Life cannot exist as we know it forever

Eventually light will be slower than the expansion of the universe , so there won't be any perception of things as for us light = information

Everything else is a guess from me 👍

[removed]

Pretty much everything we know at this point says that no, the universe as we know it is not going to exist forever. Life as we know it needs a place to be and something to be made out of in order to exist.

The good news is that unless something really dramatic happens, it probably won't be for a while.

People still don't know about Ad Blockers?

I know what I'm about to out on and watch

Would you like to know more?

Gotta realise a reference is to obscure when you come back to point that out and can't remember where it's from yourself.

>And it is not beyond the realm of possibility that they say, 'Keep out, we're here, this is our territory.'"

The small-mindedness of this.... going to the moon or mars not to advance the entire species but to say "Look, we're the best and smartest humans on earth because we somehow made it here" when you really just build upon the work of generations that came before.

And we always have to "beat each other there" because... well... we don't really know except so we can bang out chest and tell everybody how great we are. No real point in it but that never prevented us from doing it, right?

The distance to Mars changes depending on the respective orbits, at the closest point it's about half that.

After the 30 second Discover ad continued to repeat I seriously wish that the next near approach actually hits us and disintegrates the entire planet.

If they launch US astronauts to the ISS it would be a NASA mission though.

As a private company they just provide the product that allows this mission to be done.

Got my name from the scads of Al- names

That is the most massive exaggeration of the "space rock" I've seen so far. By next week, it'll be as big as Jupiter.

various factors affect this such as vehicle size and many more

maybe my calculation is wrong.

2 years and 22 days? But the original quote said it takes 6 months to get to Mars at the moment?

From what I have read the rubble asteroids are the hardest to do something about. We can redirect a lump of iron provided we have enough warning, but rubble asteroids are much trickier since you cant just push them out of the way. The only two options are gravity tractor or demolition. Neither option is easy and both require lots more advanced warning compared to a similar mass solid asteroid.

Bunker busters wouldnt be particularly useful since the warhead wouldnt survive the impact at the speeds necessary to get sufficient penetration on a rubble asteroid big enough to need redirection. The drone idea is harder, but if you can get several deep enough with big enough bombs the blast should at least nudge the thing off course.

[removed]

Yes, the t-ring is just the extension of the DSLR camera that goes inside the telescope, so.. you use the telescope focuser to get the better result in the image you are seeing through the DSLR screen. That's how i do it.

uhh looks like i have to do some research and math here soo..

The rocket engine, according to the plan, worked for 3.2 s, accelerating the rocket to a speed of about 90 m/s, which allowed the rocket to reach an altitude of 450 m.

The detonation shockwave travels significantly faster than the deflagration wave leveraged by today's jet engines, Trimble explained: up to 2,000 meters per second (4,475 miles per hour) compared to 10 meters per second from deflagration.

i am gonna use the second one (but i don't know if it is talking about the vehicle or the wave.)

distance from mars (130,000,000 km)

speed of detonating engine = 2km/s

so, 130000000/2= 65000000 seconds = 752.31481481 days or 2 years and 22 days.

not sure don't quote me on this.

edit: YES I knew it i was right that i was wrong!

this is an engine showcasing newer material manufacturing tecnics such as additive manufacturing, these tecnics allow more resilience and temperatures needed for this type of engine

in theory ths will allow a type of engine that is simpler and more efficient but it has its own challenges, for instance solving instabilities

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

How does it focus? Does it just focus using the telescope focuser?

Is there a similar estimate as to the difference RDRE would make? Or is it more the case of RDRE being more efficient in fuel terms, allowing for longer flights, rather than making them faster per se?

Using a t-ring 💪

Nuclear powered

>This isn’t the only way that NASA is looking at revolutionizing deep space travel. The space agency is reportedly looking into nuclear-powered spacecraft, which would allow spacecraft to travel further distances without needing liquid fuel. It would also make the journey to Mars significantly shorter, from six months to just 45 days.

>It would also make the journey to Mars significantly shorter, from six months to just 45 days.

Is this with RDRE or the proposed nuclear-powered system?

> Try to identify humor as much as you can

It’s tricky and subjective.