#21
|
|||
|
|||
How cool is VL2
"Bill Snyder" wrote in message
So when you posted all those messages to a thread that you titled "Our moon is hot, Venus is not," you really meant the L2 point? When you said, "Venus has certainly been a little different and perhaps a whole lot more planetology rare on behalf of having accommodated intelligent other life than Earth," you meant space-based life? When you said, "You folks do realize that a fully manned rigid airship that's cruising efficiently just below those cool nighttime clouds could actually require some auxiliary cabin heat." -- that Zep would be cruising through clouds at the L2 point? Liar, lunatic, and retard. Not exactly Sir "Liar, lunatic, and retard" However, try to remember that VL2 (1.0143e6 km 1.0142e6 km) isn't all that far away from Venus. I'm thinking at least 85% isolation, and a bit more isolation if we're taking that 100+ km elevated deck of thick clouds into account. However once again; If you're situated upon the toasty deck and you have essentially unlimited renewable energy to burn (sort of speak), as such where's all the big insurmountable problems with having more than your fair share of mostly geothermal dry heat to deal with? Is having too much energy a problem for your naysay mindset? - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
How cool is VL2
In sci.physics, Brad Guth
wrote on Mon, 26 Feb 2007 22:23:41 +0000 (UTC) lgate.org: "The Ghost In The Machine" wrote in message Somehow, I seriously doubt the VL2 point would get all that much shade. But lessee. One should see Venus as a dot against the Sun, but that's about it. Looks to me to be about a 0.0001% reduction in insolation -- which is basically nothing. Venus L2 is only worth an isolation of "0.0001%"(??????), and here I thought my math was pretty bad off. Would you like to try that one more time? Misplaced a decimal point in the Venusian radius. I now see total occultation. I've got AutoCad. What have you got to work with? Try to remember that VL2 (1.0143e6 km 1.0142e6 km) isn't all that far away from Venus. I'm thinking at least 85% isolation, and a bit more isolation if we're taking that 100+ km elevated deck of thick clouds into account. - Brad Guth -- #191, Useless C++ Programming Idea #11823822: signal(SIGKILL, catchkill); -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
How cool is VL2
"The Ghost In The Machine" wrote in
message Misplaced a decimal point in the Venusian radius. I now see total occultation. Thanks much for that honest info. I think we're both off by some +/- factor, as I'm not at all that certain that VL2 = 100% occultation unless you're giving something better than 150 km worth of added radius as due to that Venus cloud layer, and otherwise only taking into account for the actual solar surface. VL2 is also a bit of a halo station-keeping orbit, and thereby the outer portions of the flaming solar atmosphere should be giving VL2 at least some degree of direct solar influx. I guess that I'll have to redo my best swag and report back. - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
How cool is VL2
In sci.physics, Brad Guth
wrote on Tue, 27 Feb 2007 18:30:52 +0000 (UTC) lgate.org: "The Ghost In The Machine" wrote in message Misplaced a decimal point in the Venusian radius. I now see total occultation. Thanks much for that honest info. I think we're both off by some +/- factor, as I'm not at all that certain that VL2 = 100% occultation unless you're giving something better than 150 km worth of added radius as due to that Venus cloud layer, and otherwise only taking into account for the actual solar surface. VL2 is also a bit of a halo station-keeping orbit, and thereby the outer portions of the flaming solar atmosphere should be giving VL2 at least some degree of direct solar influx. I guess that I'll have to redo my best swag and report back. - Brad Guth Must I? Oh well...reprising my previous calculation with more precision and a corrected decimal point: If one again assumes r =~ R * cuberoot(M2/(3*M1)) where M1 is presumably 1.998435 * 10^30 kg, M2 4.8685 * 10^24 kg, and R 1.08208926000 * 10^11 m. This gives r = 1.0954 * 10^9 m. At that distance the angular displacement of Venus, which has diameter about 1.2102 * 10^7 m, will be about 1.1988 * 10^-2 radian. The angular displacement of Sol, which has diameter 1.392 * 10^9 m, will be 1.2864 * 10^-2 radian. Therefore, 86.84% -- the square of the ratio of angular displacements. If one includes the 150km cloud cover the percentage only ups to 91.20%. (These are approximate because I'm confusing pie wedges with triangles for simplicity in the calculation.) -- #191, Useless C++ Programming Idea #12398234: void f(char *p) {char *q = strdup(p); strcpy(p,q);} -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
How cool is VL2
"The Ghost In The Machine" wrote in
