You are not logged in.
then there is this.
https://postimages.org/
but off course its a 3rd party and one never knows what they decide to do in the future.
It just dawned on me that SSTO is basically the step after full reusability.
Which starship is reaching.
So its:
1. No reusability, just getting into orbit and throw away the rocket.
2. Dual system, reuse lower part. (Falcon 9)
3. Dual system, reuse both parts. (Starship)
4. Reusable SSTO.
And each of those, has a minimum system.
And by minimum system i mean a rocket that can send, 1kg into orbit.
That rocket gets bigger the further we move along those 4 numbers.
But efficency, takin everything into account,
tends to grow faster with rocket size the higher the number is.
A gigantic reusable SSTO.
There.
And all humanity and everything is in space.
Just becomes an elevator into the new world.
Might as well reset the calendar its such a big event.
I would always think that, the most sensible way to make each system,
would be to first make the minimum system.
Have that blow up left and right and learn learn learn.
And only then, start to increase the height then... increase the width.
And thats an event.
So we basically have a ladder up this stairway.
Stairway to heaven.
It would actually be nice to see the smallest possible version of each of those systems.
Then have some slider,
and able to drag it around and it displays, the expected efficiency of each rocket.
In dollars per kg to LEO.
Or just a graph.
With one line for each type.
Would be a very interesting graph.
And we could plot the falcon 9, starship and some ordinary rockets on it.
Chatgpt to the rescue. Here it is:
https://postimg.cc/DmLXd0s0
https://chatgpt.com/share/68b17fbe-4dc8 … 04ad435527
Ignore the beginning of the lines.
I chose too low of a beginning, 1kg into orbit. Should have been 1ton into orbit.
But i kinda dont get it.
Minimum should be... nothing. just get into orbit.
Im a bit confused with each categories line being lower than the one above, at all launch masses.
Would have thought the ssto would end up the lowest but not at the lower launch masses,
and such for each consecutive category.
Does that mean we should have just gone straight for an SSTO?
Chatgpt was saying the SSTO has razor thin delivery margins.
But shouldn't that be a function of size.
The bigger the craft the better the margins.
Because of the, circumference grows to the second power while mass grows to the third, effect.
"Where can Aluminum replace Copper?". It seems that it can do so in many things.
thats very interesting.
so far, humanity hasn't really been dealing with the copper scarcity because there hasn't been any copper scarcity.
The copper scarcity is about to hit when solar exponential curve really takes off in the next few years.
So the dream of infinite energy is nearer.
thanks i posted on one of his subjects.
"There will be on near future capability to create extreme large but lightweight structures to build things really big."
This always makes me think of 3d printing.
How a 3d printer can make materials in a completely different fashion than how we normally make them.
Each and every dot inside the material can be programmed.
We can control precisely how the material is built.
Meaning we can actually leave holes inside a material,
making it lighter.
We could make aluminium, 90% density.
10% of it is holes.
And we could, have artifical intelligence decide where to place those holes.
To maximize the lightening by leaving as many empty spots as possible,
while at the same time, minimize the decrease in strength.
If thats whats needed at that time.
It could also do wonders for planes.
If we could figure out precisely, how much strenght each part of the plane actually needs.
And only have that.
Just whenever you want to make things lighter.
And save on material.
A friend of mine was telling me about this 20 years ago.
Seems not much has happened in this since then.
A piece of aluminium.
Which is just, 50% actually there.
50% the weight but i would guess it would have more than 50% of the strength.
And precisely where its best to leave the holes, can be a field of its own.
Maybe we could be printing pieces of material this way,
with much better numbers.
And it also allows for,
mixing materials together in whatever way we like.
With god knows what results.
Its never been possible before so its probably never been studied.
Then ultimately if we could print each atom.
On an atomic scale control precisely where each atom should be.
Like, how could we improve those numbers for our materials.
And what consequences could that have for everything we are building.
I downloaded the program and ran it.
You can add
###
from modules.planet import Planet
earth = Planet('Earth');
earth.g_constant = 6.67430e-11
earth.mass = 5.972e24
earth.radius = 6.371e6
earth.sea_level_density = 1.225
# Gravitational constant (N * m^2 / kg^2)
# Default units are kg and meters.
###
right beneath the first 3 import lines.
