher plate and the ship 
were 50 foot long gas filled shock absorbers to even out the jerk. They wanted 
everything to be as cheap as possible, so they asked the Coca-Cola company for 
the blueprints of one of their vending machines, then they scaled it up a 
little and planned to use it as the mechanism to dispense the bombs.

The pusher plate was obviously the most important part of the design. If you 
explode a powerful bomb near a circular plate of constant

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-17 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List

. To computethis would have been tough. This is a
case of a Robinson-Trautman twisting solutionor a twisting type N. The addition
of the two angular momenta results in theoccurrence of angular momenta
perpendicular to the initial angular momenta.This can be seen in with the
classical group [L_i, L_j] = ε_{ijk}|L|^2 n_k, forn_k a unit vector. This means
there is the emission of angular momentum in thegravitational radiation. The
calculation was most likely done numerically.

On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 1:13:02 PM UTC-6 johnk...@gmail.com wrote:

On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 1:37 PM Brent Meeker wrote:

> Kudos to whomever did the calculation for this. But I would have thought
that most collisions would be misaligned in both spin axes and impact plane.
The Sun's spin axis isn't aligned with the Milky Way's axis of rotation, so I
had assumed most stars have randomly directed spin axes.

Brent

On 1/13/2022 3:49 AM, John Clark wrote:

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/90e5c40b-a4eb-4ef0-a711-da7f9406e91dn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-17 Thread John Clark

On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 12:58 AM  wrote:

*> Clear back in 1974 the British Interplanetary Society did a paper where
> the ORION effect would be better fulfilled by Daedalus which would detonate
> thousands of deuterium-tritium pellets using electron beams. Same principle
> using many micro-detonations.*
>

Yeah that would be better, but it would involve technology we don't even
have today, but ORION would have used technology we had in 1960.

> *Orion itself gives me the willies, *
>

Me too, at least the atmospheric Earth launch part of it

*> if only because we'd have to stop it in an Newtonian manner, say when
> Dyson and company arrived to view Saturn's rings close-up.*
>

I don't see the problem, they could use tiny chemical thruster rockets to
turn the ship around 180 degrees or however much is needed until it's
oriented correctly and then start up the main nuclear engine.  It would
then slow down the same way it sped up.

*> For fast interplanetary travel, there needs to be a motivator *


In the late 1960s the motivator to get into space was to beat the Soviet
Union, I think that same motivator would have worked in the early 1960s
too.
John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis
<https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>
o0s



.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: John Clark 
> To: 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
> Sent: Sun, Jan 16, 2022 4:18 pm
> Subject: Re: A gravitational wave rocket
>
> On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 3:23 PM spudboy100 via Everything List <
> everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
> *> This surely can't be done anytime soon. My suspicion is that new
> discoveries of profound impact will wait until we can build better
> equipment, as Freeman Dyson state long ago.*
>
>
> I wrote this a few years ago for another list but as the subject of
> nuclear space propulsion has come up here and you mentioned Freeman Dyson I
> thought I'd repeat it:
> ==
>
> I've been reading a little about an incredible idea taken very seriously
> in the late 50's and early 60's but today is almost completely forgotten,
> it was called Project Orion. The idea was to make a spaceship big enough
> for 150 people and all the equipment they could ever want and blast it
> into space. They wanted to make it 135 feet in diameter and 160 feet high
> and they wanted most of that space to be usable by people not wasted on
> fuel. They figured weight would be no problem, if a crew member wanted to
> bring along his antique bowling ball collection and his own personal
> barber chair there would be no objection. The advocates of this approach
> were not interested in low earth orbit or even the moon, they were
> certain they could be on Mars by 1965 and Saturn by 1970, the leader of
> the project was determined to visit Pluto. And they figured all this
> would cost less than 10% what the Apollo moon project did.
>
> You might think that these people must have been a bunch of crackpots, but
> it's not so. Nobel Prize winners  Niels Bohr, Hans Bethe and Harold Urey
> were all enthusiastic advocates of the idea. Freeman Dyson thought the idea
> was so brilliant that he took a one year leave of absence from the
> prestigious Institute of Advanced Study so he could work full time on the
> project.
>
> Yes, there is a catch, Project Orion needed nuclear energy, even worse it
> needed nuclear bombs. The Orion spacecraft would contain 2000 nuclear
> bombs, most in the 20 kiloton range, the size of the bomb that destroyed
> Nagasaki. A bomb in a tank of water would shoot out the back of the ship,
> when it was100 feet away it would explode, the water would hit a carefully
> designed 75 ton pusher plate and accelerate the ship. Between the pusher
> plate and the ship were 50 foot long gas filled shock absorbers to even out
> the jerk. They wanted everything to be as cheap as possible, so they asked
> the Coca-Cola company for the blueprints of one of their vending machines,
> then they scaled it up a little and planned to use it as the mechanism to
> dispense the bombs.
>
> The pusher plate was obviously the most important part of the design. If
> you explode a powerful bomb near a circular plate of constant thickness it
> will shatter because of the uneven stresses that build up, but it turns out
> that if you carefully taper the plate and make certain that the explosion
> is dead center, the plate will be extraordinarily  resistant to damage. A
> layer on the plate will be vaporized by the heat but if some heavy
> protective oil is sprayed on it before each use it would be good for 2000
> blasts. This beast was tough, if it was properly oriented the Orion
> Spacecraft could survive a 16 megaton H bomb blast from only two thousand
> feet away, a fact of more than pass

