@roncords Nah, people will never buy that. I know, lets get a little girl to narrate the trailer, people wouldn't say no to a little girl, would they?
we need to make it to the Gliese 581 System which is 20 light years away from Earth and 200 Trillion miles that's what we need to do, fuck Mars, it'll be cool to land there and all but were not ending space exploration there!
If we can somehow mass produce anti-matter, we could have probably the most efficient engines ever. If you combine an apple of normal matter with an apple of anti matter you get an explosion bigger than the biggest bomb ever detonated lol. The entire mass off both converts to energy.
@Humanoidity Um, Gday, again... Sorry for failing to include your acc.address with my previous post. Am new at this stuff... Fact is, it took yt search engine 36 hrs to swallow it's disbelief & connect the links... For a giggle, search 'solar thermal ramjet'... It's all true, too. Thanks for that NASA insignia at the close of your clip, YUM. That's BRILLIANT !
Last time NASA took backseat to a Hillbilly, Chuck Yeager was flying Rocketplanes at Muroc DryLake (EdwardsAFB)
Greetings , um , I hate to upset anybody , but there's a Ventilated Faceted Aerofoil using Ramscoops feeding compressed-air to it's Boundary-Layer Airflow-Control-Vents , flying as a Wing in Ground-Effect over my Car Roof. In the Sun it's a Solar Thermal Ramjet , and that's just the FAIRNG of the Photovoltaic Panel I was trying to streamline. Search Sunfoil & check the clips. The "Short-Talk (May 2011 Update) includes Australian CSIRO evaluation. Enjoy !
nuclear has too many risks at this stage I mean gosh humans cant even go 30 years without another nuclear emergency.
having said that I'm not educated in the field so my opinion doesn't hold much weight so don't even think about trolling me.
I love the virgin 1 and 2 spaceship and how it only uses rocket boosters in the upper atmosphere that seems like a good starting point in conserving fuel.
why cant we just solar power them we just need better solar tech me thinks.
@komaki119 "Nuclear has too many risks at this stage I mean gosh humans cant even go 30 years without another nuclear emergency."
Well, that's like saying that "Oil has too many risks at this stage I mean gosh humans cant even go 5 years without another fossil fuel related emergency."
And "emergency" is completely a perspective issue. What's an emergency? Just scaring people because they don't know anything about nuclear so they believe fear mongering media and anti-nuclear activists?
nuclear is different its a dark and sinister fuel, you can get all kinds of cancers from radiation not to mention the explosive capability if it was reacted in space away from most of humanity id be cool with it.
fossil fuel related accidents from car crashes to explosions effect the immediate area and generally hurt the people affected you can usually count the amount of affected people. nuclear radiation can cause cancer years after exposure so no one ever knows the final death toll.
@CATSHITONEMM a bad enough single nuclear accident could kill more people and decimate the land around it causing massive heath, social and economic problems than produced by fossil fuel related accidents in between incidences hate fossil fuels more than anything else i don't drive a car i cycle i use minimum amounts of fuels to run my house and i pride myself on being eco friendly, i know from experience we can do without both nuclear and fossil. solar, wind and electrolysis are the way to go
@Paramorerocks19 Do a little research before posting please. There are better alternatives and cheaper ones too. So we can hopefully eliminate the budget and make space travel a regular thing. If you did research you would know that we could get to Mars in 39 days or less. Its called the VASIMR. I believe it is a magnetoplasma rocket. So there. Still complicated but don't post degrading comments on a video with your "views".
True, but it's much more complicated than that little girl....there's the budget to begin with, then of course the problem with landing them in such terrains(though I think the moon should be "easier"), then the problems with sun and it's radiation. Plus sending humans to Mars would be about a six year journey, two years to get there, two years to stay, and two years to get back. I could blabber on, but it'd be more complicated
A Nuclear Fusion engine would be the best bet to improve speeds in space. The Bussard Ramjet concept shows that Nuclear Fusion powered engines could achive 33% of C.