But u need to make a folder called modules.
and in that folder, place file planet.py and put in that file:
class Planet:
def __init__(self, name):
self.name = name
def set_mass(self,new_mass):
self.mass = new_mass
If u want i could write say, class planet,
and u could tell me what its attributes are:
Radius, mass, density ..
And which member functions it needs to have. Maybe:
get_diameter()
get_surface_area()
..
something like that.
Could be as much about learning as it is about doing the programming.
ur project reminds me of this nasa program they were
working on in the 90s.
it was super cool.
he heated the air above this tiny metal. and that created this upwards
momentum, which propelled the thing upwards.
and he could shoot the laster from elsewhere even.
off course, the thing that killed it, is that it doesnt work outside
the atmosphere.
still cool though, and interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAdj6vpYppA
when an object is in the air,
the molecules are hitting it from all sides.
if the molecules above it, increase in temperature for instance.
two things will start to happen.
the molecules will be traveling faster, thus, hitting the object faster.
which is bad for they will tend to be on the way downwards.. pushing it down.
but also, the density of the air/molecules. should decrease.
meaning fewer molecules start hitting it downwards.
which is good.
i have no idea nor ability to evaluate the magnitude of each effect.
if we could magically just, decrease the density above an object.
shouldnt that lead to an upwards force on it.
i would think so.
because i would think the decrease in density effect would overshadow
the increase in speed effect.
i would think if a tunnel of vacuum, would, magically form over an object.
it would just, shoot right up.
cant we somehow use those lasers,
to change that density somehow.
to lead to motion.
in any direction.
speaking about lasers,
they seem to have been advancing in leaps and bounds lately.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBVlL0FNbSE
and apparently we can also create motion with sound.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uENITui5_jU
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-34647921
its like a riddle.
a riddle i think i will never solve.
but maybe somebody somewhere, will.
Nah i used to be for functional programming.
But slowly started to see how object programming really makes sense.
Especially in big systems.
It just needs to be introduced to people correctly.
I dont know what it means to start a class in python. Like, what that actually entails.
Hasn´t the class already started, we are already talking and learning.
Looks like some functions should be smaller.
And also, some lines could be put into a function.
Have u guys looked into object oriented programming.
For those are very object-y things we are dealing with.
We make class projectile,
then an instance of that class and then thats a projectile.
Something like that.
When we are having as many arguments as simulate_air_harvesting_launch has.
Makes me wonder.
We already think in objects.
And everything about a projectile for instance, should just be locked to that specific projectile.
Then we can just send that instance as an argument to the function.
One arg which can contain any number of member variables.
I think for instance, we should have class planet in that code.
And then make an instance of it, earth.
Then
M_EARTH = 5.972e24 # Mass of Earth (kg)
could become
earth.mass = 5.972e24
We could make it with something like this.
# Here we decide, what we do when we create new planets. Its called a constructor.
# In the constructor, self is a reference to the object being created each time.
class planet():
# Here we make a member function.
# Thats a function all the instances of a planet, have access to.
# When this function is being called, self always means, whatever object is calling each time.
def add_mass(self,new_mass):
self.mass=new_mass;
#Lets make two planets.
earth = planet();
mars = planet();
#Lets give them both some mass.
earth.set_mass(300);
mars.set_mass(500);
And now..
M_EARTH = 5.972e24 # Mass of Earth (kg)
could become something like:
earth.set_mass(5.972e24)
And after that we can just talk about earth.mass.
The bigger the code the bigger the benefit of thinking like this.
We could have hundreds of variables and functions belonging to class planet.
We already think about planets this way in the real world.
And most objects for that matter.
We are not just reusing code we are also reusing our own thinking process.
And if we make another system in the future we can just reuse class planet.
Class planet is not really this computer program as such.
Its just a concept.
I see it now but the first starship should have been the smallest starship possible which would still deliver, something, into orbit.
Should have just made a tiny starship and booster.
Which can deliver 100kg to leo.