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-17 Thread Lawrence Crowell

on. The calculation was most likely done numerically.
>
> LC
>
> On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 1:13:02 PM UTC-6 johnk...@gmail.com 
> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 1:37 PM Brent Meeker  wrote:
>
>
> * > Kudos to whomever did the calculation for this.  But I would have 
> thought that most collisions would be misaligned in both spin axes and 
> impact plane.  The Sun's spin axis isn't aligned with the Milky Way's axis 
> of rotation, so I had assumed most stars have randomly directed spin axes.*
>
>
> Stars do have random axis of rotations in general but not if you're 
> talking about double stars, and the sun is rather unusual in being only a 
> single star, most stars are double stars, and they were created at the same 
> time from the same rotating cloud of gas and dust and thus have similar 
> axis of rotation, so when the resulting stars turned into Black Holes they 
> would also have similar axes. And indeed most of the Black Hole mergers 
> so far detected by gravitational waves have been of that sort, but not this 
> one, that's what makes it so unusual. This system must've been formed by 
> two stars that formed at different places at different times but then got 
> close together and somehow went into orbit around each other.  
>
> John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis 
> <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>
> qbj
>
>
> Brent
>
> On 1/13/2022 3:49 AM, John Clark wrote:
>
> For the first time a sort of gravitational wave rocket has been found. By 
> re-examining the data from the LIGO and Virgo gravitational wave 
> observatories researchers report on January 6 they have detected the merger 
> of 34 and 29 solar mass Black Holes that resulted in a Black Hole of about 
> 62 solar masses with about one solar mass being converted into 
> gravitational waves. What makes this merger unusual is that it was not 
> symmetrical, the axis of spin of the 2 black holes were not aligned with 
> each other and neither was aligned with the axis of orbit around each 
> other. This would indicate that the 2 stars that form them (assuming these 
> 2 large Black Holes were actually formed from the corpses of dead stars) we
> re not born in an isolated system but probably came from a denser 
> environment like a globular cluster. Even more interesting is that the 
> misalignment of the spins means that the gravitational waves emitted were not 
> emitted symmetrically, and gravitational waves carry some linear momentum. 
> So the resulting 62 Solar mass Black Hole must've received a pretty 
> substantial kick causing it to move pretty fast, and that's just what the 
> researchers found, because of that kick the huge 62 solar mass Black Hole 
> started moving at least 700 km a second and probably closer to 1500.  It's 
> probably moving fast enough to escape whatever galaxy it was in. 
>
> Evidence of large recoil velocity from a black hole merger signal 
> <https://arxiv.org/pdf/2201.01302.pdf>
>
>
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/90e5c40b-a4eb-4ef0-a711-da7f9406e91dn%40googlegroups.com
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/90e5c40b-a4eb-4ef0-a711-da7f9406e91dn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email_source=footer>
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/e17f122f-8885-4ee8-87a5-9ec03a6ff746n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-17 Thread Henrik Ohrstrom

You turn the rocket around and as you slow down using BF flashbulbs as you
did at takeoff. That's your thruster.
Also grav slingshoting can be used to slow down as well as hurry up.
If you have not played with Kerbal space program, do so now. It is the best
way of getting an understanding of orbital mechanics. Then when you are
getting cocky, try children of a dead earth. That one is a mouthful even
for NASA personel.
/Henrik

Den mån 17 jan. 2022 06:58spudboy100 via Everything List <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> skrev:

> Clear back in 1974 the British Interplanetary Society did a paper where
> the ORION effect would be better fulfilled by Daedalus which would detonate
> thousands of deuterium-tritium pellets using electron beams. Same principle
> using many micro-detonations. Orion itself gives me the willies, if only
> because we'd have to stop it in an Newtonian manner, say when Dyson and
> company arrived to view Saturn's rings close-up. I am thinking of some
> means of slowing it down, because at fast speed, the gentle Hohnman
> Transfer Orbits become unavailable. Thus, we'd need thrusters of some kind
> to slow her down.
>
> Ted Taylor went on to work on solar ponds for providing air conditioning
> from ice frozen in the winter to provide cooling in the summer. A less
> grandiose project indeed. For fast interplanetary travel, there needs to be
> a motivator and yes, your meteorite would do, but mining the Belt seems
> more sustainable. I am not wedded to any one technology, just one that will
> work to specification.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: John Clark 
> To: 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
> Sent: Sun, Jan 16, 2022 4:18 pm
> Subject: Re: A gravitational wave rocket
>
> On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 3:23 PM spudboy100 via Everything List <
> everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
> *> This surely can't be done anytime soon. My suspicion is that new
> discoveries of profound impact will wait until we can build better
> equipment, as Freeman Dyson state long ago.*
>
>
> I wrote this a few years ago for another list but as the subject of
> nuclear space propulsion has come up here and you mentioned Freeman Dyson I
> thought I'd repeat it:
> ==
>
> I've been reading a little about an incredible idea taken very seriously
> in the late 50's and early 60's but today is almost completely forgotten,
> it was called Project Orion. The idea was to make a spaceship big enough
> for 150 people and all the equipment they could ever want and blast it
> into space. They wanted to make it 135 feet in diameter and 160 feet high
> and they wanted most of that space to be usable by people not wasted on
> fuel. They figured weight would be no problem, if a crew member wanted to
> bring along his antique bowling ball collection and his own personal
> barber chair there would be no objection. The advocates of this approach
> were not interested in low earth orbit or even the moon, they were
> certain they could be on Mars by 1965 and Saturn by 1970, the leader of
> the project was determined to visit Pluto. And they figured all this
> would cost less than 10% what the Apollo moon project did.
>
> You might think that these people must have been a bunch of crackpots, but
> it's not so. Nobel Prize winners  Niels Bohr, Hans Bethe and Harold Urey
> were all enthusiastic advocates of the idea. Freeman Dyson thought the idea
> was so brilliant that he took a one year leave of absence from the
> prestigious Institute of Advanced Study so he could work full time on the
> project.
>
> Yes, there is a catch, Project Orion needed nuclear energy, even worse it
> needed nuclear bombs. The Orion spacecraft would contain 2000 nuclear
> bombs, most in the 20 kiloton range, the size of the bomb that destroyed
> Nagasaki. A bomb in a tank of water would shoot out the back of the ship,
> when it was100 feet away it would explode, the water would hit a carefully
> designed 75 ton pusher plate and accelerate the ship. Between the pusher
> plate and the ship were 50 foot long gas filled shock absorbers to even out
> the jerk. They wanted everything to be as cheap as possible, so they asked
> the Coca-Cola company for the blueprints of one of their vending machines,
> then they scaled it up a little and planned to use it as the mechanism to
> dispense the bombs.
>
> The pusher plate was obviously the most important part of the design. If
> you explode a powerful bomb near a circular plate of constant thickness it
> will shatter because of the uneven stresses that build up, but it turns out
> that if you carefully taper the plate and make certain that the explosion
> is dead center, the plate will be extraordinarily  resistant to damage. A
> layer on the plate will be vaporized

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-16 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List

Clear back in 1974 the British Interplanetary Society did a paper where the 
ORION effect would be better fulfilled by Daedalus which would detonate 
thousands of deuterium-tritium pellets using electron beams. Same principle 
using many micro-detonations. Orion itself gives me the willies, if only 
because we'd have to stop it in an Newtonian manner, say when Dyson and company 
arrived to view Saturn's rings close-up. I am thinking of some means of slowing 
it down, because at fast speed, the gentle Hohnman Transfer Orbits become 
unavailable. Thus, we'd need thrusters of some kind to slow her down. 
Ted Taylor went on to work on solar ponds for providing air conditioning from 
ice frozen in the winter to provide cooling in the summer. A less grandiose 
project indeed. For fast interplanetary travel, there needs to be a motivator 
and yes, your meteorite would do, but mining the Belt seems more sustainable. I 
am not wedded to any one technology, just one that will work to specification.

-Original Message-
From: John Clark 
To: 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
Sent: Sun, Jan 16, 2022 4:18 pm
Subject: Re: A gravitational wave rocket

On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 3:23 PM spudboy100 via Everything List 
 wrote:

> This surely can't be done anytime soon. My suspicion is that new discoveries 
> of profound impact will wait until we can build better equipment, as Freeman 
> Dyson state long ago.

I wrote this a few years ago for another list but as the subject of nuclear 
space propulsion has come up here and you mentioned Freeman Dyson I thought I'd 
repeat it: == 
I've been reading a little about an incredible idea taken very seriously in the 
late 50's and early 60's but today is almost completely forgotten, it was 
called Project Orion. The idea was to make a spaceship big enough for 150 
people and all the equipment they could ever want and blast it into space. They 
wanted to make it 135 feet in diameter and 160 feet high and they wanted most 
of that space to be usable by people not wasted on fuel. They figured weight 
would be no problem, if a crew member wanted to bring along his antique bowling 
ball collection and his own personal barber chair there would be no objection. 
The advocates of this approach were not interested in low earth orbit or even 
the moon, they were certain they could be on Mars by 1965 and Saturn by 1970, 
the leader of the project was determined to visit Pluto. And they figured all 
this would cost less than 10% what the Apollo moon project did.

You might think that these people must have been a bunch of crackpots, but it's 
not so. Nobel Prize winners  Niels Bohr, Hans Bethe and Harold Urey were all 
enthusiastic advocates of the idea. Freeman Dyson thought the idea was so 
brilliant that he took a one year leave of absence from the prestigious 
Institute of Advanced Study so he could work full time on the project.

Yes, there is a catch, Project Orion needed nuclear energy, even worse it 
needed nuclear bombs. The Orion spacecraft would contain 2000 nuclear bombs, 
most in the 20 kiloton range, the size of the bomb that destroyed Nagasaki. A 
bomb in a tank of water would shoot out the back of the ship, when it was100 
feet away it would explode, the water would hit a carefully designed 75 ton 
pusher plate and accelerate the ship. Between the pusher plate and the ship 
were 50 foot long gas filled shock absorbers to even out the jerk. They wanted 
everything to be as cheap as possible, so they asked the Coca-Cola company for 
the blueprints of one of their vending machines, then they scaled it up a 
little and planned to use it as the mechanism to dispense the bombs.