@NANOFORGE what does 33% of C mean? is that part of an equation? i didn't think fission tech was being practised yet I thought it was only a theory atm.
@komaki119 C is the speed of light. Nuclear Fission is what we use currently, Nuclear Fusion is no theory, Stars like our sun use natural occuring nuclear fusion to power them and it has been achieved for a few seconds here on Earth.
@komaki119 Fission is when the nucleus of an atom splits into lighter nuclei which. Fusion is when a pair of nucleus fuse together to form a heavier nuclei. Both of these however sproduce gamma radiation which is very harmful to any life form. In the core of the sun or any star for that matter are the only places in the universe where fusion natural occurs because it is dense enough. In stars Hydrogen nuclei are fused into lighter Helium, and the lost mass is released into space.
@007shakers There are no such thing as illegal immigrants, no one is the owner of planet Earth, and neither the Universe. How would you feel if you came to a new discovered planet with life and they deported you back to your own planet, rejected to visit any planet in the Universe, you would feel very bad. Humans are selfish and a greedy race. We should focus more on peace world wide instead of chosing who may come in and who may go.
offfffffffffffffffff course why didnt nasa think of that or rocket scientists. wat a great idea. show it to nasa and u could win a noble prize. *COUGH* ur retarded. since ur probably reading a script then the writer is stupid.
Hmmm... what about space folding / contraction of the "space fabric"
Also safe? I don't know... how old is she?
I do agree that energy out put to mas, nuclear power is definitely the way to go... but how about radiation shielding and it's not the "power of th thrust" that matters it's how long you can keep it also...
The Apollo moon missions were faked in a studio. To see a partial summary of hoax evidence, google "The Naked Scientists". In the "New Theories" section of the forum there's a thread entitled "Did We Land on the Moon?". The summary is on page 15 of the thread. It's the 7th post from the top.
The Apollo moon missions were faked in a studio. To see a partial summary of hoax evidence, google "The Naked Scientists". In the "New Theories" section of the forum there's a thread entitled "Did We Land on the Moon?". The summary is on page 15 of the thread. It's the 7th post from the top.
in this video Nasa is telling that nuclear powered rocket is much faster, ok, then why did it shutdown Prometheus project that in fact was the only nuclear programme of Nasa?.
lol people getting so offended that a child said this, all of you are so immature at how offended you get. Although, yes nuclear is not the way to go...its too expensive imo, Perhaps a engine that sucks in the power from the gases of stars would be better.
We use it all the time in submarines and aircraft carriers.
The engine you refer to is a Buzzard Ramscoop. Doesn't do much good if you're just in the solar system. Also, it's more useful as a brake, due to it's effects.
@Aeshmauniversus You know if your gonna cuss people out you should probably make sure they dont have to use a dictionary to figure out what you said. It kinda kills the whole point.
I know how we can travel to distant parts of the universe! we can build a wormhole device and use a rocket equipped with VASMIR engines. we could travel through the wormhole at several thousand times the speed of light. before you know, we could be on the other side of the universe!
Wow a kid telling us nuclear power is the way to go. I would like to see a nuclear powered rocket even a retrofitted Apollo rocket as proof of concept and slowly worked for speed and reliability. A new launch pad outside Vegas in the Nevada desert. And we'll be A1 closer than we think.
yay! lets make rockets that "can't" explode (rockets never explode) carrying a nuclear reactor! :D
it's safe, and would not create a new chernobyl or fukushima in an altitude of 50 miles!
wow great idea!!
dejavue, as if I have heared of nuclear missiles before... i think it was something about the cold war...
no but seriously... with that technology we will sooner or later kill us all.
don't place a nuclear reactors on rockets! that's stupid!!!
roncords 4 months ago
@roncords This is also my main concern about the subject. In fact, the video was uploaded before the Fukushima disaster.
EuroUser1 3 months ago 2
@roncords Nah, people will never buy that. I know, lets get a little girl to narrate the trailer, people wouldn't say no to a little girl, would they?