And play around and have those tiny boosters and starships explode all over the place.
Then once they have mastered the art of going to space, in this fully reusable fashion.
only then start to make them larger.
Its like humans, we play and make all kinds of mistakes when we are children.
Hopefully.
So that by the time we grow up and mistakes start to cost more, we will already have learned.
Nah that was just lack of time.
If i had the time i would have put like, massive destruction in there.
Yes the modern computer world.
Its a clusterfuck.
And complexity is.. bad.
And we have a lot of complexity.
And this complexity, just, grows.
Its really hard to keep it down.
Keeping the complexity down is one of the most important qualities.
To keep the complexity down, we often need to, work in ways which appear inefficient to capitalists.
Because we need to truly understand what we are doing.
Its important to understand,
how little we understand about the world.
Even though one has studied for years and decades.
The world is still almost entirely just a mystery.
I may have understood some canvas stuff over there.
But what you guys are working on,
im almost not exaggerating when I say its just a black box to me.
Not qualified to evaluate it or anything like that.
Im a little bit in darkness as to how it all works here.
But my guess is it would be worthwhile for this community to have a raspberry pi.
With an nginx setup.
And some canvas.
Then Im not quite sure how it would be best to proceed from there.
Feedback appreciated.
But my thinking is you guys are, often,
displaying some objects in some world.
The way I think it,
is that, we have a world.
And in this world,
there are objects.
This is the problem with assumptions.
They are usually wrong down the road.
Like now, not everything is an object.
But still,
if we assume everything is an object.
And we have a world of objects.
And each object, is of a type.
Could be for instance, rectangle, ball, triangle, car, human...
list goes on.
And then we have a class for each type of object.
And as we, in every frame, go through all of those obejcts that exist in this world.
We want to render each object.
And we make an instance of the class to which that object belongs.
And draw that object accordingly.
Then there is behaviour of those objects.
And its here that, i dont really know how to make those objects behave.
Feedback would be appreciated i think a discussion would be a good thing.
Im not even sure if we should do this at all.
And if we should, then how.
Lots of darkness.
I made a computer game once, never finished it but u can see it here:
https://openage.org/tank_fight/index.html
a tank is an object,
bullet is an object which gets created when u press fire.
and a bullet has behaviour which gets implement in each frame.
So does a tank
and a turret.
always a class and an instance of that.
One like this can host an entire website,
https://thepihut.com/products/raspberry-pi-5
and using nginx.
It can handle a significant amount of traffic.
I once paid someone to host my website,
it was super slow.
Then i replaced it with a rpi3 in my own location.
it was way faster.
plus i could do whatever i wanted,
the one who was hosting was putting all kinds of restrictions on it.
Plus they were charging for it.
The obfuscation technology matters a lot for the speed.
To not be downloading multiple files each time a viewer views the website.
Rather just a single file.
It being kinda large is not that big of a deal.
Its that, every time a file is downloaded, the http protocol requires this handshake.
A handshake for every single file.
And thats time consuming for in a code setup its usually a bunch of files.
So its both slow, and also, a big burden on the server.
Slowing down even more if there are many requests.
Using bash i could cat all the files into a single large file.
Then obfuscate it using this obfuscation library.
So i make whatever code i want.
If i want to publish it, i run function tp.
To Public.
And that, does all the stuff that needs to be done for that code to become public in the correct manner.
Then run a function to rsync this new version of the system onto the rpi which contains the website.
And voila, whatever i was doing is now on the world stage.
Yes I think the canvas is an underrated technology.
It's basically just a... canvas.
The only caveat is that, when we draw on it,
we don't draw on a 2d array or anything like that.
Instead the canvas is just a single large 1d array.
And instead of a single location for a single pixel, we have 4 slots, so to speak.
Those are the red,green,blue and opacity, positions.
And each is 8bits, so, a number between 0 and 255.
But once we have passed that, its just a 2d array, with a pixel in each slot.
And whatever we fill this 2d array with, gets shown on the canvas.
And then we have a loop.
We loop in circles and in every loop, we are generating a single frame,
like in a movie.