message Your 86.84% is near enough to the absolute ideal worth of occultation. Unfortunately it'll never remain that good. I'm using a bit larger sun radius of 700,000 km, and of Venus w/clouds at merely 5152 km, and the VL2 of 1,014,290 km Allowing for some give or take from within the halo station-keeping orbit at VL2: Solar isolation or occultation of 85% while at VL2 offers 390 w/m2. ISS average, as based upon orbiting Earth, ISS deals with 780 w/m2. This means that Venus L2 is actually operating cold compared to whatever ISS has to cycle between 1370 (+ Earth's reflected IR) and otherwise by nighttime where it's nearly but not ever zero as it orbits behind mother Earth that's having to radiate all of it's daytime solar influx (plus something extra of whatever our moon and humanity has contributed towards global warming). I had to guess at the ISS figure of 780 w/m2 because, for some reason there's no clear cut science on that sucker, as to what Earth contributes to the ISS thermal energy budget. If anything, I'm guessing way low on that amount if Earth reflects roughly 36%, as obviously all of the solar influx has to leave town, or else Earth explodes. Therefore, a POOF application at VL2 should fly. - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
How cool is VL2
"The Ghost In The Machine" wrote in
message Your 86.84% is near enough to the absolute ideal worth of occultation or solar isolation. Unfortunately, VL2 will never remain quite that good. Oops, as per usual, I've made another silly typo mistake, as Venus w/clouds is not 5162 km. For my solar energy calculations of Venus L2, I'm using the wee bit larger sun radius of 700,000 km, and of Venus w/clouds at merely 6152 km, and the VL2 of 1,014,290 km Allowing for some give or take from having to coexist within the halo station-keeping orbit at VL2: Solar isolation or occultation of 85% while at VL2 offers 390 w/m2. ISS average, as based upon orbiting Earth, ISS deals with 780 w/m2. This means that Venus L2 is actually operating relatively cold compared to whatever ISS has to cycle itself between 1370 (+ Earth's reflected IR) and otherwise by nighttime where it's nearly zilch but not ever zero as it orbits behind mother Earth that's having to radiate all of it's daytime solar influx (plus something extra on behalf of whatever our moon and humanity has contributed towards global warming). Obviously at the distance of VL2 being 1,014,290 km, as such that VL2 location hasn't to worry all that much about the extent of secondary IR that's coming off the nighttime season of Venus, at least not nearly as to the extent of what Earth's ISS at merely 375,000 km has to deal with (plus whatever gets contributed by our extremely large and nearby moon that's actually capable of being a fairly good IR reflector and otherwise offing a secondary/recoil bath worth of FIR or long wave IR energy to boot). I had to use my dyslexic swag at the ISS figure of 780 w/m2 because, for some reason there's no clear cut science as to the orbital thermal budget that's imposed upon that sucker, such as to what Earth contributes to the ISS thermal energy budget. If anything, I'm guestimating way low on that amount, especially if Earth reflects roughly 36%, as obviously one way or another all of that solar influx plus whatever's contributed by our moon has to leave town, or else Earth explodes. Therefore, a given POOF or perhaps many POOF applications at VL2 should fly. - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
How cool is VL2
"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:943268f4698ce93ff8aabb231b766a9b.49644@mygate .mailgate.org By one analogy of our 1AU raw sunlight spectrum UV to IR being worth 1390 w/m2: However, if the earthshine/planetshine upon average IR radiance is being worth 266 w/m2, adding half the other direct influx, as having been shuttle instrument reported as 1354 w/m2 = 266 + 677 = 943 w/m2, as representing what ISS or most any other terrestrial orbiting platform has to externally contend with. If it weren't for the nighttime portion of each ISS orbit, they'd be summarily roasted to death long ago, and it's actually worse off at the moon's L1 because of the same 1390 w/m2 potential plus a moonshine radiance worth of IR that I believe has to be worth nearly 695 w/m2, thereby being at roughly 58,000 km from that IR emitting surface might suggest 1390 + 20 = 1410 w/m2 (not to forget about a little something extra from earthshine IR), along with hardly any amount of that time spent at the moon's L1 as for being shaded by way of Earth or by the moon itself (in other words, you'll have to provide an artificial shade, or else). As opposed to the solar radiance being 390 w/m2 at Venus L2, whereas the VL2 halo station-keeping orbit is upon average receiving perhaps as little as 41% of the ISS thermal trauma. Even if there's an extra 10 w/m2 of IR planetshine to deal with (of which there isn't), that's still only 400 w/m2, and if that's not Bigelow POOF or most any other space depot certified, then perhaps nothing is. The better could obviously be said for establishing the Earth L2 (EL2) space depot, but clearly we're not smart enough or otherwise having enough rad-hard DNA as for pulling that one off, either. Therefore, once again I have to agree with the intelligent mindset of Dr. Van Allen, that the vast majority of space travels and of such planetary or moon expeditions needs to be given as much robotics as possible, that is unless we can affordably launch and sustain a sufficient physical shield against the solar, moon and cosmic sorts of lethal radiation trauma that tends to summarily nail our frail DNA (not to mention having to defend ourselves from nearly all directions, as from those pesky fast moving debris encounters of the potentially lethal kind). - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