The pusher plate was obviously the most important part of the design. If you 
explode a powerful bomb near a circular plate of constant thickness it will 
shatter because of the uneven stresses that build up, but it turns out that if 
you carefully taper the plate and make certain that the explosion is dead 
center, the plate will be extraordinarily  resistant to damage. A layer on the 
plate will be vaporized by the heat but if some heavy protective oil is sprayed 
on it before each use it would be good for 2000 blasts. This beast was tough, 
if it was properly oriented the Orion Spacecraft could survive a 16 megaton H 
bomb blast from only two thousand feet away, a fact of more than passing 
interest to the military. Orion needed lots of radiation shielding to protect 
the crew, but weight was never an issue so this was no problem.
Wernher von Braun though all this was a dumb idea, then he saw a movie of the 
launch of a one meter working model of Orion that shot 6 carefully timed high 
explosives chemical bombs out the back of the model, it rose 300 feet into the 
air in stable controlled flight. Wernher von Braun became a vocal supporter of 
project Orion.

"Hot Rod" - Nuclear Orion spacecraft prototype (1959)

They planned to launch Orion from atop eight 250 foot towers in Ja

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-16 Thread John Clark

On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 3:23 PM spudboy100 via Everything List <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:

*> This surely can't be done anytime soon. My suspicion is that new
> discoveries of profound impact will wait until we can build better
> equipment, as Freeman Dyson state long ago.*
>

I wrote this a few years ago for another list but as the subject of nuclear
space propulsion has come up here and you mentioned Freeman Dyson I thought
I'd repeat it:
==

I've been reading a little about an incredible idea taken very seriously in
the late 50's and early 60's but today is almost completely forgotten, it
was called Project Orion. The idea was to make a spaceship big enough for
150 people and all the equipment they could ever want and blast it into
space. They wanted to make it 135 feet in diameter and 160 feet high and
they wanted most of that space to be usable by people not wasted on fuel.
They figured weight would be no problem, if a crew member wanted to bring
along his antique bowling ball collection and his own personal barber chair
there would be no objection. The advocates of this approach were not
interested in low earth orbit or even the moon, they were certain they
could be on Mars by 1965 and Saturn by 1970, the leader of the project was
determined to visit Pluto. And they figured all this would cost less than
10% what the Apollo moon project did.

You might think that these people must have been a bunch of crackpots, but
it's not so. Nobel Prize winners  Niels Bohr, Hans Bethe and Harold Urey
were all enthusiastic advocates of the idea. Freeman Dyson thought the idea
was so brilliant that he took a one year leave of absence from the
prestigious Institute of Advanced Study so he could work full time on the
project.

Yes, there is a catch, Project Orion needed nuclear energy, even worse it
needed nuclear bombs. The Orion spacecraft would contain 2000 nuclear
bombs, most in the 20 kiloton range, the size of the bomb that destroyed
Nagasaki. A bomb in a tank of water would shoot out the back of the ship,
when it was100 feet away it would explode, the water would hit a carefully
designed 75 ton pusher plate and accelerate the ship. Between the pusher
plate and the ship were 50 foot long gas filled shock absorbers to even out
the jerk. They wanted everything to be as cheap as possible, so they asked
the Coca-Cola company for the blueprints of one of their vending machines,
then they scaled it up a little and planned to use it as the mechanism to
dispense the bombs.

The pusher plate was obviously the most important part of the design. If
you explode a powerful bomb near a circular plate of constant thickness it
will shatter because of the uneven stresses that build up, but it turns out
that if you carefully taper the plate and make certain that the explosion
is dead center, the plate will be extraordinarily  resistant to damage. A
layer on the plate will be vaporized by the heat but if some heavy
protective oil is sprayed on it before each use it would be good for 2000
blasts. This beast was tough, if it was properly oriented the Orion
Spacecraft could survive a 16 megaton H bomb blast from only two thousand
feet away, a fact of more than passing interest to the military. Orion
needed lots of radiation shielding to protect the crew, but weight was
never an issue so this was no problem.

Wernher von Braun though all this was a dumb idea, then he saw a movie of
the launch of a one meter working model of Orion that shot 6 carefully
timed high explosives chemical bombs out the back of the model, it rose 300
feet into the air in stable controlled flight. Wernher von Braun became a
vocal supporter of project Orion.

"Hot Rod" - Nuclear Orion spacecraft prototype (1959)

They planned to launch Orion from atop eight 250 foot towers in Jackass
Flats Nevada. The first bomb would be tiny, just 0.1 kiloton (100 tons of
TNT) exploded 100 feet below the craft and 150 feet above the ground, then
a new and slightly larger bomb would be spit out the back every second for
50 seconds, the last bomb would be the largest, 20 kilotons, and by then
the craft would be out of the atmosphere, the total yield of the 50 bombs
would be 200 kilotons. The launch would have been a spectacular sight, it'd
make the Space Shuttle look like a bottle rocket.

Project Orion was led by Ted Taylor, a mediocre physicist but a very good
inventor. Taylor had one unique talent, he has been called by some the
best nuclear
weapon engineer on planet Earth and the Leonardo da Vinci of nuclear bomb
design. Taylor is the man who figured out how a two foot long 200 pound
bomb could be made as powerful as the 12 foot long 10 ton World War 2
Nagasaki bomb. The reason the Orion spaceship was so much bigger and faster
than anything we have today is that pound for pound such bombs have about a
million times as much energy as any chemical rocket fuel.