We can set it to a specific frequency, but because the cpu has a bunch of things to worry about,
its actually better not to decide for it precisely how the framerate should go.
In order to do that we use a technology called requestanimationframe.
It basically just saying to the cpu "just do your best".
It has a much better performance than if we dictate to it precisely what the framerate should be.
But anyways, then we have this canvas,
we can draw on it.
In a loop.
And we are basically just making a movie.
And we can draw whatever we like.
Like when tahanson was showing me the simulation he was making in python.
Couldn't help but feeling like, what he is making.
Would be better displayed in js on a website.
For he can do those calculations and also, display them,
in a movie.
To the entire world without any... hindering.
Just.. anybody can click a button and theres the result.
Graphically, like a video.
We need a module that decreases the complexity from that obscure large 1d array, towards that 2d array though.
Then maybe another module that can put the requestanimationframe technology under the hood as well.
But then we are basically programming in movies.
Then, if we want to make some real graphics theres this library called 3js.
I really like that library.
Thats a thing you can use if you want to render, like, real graphics on that canvas.
https://threejs.org/
With shades, and, all that super complicated stuff you have to figure out if you wanter render graphics, for real.
I have programmed my own demo for it.
https://openage.org/it/3d/
press esc for directions.
buttons are:
wasdeq
z to enable the mouse.
It runs better in chrome for it has the v8 engine.
The core dream is,
to get the entire universe under the hood.
And speak only in data.
Maybe one day we can walk around in a world like that,
which is.. just, the world.
And we can go to mars and whatnot and its all... the way it is.
We could generate planets in there,
a planet is just a function, a module.
Like that landscape im making.
I keep thinking how i could update that functionality,
to go into a sphere.
Then we have a planet.
Then just make it super duper big.
There.. thats a planet.
And if we have the altitutde in each location of a planet.
We could use that to have that peace of code, make, for instance, Mars.
Or Earth.
There is also a multiplayer option via nodejs and just... a lot more.
"Offtherock, Solar PV is not the cheapest form of energy production. It is one of the most expensive. To deliver a reliable kW of power to the grid using PV, means having a PV powerplant, battery storage for frequency control, extra transmission lines and above all, a gas turbine powerplant that can pick up the load when the sun isn't sufficient. You need all those things together. It is this combination of costs that account for high electricity prices in European countries. A nuclear reactor or coal burning plant doesn't need this extra stuff."
We already discussed this.
https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 10#p233410
"Not sure what this argument is getting at. We don't use much solar PV at the moment because it has not been very useful. It also isn't particularly clean when you add up all the CO2 emissions involved in build a PV powerplant. It compares badly to wind and nuclear power. This is a direct result of its poor underlying energy economics."
https://chatgpt.com/share/68a4dda9-5b24 … e6c9a72a4d
"I don't care where the guy works or where he gets his money from. What matters is whether what he is saying is true or not. Are the facts that he puts forward varifiable?"
I could see in 10 seconds flat that its propaganda.
I don't like wasting my life wading through some propaganda snippet.
And I have already answered this guys claim.
Most of the worlds energy production isnt solar.
Solar is the cheapest form of prodcution, and cleanest and fastest growing.
But its just a few percentages points of the whole.. still.
Therefore, to point out that something isnt powered by solar yet, isn't an argument for anything.
We come from a dirty past.
But a dirty past is not an argument for a dirty future.
Here's the chatgpt take on that love-for-coal link.
https://chatgpt.com/share/68a4cec8-7260 … b66f371b52
The author of that book doesn't have connections to the coal industry, he is the coal industry.
A man with huge interests in coal remaining big.
Who also happens to have attitudes aligning with that.
Shocking.
https://chatgpt.com/c/68a4d159-d0e8-832 … 3f15542b29
In 2025 it takes solar ~1 year to make the energy to make that very solar.
https://chatgpt.com/share/68a47d8f-eb7c … 5acb129f48
The most promising method for carbon removal seems to be getting kelp to grow more in the ocean.
Kelp which then sinks to the ocean floor and just stays there.
There was a company which planned on doing this but they failed somehow.