SepradistPhantom 3 months ago
build a mass effect relay
glasax7 4 months ago
@glasax7 If only... Hello Asari. :D
deathrooster14 1 month ago
we need to make it to the Gliese 581 System which is 20 light years away from Earth and 200 Trillion miles that's what we need to do, fuck Mars, it'll be cool to land there and all but were not ending space exploration there!
theFunnierWill211187 6 months ago
If we can somehow mass produce anti-matter, we could have probably the most efficient engines ever. If you combine an apple of normal matter with an apple of anti matter you get an explosion bigger than the biggest bomb ever detonated lol. The entire mass off both converts to energy.
DBDMotorsports 6 months ago
thats why nasa is experimenting with Plasma Rockets (Vasmir is the name of the project. They are somewhat safer and needs less fuel.
deadlus16 7 months ago
@Humanoidity Um, Gday, again... Sorry for failing to include your acc.address with my previous post. Am new at this stuff... Fact is, it took yt search engine 36 hrs to swallow it's disbelief & connect the links... For a giggle, search 'solar thermal ramjet'... It's all true, too. Thanks for that NASA insignia at the close of your clip, YUM. That's BRILLIANT !
Last time NASA took backseat to a Hillbilly, Chuck Yeager was flying Rocketplanes at Muroc DryLake (EdwardsAFB)
WarblesOnALot 8 months ago
Eat some beans, get out the atmo, FART and go
NoveMosse 8 months ago
Greetings , um , I hate to upset anybody , but there's a Ventilated Faceted Aerofoil using Ramscoops feeding compressed-air to it's Boundary-Layer Airflow-Control-Vents , flying as a Wing in Ground-Effect over my Car Roof. In the Sun it's a Solar Thermal Ramjet , and that's just the FAIRNG of the Photovoltaic Panel I was trying to streamline. Search Sunfoil & check the clips. The "Short-Talk (May 2011 Update) includes Australian CSIRO evaluation. Enjoy !
WarblesOnALot 9 months ago
nuclear has too many risks at this stage I mean gosh humans cant even go 30 years without another nuclear emergency.
having said that I'm not educated in the field so my opinion doesn't hold much weight so don't even think about trolling me.
I love the virgin 1 and 2 spaceship and how it only uses rocket boosters in the upper atmosphere that seems like a good starting point in conserving fuel.
why cant we just solar power them we just need better solar tech me thinks.
komaki119 9 months ago
@komaki119 "Nuclear has too many risks at this stage I mean gosh humans cant even go 30 years without another nuclear emergency."
Well, that's like saying that "Oil has too many risks at this stage I mean gosh humans cant even go 5 years without another fossil fuel related emergency."
And "emergency" is completely a perspective issue. What's an emergency? Just scaring people because they don't know anything about nuclear so they believe fear mongering media and anti-nuclear activists?
CATSHITONEMM 8 months ago
nuclear is different its a dark and sinister fuel, you can get all kinds of cancers from radiation not to mention the explosive capability if it was reacted in space away from most of humanity id be cool with it.
fossil fuel related accidents from car crashes to explosions effect the immediate area and generally hurt the people affected you can usually count the amount of affected people. nuclear radiation can cause cancer years after exposure so no one ever knows the final death toll.
komaki119 8 months ago
@CATSHITONEMM a bad enough single nuclear accident could kill more people and decimate the land around it causing massive heath, social and economic problems than produced by fossil fuel related accidents in between incidences hate fossil fuels more than anything else i don't drive a car i cycle i use minimum amounts of fuels to run my house and i pride myself on being eco friendly, i know from experience we can do without both nuclear and fossil. solar, wind and electrolysis are the way to go
komaki119 8 months ago
@Paramorerocks19 Do a little research before posting please. There are better alternatives and cheaper ones too. So we can hopefully eliminate the budget and make space travel a regular thing. If you did research you would know that we could get to Mars in 39 days or less. Its called the VASIMR. I believe it is a magnetoplasma rocket. So there. Still complicated but don't post degrading comments on a video with your "views".