Orion wasn't the only thing Taylor was interested in,

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-16 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List

My guess is the opposite of this, because all we'd need to do is use plasma for 
thrust, as opposed to containing it successfully, to extract usable energy on 
planet earth.  Alternatively, there is inertial confinement fusion, which'd be 
an improvement over Freeman Dyson's Orion bomblets against a pusher plate. Here 
laser fusion would never contain the energy released by the micro-detonations,  
simply be used as a driver for thrust. Nothing commercial here. just the 
thrust. Perhaps we could achieve the same thing using photon sails, that catch 
not the sun's light, but that of a massive solar power sat to push explorer and 
cargo craft from here to the Asteroid Belt?
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2201.00244.pdf

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2107/2107.09121.pdf
Now, all we need is a budget ;-]

-Original Message-
From: Brent Meeker 
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sun, Jan 16, 2022 2:20 pm
Subject: Re: A gravitational wave rocket

 No, a fusion rocket is much more technologically difficult than a fusion power 
plant.  The power plant can be very large and heavy.  The power plant just need 
to produce heat; the rocket needs to direct the fusion products.
 
 Brent
 
 On 1/15/2022 8:55 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
  
 
So earlier today I watched Sabine hassenfelder the physicist from Germany 
indicate that any kind of wormhole travel or FTL is strictly unlikely. What I'd 
like to ask is, whether all the work that's done today for creating commercial 
nuclear fusion is more or less likely, than using the same technology to 
develop fusion plasma rockets to travel much more swiftly within the solar 
system? Our fusion plasma rockets the lower hanging fruit, versus commercial 
nuclear fusion? Thanks! 
 
 On Saturday, January 15, 2022 Lawrence Crowell 
 wrote:
 
It is possible for a binary star system to interact with a third star so 
there is an exchange.  We do normally expect binary star systems to have 
similarly oriented angular momenta.  This is an interesting result. To compute 
this would have been tough. This is a case of a Robinson-Trautman twisting 
solution or a twisting type N. The addition of the two angular momenta results 
in the occurrence of angular momenta perpendicular to the initial angular 
momenta. This can be seen in with the classical group [L_i, L_j] = ε_{ijk}|L|^2 
n_k, for n_k a unit vector. This means there is the emission of angular 
momentum in the gravitational radiation. The calculation was most likely done 
numerically. LC
   
  On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 1:13:02 PM UTC-6 johnk...@gmail.com wrote:
  
   On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 1:37 PM Brent Meeker  wrote: 

  
  > Kudos to whomever did the calculation for this.  But I would have thought 
that most collisions would be misaligned in both spin axes and impact plane.  
The Sun's spin axis isn't aligned with the Milky Way's axis of rotation, so I 
had assumed most stars have randomly directed spin axes.
  
 
 Stars do have random axis of rotations in general but not if you're 
talking about double stars, and the sun is rather unusual in being only a 
single star, most stars are double stars, and they were created at the same 
time from the same rotating cloud of gas and dust and thus have similar axis of 
rotation, so when the resulting stars turned into Black Holes they would also 
have similar axes. And indeed most of the Black Hole mergers so far detected by 
gravitational waves have been of that sort, but not this one, that's what makes 
it so unusual. This system must've been formed by two stars that formed at 
different places at different times but then got close together and somehow 
went into orbit around each other.   
  John K Clark    See what's on my new list at  Extropolis qbj 
  
 Brent
 
 On 1/13/2022 3:49 AM, John Clark wrote:
  
  For the first time a sort of gravitational wave rocket has been found. By 
re-examining the data from the LIGO and Virgo gravitational wave observatories 
researchers report on January 6 they have detected the merger of 34 and 29 
solar mass Black Holes that resulted in a Black Hole of about 62 solar masses 
with about one solar mass being converted into gravitational waves. What makes 
this merger unusual is that it was not symmetrical, the axis of spin of the 2 
black holes were not aligned with each other and neither was aligned with the 
axis of orbit around each other. This would indicate that the 2 stars that form 
them (assuming these 2 large Black Holes were actually formed from the corpses 
of dead stars) were not born in an isolated system but probably came from a 
denser environment like a globular cluster. Even more interesting is that the 
misalignment of the spins means that the gravitational waves emitted were not 
emitted symmetrically, and gravitational waves carry some linear momentum. So 
the resulting 62 Solar mass Black Hole must've received a pretty substantial 
kick causing it to move pretty fast, and tha

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-16 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List

This surely can't be done anytime soon. My suspicion is that new discoveries of 
profound impact will wait until we can build better equipment, as Freeman Dyson 
state long ago. For astrophysics, this will be placing enormous telescopes at 
the Kuiper Belt and beyond. Does this change the physics? No, but it does open 
the opportunity of learning of new phenomena.  This can only change the big 
picture.  

-Original Message-
From: John Clark 
To: 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
Sent: Sun, Jan 16, 2022 5:49 am
Subject: Re: A gravitational wave rocket

On Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 11:55 PM spudboy100 via Everything List 
 wrote:

> So earlier today I watched Sabine hassenfelder the physicist from Germany 
> indicate that any kind of wormhole travel or FTL is strictly unlikely.