How cool is VL2
"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:943268f4698ce93ff8aabb231b766a9b.49644@mygate .mailgate.org Usenet topic: Manned Venus Flyby http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...ea67d6de4199a9 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manned_Venus_Flyby Venus L2 need not be a flyby, but rather a 19 month destination stop-over. However, you're not going to get yourself very hot, much less roasted to death. All that's needed is a good cache of TP plus lots of beer and pizza that'll last between those mostly robotic resupply missions. The VL2 radiation environment that's potentially lethal to our frail DNA isn't nearly as bad off as being with ISS, as it manages to avoid the ever expanding SAA contour, and there's certainly going to be less (nearly 50% less) of the cosmic influx trauma to deal with, not to mention VL2 not having that gamma and hard-X-ray producing moon to deal with. By one analogy of our 1AU raw sunlight spectrum of UV to IR being worth 1390 w/m2: However, if the earthshine/planetshine upon average IR radiance is worth 266 w/m2, adding half the other direct influx, as having been shuttle instrument reported as 1354 w/m2 = 266 + 677 = 943 w/m2, as representing the external energy budget of what ISS or most any other terrestrial orbiting platform has to externally contend with. A correction for the following worth of moon's L1 IR = 2 w/m2 (not a big factor, but it's there to behold at least 50% of the time) If it weren't for the nighttime portion of each ISS orbit, as such they'd be summarily roasted to death long ago, and it's actually worse off at the moon's L1 because of the same 1390 w/m2 potential plus a moonshine surface radiance of IR that I believe has to be worth nearly 695 w/m2, thereby being at roughly 58,000 km away from that IR emitting surface might suggest 1390 + 2 = 1392 w/m2 (not to forget about a little something extra that's contributed from earthshine IR). With hardly any amount of that time spent at the moon's L1 as for being shaded by way of Earth or by the moon itself (in other words, you'll have to provide an artificial shade 97.6% of the time according to Clarke Station analogy, or else get yourself prepaired to sweat like a slow roasted pig in a can). As opposed to the solar radiance being less than 390 w/m2 at Venus L2, whereas the VL2 halo station-keeping orbit is upon average receiving perhaps as little as 41% of the ISS thermal trauma. Even if there's an extra 1 w/m2 of IR planetshine to deal with (of which there isn't), that's still only 391 w/m2, and if that's not Bigelow POOF or most any other space depot certified, then perhaps nothing is. The better argument could obviously be said for establishing Earth L2 (EL2) space depot, but clearly we're not smart enough or otherwise having enough rad-hard DNA as for pulling that one off any better than we could accomplish the moon's L1. I guess we don't actually have "The Right Stuff". Therefore, once again I may have to agree entirely with the intelligent mindset of Dr. Van Allen, that the vast majority of open space travels (external to our protective magnetosphere) and of such other planetary or moon expeditions needs to be given as much robotics as possible, that is since our going terribly fast isn't an option and unless we can affordably launch and sustain a sufficient physical shield against the solar, moon and cosmic sorts of lethal radiation trauma that tends to summarily nail our frail DNA (not to mention having to defend ourselves from nearly all directions, as from those pesky fast moving debris encounters of the potentially lethal kind), as such robotics are just about exactly what the doctor ordered, the same as having been insisted by Dr. Van Allen. - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
How cool is VL2
That's simply odd. Here VL2 being such a nifty cool location for
safely and efficiently hosting a community of POOFs, and lo and behold if all the Usenet lights didn't go out (again). I guess such honest notions is what blew out yet another one of those Old Testament installed Usenet fuses. Sorry about that. - Brad Guth |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
very cool | ROC | Amateur Astronomy | 2 | June 28th 05 06:00 AM |
COOL | www.ultravideo.fr.st | Astronomy Misc | 0 | March 29th 04 04:44 AM |
COOL | www.ultravideo.fr.st | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | March 29th 04 04:44 AM |
Cool! | Sally | Misc | 3 | November 27th 03 01:21 PM |
Cool! | Sally | UK Astronomy | 2 | November 27th 03 12:56 PM |