tuxmascot 10 months ago
True, but it's much more complicated than that little girl....there's the budget to begin with, then of course the problem with landing them in such terrains(though I think the moon should be "easier"), then the problems with sun and it's radiation. Plus sending humans to Mars would be about a six year journey, two years to get there, two years to stay, and two years to get back. I could blabber on, but it'd be more complicated
Paramorerocks19 11 months ago
A Nuclear Fusion engine would be the best bet to improve speeds in space. The Bussard Ramjet concept shows that Nuclear Fusion powered engines could achive 33% of C.
NANOFORGE 1 year ago
@NANOFORGE what does 33% of C mean? is that part of an equation? i didn't think fission tech was being practised yet I thought it was only a theory atm.
komaki119 9 months ago
@komaki119 C is the speed of light. Nuclear Fission is what we use currently, Nuclear Fusion is no theory, Stars like our sun use natural occuring nuclear fusion to power them and it has been achieved for a few seconds here on Earth.
NANOFORGE 9 months ago
@NANOFORGE so the difference between fission and fusion is fusion is the same as it happens in the sun?
thanks for the reply.
komaki119 9 months ago
@komaki119 Fission is when the nucleus of an atom splits into lighter nuclei which. Fusion is when a pair of nucleus fuse together to form a heavier nuclei. Both of these however sproduce gamma radiation which is very harmful to any life form. In the core of the sun or any star for that matter are the only places in the universe where fusion natural occurs because it is dense enough. In stars Hydrogen nuclei are fused into lighter Helium, and the lost mass is released into space.
NANOFORGE 9 months ago
Comment removed
deltaD07 1 year ago
travel with me robotruss
Humaneering 1 year ago
Orbital Rail Gun
Noogymonster 1 year ago 5
iligal imergrants found a new way to get out of the country
007shakers 1 year ago 6
@007shakers There are no such thing as illegal immigrants, no one is the owner of planet Earth, and neither the Universe. How would you feel if you came to a new discovered planet with life and they deported you back to your own planet, rejected to visit any planet in the Universe, you would feel very bad. Humans are selfish and a greedy race. We should focus more on peace world wide instead of chosing who may come in and who may go.
HourGlass2012 1 year ago
safe lol dint the russians shutdown their nuke propulsion program in the 60s cuz of the potential fallout
its bak up but y?
like Tedericoe sed plasma thrust the best way ive heard bout so far
k35magnum 1 year ago
Its called VASIMAR, That could send us to Mars in 39 days or faster.
Tedericoe 1 year ago
watch?v=QNsP1PJLorw
MCCULLAH1 1 year ago
its only natural to use the most efficient sources of energy, especially for space travel
ergo nuclear (which may include fusion) and solar
Ishidasouken 1 year ago
offfffffffffffffffff course why didnt nasa think of that or rocket scientists. wat a great idea. show it to nasa and u could win a noble prize. *COUGH* ur retarded. since ur probably reading a script then the writer is stupid.
ShowmenTv 1 year ago
Nuclear powered space crafts? Impossible while the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty is active
brizihe 1 year ago
Well we can try Ion drives or Thermo Nuclear rockets. Either those or ask Paramount if we can borrow the USS Enterprise XD.
NANOFORGE 1 year ago
Hmmm... what about space folding / contraction of the "space fabric"
Also safe? I don't know... how old is she?
I do agree that energy out put to mas, nuclear power is definitely the way to go... but how about radiation shielding and it's not the "power of th thrust" that matters it's how long you can keep it also...
GreenAce92 1 year ago
@GreenAce92 safe? i dont think so XD
ZELDAFAN152 1 year ago
@ZELDAFAN152 yes it is safe.