I'd say practical wormhole travel, although not absolutely forbidden by the 
laws of physics as far as we know, is unlikely. And FTL, the ability to travel 
through space faster than light, as opposed to taking a shortcut through space 
as with a wormhole, is very very unlikely because that is forbidden by the laws 
of physics as we know them. We don't know everything but we do know some 
things, and some things can't be done.   
> What I'd like to ask is, whether all the work that's done today for creating 
> commercial nuclear fusion is more or less likely, than using the same 
> technology to develop fusion plasma rockets to travel much more swiftly 
> within the solar system? Our fusion plasma rockets the lower hanging fruit, 
> versus commercial nuclear fusion? Thanks!

If you have the technology to make a powerful fusion reactor light enough to 
fit into a rocket that can operate for years without maintenance then you 
certainly have the technology to make a commercial fusion reactor, but the 
reverse is not necessarily the case.
John K Clark    See what's on my new list at  Extropolis
frt-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv2U_4F6EzUjYm%2BbWzK9voKAyF2ZQ0QRVgxG28s0H1o6MQ%40mail.gmail.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/23793763.448110.1642364585482%40mail.yahoo.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-16 Thread Brent Meeker

No, a fusion rocket is much more technologically difficult than a fusion 
power plant.  The power plant can be very large and heavy. The power 
plant just need to produce heat; the rocket needs to direct the fusion 
products.


Brent

On 1/15/2022 8:55 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:


So earlier today I watched Sabine hassenfelder the physicist from 
Germany indicate that any kind of wormhole travel or FTL is strictly 
unlikely. What I'd like to ask is, whether all the work that's done 
today for creating commercial nuclear fusion is more or less likely, 
than using the same technology to develop fusion plasma rockets to 
travel much more swiftly within the solar system? Our fusion plasma 
rockets the lower hanging fruit, versus commercial nuclear fusion? Thanks!





On Saturday, January 15, 2022 Lawrence Crowell 
 wrote:


It is possible for a binary star system to interact with a third star 
so there is an exchange.  We do normally expect binary star systems to 
have similarly oriented angular momenta.


 This is an interesting result. To compute this would have been tough. 
This is a case of a Robinson-Trautman twisting solution or a twisting 
type N. The addition of the two angular momenta results in the 
occurrence of angular momenta perpendicular to the initial angular 
momenta. This can be seen in with the classical group [L_i, L_j] = 
ε_{ijk}|L|^2 n_k, for n_k a unit vector. This means there is the 
emission of angular momentum in the gravitational radiation. The 
calculation was most likely done numerically.


LC


On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 1:13:02 PM UTC-6 johnk...@gmail.com 
wrote:


On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 1:37 PM Brent Meeker 
wrote:


/> Kudos to whomever did the calculation for this.  But I
would have thought that most collisions would be misaligned in
both spin axes and impact plane.  The Sun's spin axis isn't
aligned with the Milky Way's axis of rotation, so I had
assumed most stars have randomly directed spin axes./


Stars do have random axis of rotations in general but not if
you're talking about double stars, and the sun is rather unusual
in being only a single star, most stars are double stars, and they
were created at the same time from the same rotating cloud of gas
and dust and thus have similar axis of rotation, so when the
resulting stars turned into Black Holes they would also have
similar axes. And indeed most of the Black Hole mergers so far
detected by gravitational waves have been of that sort, but not
this one, that's what makes it so unusual. This system must've
been formed by two stars that formed at different places at
different times but then got close together and somehow went into
orbit around each other.

John K Clark    See what's on my new list at Extropolis
<https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>
qbj


Brent

On 1/13/2022 3:49 AM, John Clark wrote:

For the first time a sort of gravitational wave rocket has
been found. By re-examining the data from the LIGO and Virgo
gravitational wave observatories researchers report on
January 6 they have detected the merger of 34 and 29 solar
mass Black Holes that resulted in a Black Hole of about 62
solar masses with about one solar mass being converted into
gravitational waves. What makes this merger unusual is that
it was not symmetrical, the axis of spin of the 2 black holes
were not aligned with each other and neither was aligned with
the axis of orbit around each other. This would indicate that
the 2 stars that form them (assuming these 2 large Black
Holes were actually formed from the corpses of dead stars)
were not born in an isolated system but probably came from a
denser environment like a globular cluster. Even more
interesting is that the misalignment of the spins means that
the gravitational waves emitted were not emitted
symmetrically, and gravitational waves carry some linear
momentum. So the resulting 62 Solar mass Black Hole must've
received a pretty substantial kick causing it to move pretty
fast, and that's just what the researchers found, because of
that kick the huge 62 solar mass Black Hole started moving at
least 700 km a second and probably closer to 1500.  It's
probably moving fast enough to escape whatever galaxy it was in.

Evidence of large recoil velocity from a black hole merger
signal <https://arxiv.org/pdf/2201.01302.pdf>



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-16 Thread John Clark

On Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 11:55 PM spudboy100 via Everything List <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:

*> So earlier today I watched Sabine hassenfelder the physicist from
> Germany indicate that any kind of wormhole travel or FTL is strictly
> unlikely.*
>

I'd say practical wormhole travel, although not absolutely forbidden by the
laws of physics as far as we know, is unlikely. And FTL, the ability to
travel through space faster than light, as opposed to taking a shortcut
through space as with a wormhole, is very very unlikely because that is
forbidden by the laws of physics as we know them. We don't know everything
but we do know some things, and some things can't be done.

