Brusion
Brusion t1_jcijk8t wrote
Reply to “The Face of Judgment” by me. by Molech999
That's a funny looking Capt Solo frozen in carbonite.
Brusion t1_jc8im5q wrote
Reply to comment by afraid_of_zombies in NASA wants new 'deorbit tug' to bring space station down in 2030 by DevilsRefugee
By 2030, I think Starship is going to change the game anyways. Two starships docked together as a station is doable for sure.
Brusion t1_ja97bc0 wrote
Reply to comment by Pigs_in_the_Porridge in Who pays for space debris removal? by DevilsRefugee
If you're talking about Starlink, those are self clearing orbits. Anything without propulsion clears in VLEO/LEO from 3 months to 3 years. Hence why those satellites have ion thrusters. The issue is higher orbits, where they are not self clearing.
Brusion t1_j9x2x8h wrote
Reply to TIL That Toronto, the largest city in Canada, is not only south of London, Paris, and Berlin, but also south of Milan, Italy. by scorr204
That southernmost point in Ontario Canada, is further south that the northern border of California.
Brusion t1_j24x39o wrote
Reply to comment by Warpedme in ELI5 why do electric vehicles have one big battery that's hard to replace once it's expired, rather than lots of smaller ones that could be swapped out based on need (to trade off range/power/weight)? by ginonofalg
Yep, I did. And perhaps you missed the first post of this thread. If a vehicle is totaled, then the battery lasted the lifetime of the vehicle. I understand all the simplistic points you made, but the batteries do no go through there usable life cycle in the lifetime of the vehicle. Not a single person I know has had to replace a battery in their vehicle, no have we. You addressed nothing, and are simply going off on a tangent to start an argument.
Brusion t1_j24s0uu wrote
Reply to comment by Warpedme in ELI5 why do electric vehicles have one big battery that's hard to replace once it's expired, rather than lots of smaller ones that could be swapped out based on need (to trade off range/power/weight)? by ginonofalg
Again, you're still wrong. Yes, they get repurposed after vehicle life ends, but that has nothing to do with this discussion. Batteries are not dying before vehicles rust out and head to the dump. You can downvote all you want, but it doesn't make you right
Brusion t1_j23vkgs wrote
Reply to comment by Warpedme in ELI5 why do electric vehicles have one big battery that's hard to replace once it's expired, rather than lots of smaller ones that could be swapped out based on need (to trade off range/power/weight)? by ginonofalg
I have 300,000 km and no degradation. Even if you have a car that has some degradation, the battery still works. You have been brainwashed. Batteries generally outlast the vehicle. You're wrong.
Also, the fact that they can use batteries after the vehicle is dead is true. This has nothing to do with the fact that the batteries outlast the vehicle.
Brusion t1_j23lfbh wrote
Reply to ELI5 why do electric vehicles have one big battery that's hard to replace once it's expired, rather than lots of smaller ones that could be swapped out based on need (to trade off range/power/weight)? by ginonofalg
A lot of points here, but also noone seems to be mentioning that they don't generally "expire". Most of the time the battery should, and is, out lasting the life of the vehicle.
Brusion t1_iw130to wrote
Reply to comment by havenyahon in The CEO of OpenAI had dropped hints that GPT-4, due in a few months, is such an upgrade from GPT-3 that it may seem to have passed The Turing Test by lughnasadh
Fair enough. It is often misused.
Brusion t1_iw090gu wrote
Reply to The CEO of OpenAI had dropped hints that GPT-4, due in a few months, is such an upgrade from GPT-3 that it may seem to have passed The Turing Test by lughnasadh
The Turing test is the dumbest test ever conceived.
Brusion t1_ivckd26 wrote
Literally one of the worst places to possibly have life, that you can see with your telescope.
Brusion t1_iqy42h0 wrote
Reply to comment by thxpk in After DART: Using the first full-scale test of a kinetic impactor to inform a future planetary defense mission by EricFromOuterSpace
I never said it wouldn't be effective. I am saying there is no shockwave from a nuke in space. That it doesn't behave like people might think.
I literally said in my post the ways it would affect an asteroid's motion.
Brusion t1_iqx2q6z wrote
Reply to comment by D3ATHfromAB0V3x in After DART: Using the first full-scale test of a kinetic impactor to inform a future planetary defense mission by EricFromOuterSpace
A nuke in space would do less than you think. A nuke itself doesn't cause much impulse in a vacuum. It has inconsequential mass by itself, it just releases an immense amount of energy.
On Earth, we see a giant blast wave from a nuke. This is because it heats up matter(the atmosphere and ground around it), and that matter expands very quickly.
In a vacuum, you don't get that. It would heat up one side of the asteroid, which do to outgassing could alter it's course, and there is photon pressure. It's certainly been discussed. But I think at this point, especially with falling costs of mass to orbit, and kinetic impactor is a more viable option.
Brusion t1_jeb9g78 wrote
Reply to Gaia discovers a new family of black holes: astronomers studied the orbits of stars and noticed that some of them wobbled on the sky, as if they were gravitationally influenced by massive objects. No light could be found using telescopes, leaving only one possibility: black holes. by Andromeda321
Primordial?
This discovery will not get the attention it deserves, as most will just think it's another black hole.