Domibond007 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is a little off-topic but-
The Apollo moon missions were faked in a studio. To see a partial summary of hoax evidence, google "The Naked Scientists". In the "New Theories" section of the forum there's a thread entitled "Did We Land on the Moon?". The summary is on page 15 of the thread. It's the 7th post from the top.
Also, do a YouTube search on "MarsFaker".
Cosmored 1 year ago
@Cosmored MM nah dont think so buddy
Mikester750 1 year ago
@Cosmored god will you shut the fuck up? if i ruled this world you and the rest of the idiots on the planet would be exterminated
Toro953 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is a little off-topic but-
The Apollo moon missions were faked in a studio. To see a partial summary of hoax evidence, google "The Naked Scientists". In the "New Theories" section of the forum there's a thread entitled "Did We Land on the Moon?". The summary is on page 15 of the thread. It's the 7th post from the top.
Also, do a YouTube search on "MarsFaker".
Cosmored 1 year ago
Vasimr + Nuclear power = to Mars in 39 days
in this video Nasa is telling that nuclear powered rocket is much faster, ok, then why did it shutdown Prometheus project that in fact was the only nuclear programme of Nasa?.
viridisrock 2 years ago
thats slow theres a way faster plan
FIGHTFANNERD3 2 years ago
Guys, the younger doesn't mean the stupider, she's 12, and when I was 10 I could understand the big bang theory as much as most scientists.
Salien1999 2 years ago
perhaps a ship that is fueled by youtube bullshit that could go for ever and ever
CONCUSSION187 2 years ago
@CONCUSSION187 haha that would work. and it would never run out of fuel!!!
SpartanW98 2 years ago
shut up
FIGHTFANNERD3 2 years ago
@FIGHTFANNERD3 are u a lost member of zz top or just a wanna be member? tell me to shut up fahk you
CONCUSSION187 1 year ago
lol people getting so offended that a child said this, all of you are so immature at how offended you get. Although, yes nuclear is not the way to go...its too expensive imo, Perhaps a engine that sucks in the power from the gases of stars would be better.
Singerazboi100 2 years ago
Why is nuclear not the way to go?
We use it all the time in submarines and aircraft carriers.
The engine you refer to is a Buzzard Ramscoop. Doesn't do much good if you're just in the solar system. Also, it's more useful as a brake, due to it's effects.
thirdclass2006 2 years ago
like a hydrogen scoop or something that picks up matter and other stuff from space.
Antimatter050 2 years ago
@Antimatter050 they were ent talking about enything simmiler to a bussard ramscoop
bringerofshadow1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Antimatter050 they were ent talking about enything simmiler to a bussard ramscoop
bringerofshadow1 1 year ago
vaffanculo americani!
Aeshmauniversus 2 years ago
@Aeshmauniversus You know if your gonna cuss people out you should probably make sure they dont have to use a dictionary to figure out what you said. It kinda kills the whole point.
Hint it just makes you look retarded.
valcan321 2 years ago
@valcan321 yes m retarded and you like bananas up in your backpipe.
Aeshmauniversus 2 years ago
this girls an idiot
theblackcomp111 2 years ago
wtf
FIGHTFANNERD3 2 years ago
I know how we can travel to distant parts of the universe! we can build a wormhole device and use a rocket equipped with VASMIR engines. we could travel through the wormhole at several thousand times the speed of light. before you know, we could be on the other side of the universe!
jigglygoober 2 years ago
They would have to launch from space itself, and in stages
CMob09 2 years ago
lots of nice techs... to move AFTER you are in space.
you still need chemical rockets to get into low orbit! And thats the most expensive part.
thus, we need to develop once and for all stuff like Space Elevators or similar (Space Needle, Magnetic Rail Launchers, etc)
rogerpenna 2 years ago
Wow a kid telling us nuclear power is the way to go. I would like to see a nuclear powered rocket even a retrofitted Apollo rocket as proof of concept and slowly worked for speed and reliability. A new launch pad outside Vegas in the Nevada desert. And we'll be A1 closer than we think.
TTTopGun 2 years ago