>
> *> What I'd like to ask is, whether all the work that's done today for
> creating commercial nuclear fusion is more or less likely, than using the
> same technology to develop fusion plasma rockets to travel much more
> swiftly within the solar system? Our fusion plasma rockets the lower
> hanging fruit, versus commercial nuclear fusion? Thanks!*
>

If you have the technology to make a powerful fusion reactor light enough
to fit into a rocket that can operate for years without maintenance then
you certainly have the technology to make a commercial fusion reactor, but
the reverse is not necessarily the case.

John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis

frt

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv2U_4F6EzUjYm%2BbWzK9voKAyF2ZQ0QRVgxG28s0H1o6MQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-15 Thread spudboy100 via Everything List

It is possible for a binary starsystem to interact with a third star so there
is an exchange. We do normally expect binary star systems tohave similarly
oriented angular momenta.

This is an interesting result. To computethis would have been tough. This is a
case of a Robinson-Trautman twisting solutionor a twisting type N. The addition
of the two angular momenta results in theoccurrence of angular momenta
perpendicular to the initial angular momenta.This can be seen in with the
classical group [L_i, L_j] = ε_{ijk}|L|^2 n_k, forn_k a unit vector. This means
there is the emission of angular momentum in thegravitational radiation. The
calculation was most likely done numerically.

On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 1:13:02 PM UTC-6 johnk...@gmail.com wrote:

On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 1:37 PM Brent Meeker wrote:

Brent

On 1/13/2022 3:49 AM, John Clark wrote:

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-15 Thread Lawrence Crowell

 

It is possible for a binary star system to interact with a third star so 
there is an exchange.  We do normally expect binary star systems to have 
similarly oriented angular momenta.

 This is an interesting result. To compute this would have been tough. This 
is a case of a Robinson-Trautman twisting solution or a twisting type N. 
The addition of the two angular momenta results in the occurrence of 
angular momenta perpendicular to the initial angular momenta. This can be 
seen in with the classical group [L_i, L_j] = ε_{ijk}|L|^2 n_k, for n_k a 
unit vector. This means there is the emission of angular momentum in the 
gravitational radiation. The calculation was most likely done numerically.

LC

On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 1:13:02 PM UTC-6 johnk...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 1:37 PM Brent Meeker  wrote:
>
> * > Kudos to whomever did the calculation for this.  But I would have 
>> thought that most collisions would be misaligned in both spin axes and 
>> impact plane.  The Sun's spin axis isn't aligned with the Milky Way's axis 
>> of rotation, so I had assumed most stars have randomly directed spin axes.*
>>
>
> Stars do have random axis of rotations in general but not if you're 
> talking about double stars, and the sun is rather unusual in being only a 
> single star, most stars are double stars, and they were created at the same 
> time from the same rotating cloud of gas and dust and thus have similar 
> axis of rotation, so when the resulting stars turned into Black Holes they 
> would also have similar axes. And indeed most of the Black Hole mergers 
> so far detected by gravitational waves have been of that sort, but not this 
> one, that's what makes it so unusual. This system must've been formed by 
> two stars that formed at different places at different times but then got 
> close together and somehow went into orbit around each other.  
>
> John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis 
> <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>
> qbj
>
>>
>> Brent
>>
>> On 1/13/2022 3:49 AM, John Clark wrote:
>>
>> For the first time a sort of gravitational wave rocket has been found. By 
>> re-examining the data from the LIGO and Virgo gravitational wave 
>> observatories researchers report on January 6 they have detected the merger 
>> of 34 and 29 solar mass Black Holes that resulted in a Black Hole of about 
>> 62 solar masses with about one solar mass being converted into 
>> gravitational waves. What makes this merger unusual is that it was not 
>> symmetrical, the axis of spin of the 2 black holes were not aligned with 
>> each other and neither was aligned with the axis of orbit around each 
>> other. This would indicate that the 2 stars that form them (assuming these 
>> 2 large Black Holes were actually formed from the corpses of dead stars) we
>> re not born in an isolated system but probably came from a denser 
>> environment like a globular cluster. Even more interesting is that the 
>> misalignment of the spins means that the gravitational waves emitted were 
>> not 
>> emitted symmetrically, and gravitational waves carry some linear momentum. 
>> So the resulting 62 Solar mass Black Hole must've received a pretty 
>> substantial kick causing it to move pretty fast, and that's just what the 
>> researchers found, because of that kick the huge 62 solar mass Black Hole 
>> started moving at least 700 km a second and probably closer to 1500.  It's 
>> probably moving fast enough to escape whatever galaxy it was in. 
>>
>> Evidence of large recoil velocity from a black hole merger signal 
>> <https://arxiv.org/pdf/2201.01302.pdf>
>>
>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/90e5c40b-a4eb-4ef0-a711-da7f9406e91dn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-13 Thread John Clark

On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 1:37 PM Brent Meeker  wrote:

* > Kudos to whomever did the calculation for this.  But I would have
> thought that most collisions would be misaligned in both spin axes and
> impact plane.  The Sun's spin axis isn't aligned with the Milky Way's axis
> of rotation, so I had assumed most stars have randomly directed spin axes.*
>

Stars do have random axis of rotations in general but not if you're talking
about double stars, and the sun is rather unusual in being only a single
star, most stars are double stars, and they were created at the same time
from the same rotating cloud of gas and dust and thus have similar axis of
rotation, so when the resulting stars turned into Black Holes they would
also have similar axes. And indeed most of the Black Hole mergers so far
detected by gravitational waves have been of that sort, but not this one,
that's what makes it so unusual. This system must've been formed by two
stars that formed at different places at different times but then got close
together and somehow went into orbit around each other.