Don't think the failure has anything to do with the planned method though.
https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/ca … on-removal
Discussing it with chatgpt it seemed like this was a dollars-on-the-penny way of removing carbon.
Thanks i updated the post significantly.
Short overview of how renewables are doing these days:
https://youtu.be/fwSkQa1tNmE?si=cfcHZ4gRqEKxDqDw
I asked chatgpt it said pv production and installation is increasing fast, even excluding china.
###
https://chatgpt.com/share/68a2ff63-20dc … 86a794fdc9
In short: Your skepticism is well-grounded. PV is not a “free lunch”—it’s a highly industrial, globalized, resource-intensive technology whose current low cost rests on conditions that may not last. Betting our energy security and civilization’s stability on it alone is precarious. The real question is whether PV can be part of a diversified, localized mix rather than the single centerpiece.
###
Then theres the ww3 coming up..
Where will the pv be then..
A few things i would like to add.
The key thing is pv is moving forward.
And the more we focus on it, invest in it, the more it moves forward again.
Its gotten a lot more efficient in the past 25 years.
Why shouldnt we expect that development to continue.
Same with batteries and transmission.
This feedback loop, in the short run its always ignored, in all calculations and investment proposals and all.
But in the long run, there is nothing but this feedback loop.
But off course society needs to focus on it for that to happen.
Without investment the pv progress will stop.
Its also a very war tolerant technology.
With its production spread out all over the place its much more difficult to destroy than some plant.
They've been feeling that in Ukraine lately.
I think having solar at home and some device that can use the electricity to extract water from the air.
Could be an immensely beneficial combo one day.
But yes, when we can use the moving part directly its almost like cheating.
There were hundreds of watermills in ancient Rome.
It kinda reminds me of the way i view problems.
The most important variable in a problem, is,
wether its going away
or
if this is some permanent reality.
And problems that are fading away, for whatever reason.
They are massively overrated in the present.
And vice versa.
Guess I think the same way about pv.
Its about the future.
Eventually it will become much better.
But only if we actually make it so.
And yes, Earths copper reserves are limited.
But I also think humanity is about to leave the Earth.
Once they have automated the process of going into space.
It will just be like pressing a button and 15 mins later ur in orbit.
Humanity will not be the same after that.
It has, absolutely insane implications for humanity.
Including copper access.
And it only costs to go up.
It doesn't cost anything to stay in the space world.
And in space pv becomes massively better again for no darkness, clouds or atmosphere plus we can start nudging them towards the sun.
Or do both.
Go for massive pv but also simpler solutions like this and solar thermal and then fission as well.
i have such erratic work schedule, most of the time it will not suit but once in a blue moon it all aligns right and i can show up. i dont get it is it a zoom meeting? and where would i sign up for it or attend it?
Chatgpt says offshore wind uses 7t/MW of copper and onsore about 3t/MW.
So its a direct competitor with solar in that regard.
Do we have any type of consensus for what type of energy system the world should move towards?
I realize the impending copper shortage but solar still looks amazing.
Maybe a world super focused on solar but then sprinkle it with a bit of fission reactors in select hard for pv locations.
Like Scandinavia or such.
I have also never understood, why for instance, France, has so many nuclear plants.
Wouldn't it make sense to make as few and big as possible.
Each nuclear plant marginalizes a huge area around it.
And the area marginalized per MW produced should get less and less as the plant gets bigger.
I would think nuclear plant efficiency would grow pretty fast with size.
Wouldn't it make tons of sense to use the marginalized land around the nuclear plant for something like... solar panels.
In for instance, France at least.
Here's Chatgpt's take on this.
https://chatgpt.com/share/689f2fad-ea6c … 7c50b5bd3d
As for solar, once we get to space, solar immediately becomes many times more productive,
Due to no atmosphere, rain, clouds, darkness or weather of any type.
And quickly we will start looking into ways to nudge the panels closer to the sun.
With the efficiency growing to the second power as we approach it.
Their efficiency will be absolutely insane.
The space society will have no idea what an energy shortage is.
Not the way we know it.
And all the copper is there its just floating there in the asteroid belt.