A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » History
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

How cool is VL2



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old February 26th 07, 11:31 PM posted to sci.space.history,uk.sci.astronomy,sci.physics,sci.astro
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default 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  
Old February 27th 07, 07:11 AM posted to sci.space.history,uk.sci.astronomy,sci.physics,sci.astro
The Ghost In The Machine
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 546
Default 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  
Old February 27th 07, 07:30 PM posted to sci.space.history,uk.sci.astronomy,sci.physics,sci.astro
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default 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  
Old February 28th 07, 05:43 AM posted to sci.space.history,uk.sci.astronomy,sci.physics,sci.astro
The Ghost In The Machine
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 546
Default 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  
Old February 28th 07, 04:55 PM posted to sci.space.history,uk.sci.astronomy,sci.physics,sci.astro
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default 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  
Old February 28th 07, 08:08 PM posted to sci.space.history,uk.sci.astronomy,sci.physics,sci.astro
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default 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  
Old March 3rd 07, 07:34 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.physics,uk.sci.astronomy,sci.astro
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default 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  
Old March 4th 07, 02:08 AM posted to sci.space.history,sci.physics,uk.sci.astronomy,sci.astro
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default 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  
Old March 17th 07, 08:40 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.physics,uk.sci.astronomy,sci.astro
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,139
Default 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

  #30  
Old March 17th 07, 10:52 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.physics,uk.sci.astronomy,sci.astro
The Ghost In The Machine
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 546
Default How cool is VL2

In sci.physics,

wrote
on 17 Mar 2007 12:40:31 -0700
. com:
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


Moving billions of metric tonnes to Venus's L2 point would be
quite a chore.

6.5 billion people * 100 kg/person = 650 million metric tonnes.
Granted, many are women and children (the women tend to be
a little smaller; the children are variable size), so this might
be an overestimate. However, support equipment would be
needed as well -- the air we breathe, recyclers to process the
CO2 back into O2 (with the C going somewhere as well), some
water and recyclers for *that*, sewage processors, and of course
various other things to keep us from going [censored] insane as
we sit behind Venus.

--
#191,

Linux. The choice of a GNU generation.
Windows. The choice of a bunch of people who like very weird behavior on
a regular basis, random crashes, and "extend, embrace, and extinguish".

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from
http://www.teranews.com

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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 02:21 PM
Cool! Sally UK Astronomy 2 November 27th 03 01:56 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.