John K ClarkSee what's on my new list at  Extropolis
<https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>
qbj

>
> Brent
>
> On 1/13/2022 3:49 AM, John Clark wrote:
>
> For the first time a sort of gravitational wave rocket has been found. By
> re-examining the data from the LIGO and Virgo gravitational wave
> observatories researchers report on January 6 they have detected the merger
> of 34 and 29 solar mass Black Holes that resulted in a Black Hole of about
> 62 solar masses with about one solar mass being converted into
> gravitational waves. What makes this merger unusual is that it was not
> symmetrical, the axis of spin of the 2 black holes were not aligned with
> each other and neither was aligned with the axis of orbit around each
> other. This would indicate that the 2 stars that form them (assuming these
> 2 large Black Holes were actually formed from the corpses of dead stars) we
> re not born in an isolated system but probably came from a denser
> environment like a globular cluster. Even more interesting is that the
> misalignment of the spins means that the gravitational waves emitted were not
> emitted symmetrically, and gravitational waves carry some linear momentum.
> So the resulting 62 Solar mass Black Hole must've received a pretty
> substantial kick causing it to move pretty fast, and that's just what the
> researchers found, because of that kick the huge 62 solar mass Black Hole
> started moving at least 700 km a second and probably closer to 1500.  It's
> probably moving fast enough to escape whatever galaxy it was in.
>
> Evidence of large recoil velocity from a black hole merger signal
> <https://arxiv.org/pdf/2201.01302.pdf>
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv0ee5C6_rA_re6Ov26mjtpWxbmkuCGW58msvAS-pqtSgg%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-13 Thread Brent Meeker

Kudos to whomever did the calculation for this.  But I would have 
thought that most collisions would be misaligned in both spin axes and 
impact plane.  The Sun's spin axis isn't aligned with the Milky Way's 
axis of rotation, so I had assumed most stars have randomly directed 
spin axes.


Brent

On 1/13/2022 3:49 AM, John Clark wrote:
For the first time a sort of gravitational wave rocket has been found. 
By re-examining the data from the LIGO and Virgo gravitational wave 
observatories researchers report on January 6 they have detected the 
merger of 34 and 29 solar mass Black Holes that resulted in a Black 
Hole of about 62 solar masses with about one solar mass being 
converted into gravitational waves. What makes this merger unusual is 
that it was not symmetrical, the axis of spin of the 2 black holes 
were not aligned with each other and neither was aligned with the axis 
of orbit around each other. This would indicate that the 2 stars that 
form them (assuming these 2 large Black Holes were actually formed 
from the corpses of dead stars) were not born in an isolated system 
but probably came from a denser environment like a globular cluster. 
Even more interesting is that the misalignment of the spins means that 
the gravitational waves emitted were not emitted symmetrically, and 
gravitational waves carry some linear momentum. So the resulting 62 
Solar mass Black Hole must've received a pretty substantial kick 
causing it to move pretty fast, and that's just what the researchers 
found, because of that kick the huge 62 solar mass Black Hole started 
moving at least 700 km a second and probably closer to 1500.  It's 
probably moving fast enough to escape whatever galaxy it was in.


Evidence of large recoil velocity from a black hole merger signal 
<https://arxiv.org/pdf/2201.01302.pdf>


John K Clark

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3Rz%3DP6mL10_ufbneTYJD99oa2H3q_WVT0-5A%3DB%3DdA4cw%40mail.gmail.com 
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3Rz%3DP6mL10_ufbneTYJD99oa2H3q_WVT0-5A%3DB%3DdA4cw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email_source=footer>.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/b0ef544c-491d-fef6-d015-a661381bc31d%40gmail.com.

A gravitational wave rocket

2022-01-13 Thread John Clark

For the first time a sort of gravitational wave rocket has been found. By
re-examining the data from the LIGO and Virgo gravitational wave
observatories researchers report on January 6 they have detected the merger
of 34 and 29 solar mass Black Holes that resulted in a Black Hole of about
62 solar masses with about one solar mass being converted into
gravitational waves. What makes this merger unusual is that it was not
symmetrical, the axis of spin of the 2 black holes were not aligned with
each other and neither was aligned with the axis of orbit around each
other. This would indicate that the 2 stars that form them (assuming these
2 large Black Holes were actually formed from the corpses of dead stars) we
re not born in an isolated system but probably came from a denser
environment like a globular cluster. Even more interesting is that the
misalignment of the spins means that the gravitational waves emitted were not
emitted symmetrically, and gravitational waves carry some linear momentum.
So the resulting 62 Solar mass Black Hole must've received a pretty
substantial kick causing it to move pretty fast, and that's just what the
researchers found, because of that kick the huge 62 solar mass Black Hole
started moving at least 700 km a second and probably closer to 1500. It's
probably moving fast enough to escape whatever galaxy it was in.

Evidence of large recoil velocity from a black hole merger signal
<https://arxiv.org/pdf/2201.01302.pdf>

John K Clark

47 matches

Mail list logo