The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Member Map
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. Profile of Professor Mega-Mind
  3. Show Posts
  4. Topics
  • Profile Info
    • Summary
    • Show Stats
    • Show Posts
      • Messages
      • Topics
      • Attachments
      • Thanked Posts
      • Posts Thanked By User
    • Show User Topics
      • User Created
      • User Participated In

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

  • Messages
  • Topics
  • Attachments
  • Thanked Posts
  • Posts Thanked By User

Topics - Professor Mega-Mind

Pages: [1]
1
New Theories / .Manimals : Should we make them ?
« on: 21/02/2019 01:49:08 »
.........Intelligent Manimals !
Should we genetically engineer them up ?  To what end , and for what purpose ?  In addition to being better pet-companions , they may also be useful in law enforcement , and the military .  Lastly , I will include medical-use ; transgenic animals , body-part growing , and head-carrying animals , as a sub-category .
..Objective analyses sought .

P.M.

2
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Does structural integrity vary proportionately with relativistic mass?
« on: 01/02/2019 09:02:16 »
...Relativistic Mass versus Structural Integrity .  What is the relationship ?  Specifically , as the rate of time passage varies , how goes structural integrity ?
P.M.

3
New Theories / Speculation on “Can you ride a gravitational wave?”
« on: 10/12/2018 03:59:10 »
...........Reply #17 - Colin 2b
Take the principles laid out here .  Now imagine ~infinitely hard , extremely light , flat waves bobbing up and down extremely fast .  One intercepts a heavier , ~infinitely hard , unmoving particle .  The highly-oblique angle of interception knocks the particle forward at great speed , while the waves bobbing (oscillating) motion is instantly reduced and reversed .  This interaction is very similar to many billiard-ball collisions , but is actually representative of photon/electron collisions .  Since light is throw-away imitation matter , it could be possible to create a recoil/thrust imbalance , and thus ride an electro-magnetic wave , in place of the impossible-to-use gravity wave .
Surf it , Franklin !
P.M.

4
New Theories / Reactionless Drives Possible ?
« on: 08/11/2018 01:49:51 »
Are Reactionless Drives really , physically possible ?  Argument is put forth here that , contrary to popular belief , they actually , genuinely are .  Though the engineering of Norman Dean proved fruitless , the equivalence principle of Albert Einstein  (E=MC2) made the possibility of producing thrust through uni-directional elimination/conversion of energy a credible concept .  As with airplanes , what once seemed absurd is now most definitely possible .
Pro and con views welcome .
P.M.
*Note-For additional discussion of this subject , go to NSF thread : Discussion on Reactionless Drive (extracted) .

5
Technology / Are heavier-than-air hybrid airships a good idea?
« on: 28/09/2018 05:14:17 »
       Heavier than air Airships
 Are these a good idea ?  It is hereby put forth that they are .  Slightly heavier than air , lifting-body airships could be extremely fuel efficient , extremely quiet & comfortable , extremely controll-able , extremely safe , and extremely convenient as well .  The very-low thrust requirement means that extremely efficient , alternative fuel drivetrains can be used . Traveling directly from city-core to city-core would become entirely practical , as would close-up , directly over-head eco-tourism .  Both mech-anical malfunction , and terror-strike , would be greatly reduced in terms of the danger they posed to the passengers & crew of these craft .  Their physical performance , and avionics , would be good enough to keep them well away from any bad weather that might head their way .  Travel times would be comparable to those for general aviation , or helicopters . 
Overall , modern technology ensures that these airships would realize the potential that their 20th century predecessors evidenced so long ago .
The preposition here is that changing societal needs call for changing technological archi-tectures and paradigms .  HTA. airships could fulfill many 21st century needs beautifully . 
That's all for now , folks !...P.M.
Addendum : The optimum HTA. Lifting-Body would APPEAR to be a cross-sectional Burnoulli-Body , with no tail , just V-T .

6
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / What spun-down the inner planets ?
« on: 25/09/2018 23:13:32 »
          Planetary Spin-down
 What reduced the rotation rate of the inner planets ?  We know that the Moon is primarily responsible for Earth's slowing , but what about Mercury , Venus , and Mars ?  All must have started with a rapid rotation rate.   Something(s) braked their spin .  If it was powerful solar-tidal effects , how is the Earth still spinning fast , when Lunar-tidal forces are much stronger ?  Some other effect is at work ; an  extremely strong , and long-lasting effect . It must be crustal rigidity .  Dry planetary crusts & mantles are much more resistant to deformation than wet ones , therefore they resist it much more .  This converts tidal bulging into heat , by way of more tidal drag .  Mars is less dry , but more cold (frozen) .  Similar effect .  Planetary surfaces therefore profoundly affect planetary rotation rates .
Critiques please ......P.M.

7
Technology / What is the optimal battlefield attack aircraft?
« on: 21/09/2018 16:52:41 »
      Best A-10 Replace. Design
 The optimum battlefield attack aircraft would have excellent performance , good efficiency , and great survivability . The A-10 Warthog has been the best example of this type aircraft in the modern era .  Bringing the characteristics & capabilites of the " Tank Buster " forward into the 21st century , while greatly improving them , is a significant design & engineering challenge .  The proposal put forth here uses several planform & propulsion system modifications to achieve these design goals , plus adds in the capability of fully loaded VTOL flight .  All of these while retaining a similar speed regime to the Warthog . 
 The key to this design architecture is the free-turbine concept .  Used for decades now in many industrial and military applications , the free-turbine is a proven technology , with many variations & derivations still unexplored & undeveloped .  The proposal herein is to use the free-turbine effect to provide seperate & segmented power for the aircraft propulsors .  A single yet powerful turbine power plant embedded in the aircraft fuselage , can duct  hi-pressure exhaust through 4 short/stout wings ( Dragonfly configuration ) to 4 seperate hi-perf. ducted-fan units .  Each unit rotatable from 90° thru -20° attack angle . When at 90° ( parallel to ground ) the two ducts would conjoin , with a slanted interface , for stability .  The contra-rotating fans then give superior level-flight performance , with no chance of engine damage from bullets or shrapnel .  The engine-core would sit in a protective trough within the fuselage , invisible to infrared detectors .  Should a fan be stricken , automatic cut-off valves would seal off that tube , thus maintaining pressure to the other fans . 
 A small V-tail would aid stability,  while a flat-panel , transparent-aluminum " knife-head " cockpit would protect the pilot from both birds & projectiles .  A passive , lean-back G-Couch could greatly increase Max.G-Load , while shrinking minimum turn radius . 
 Some/all applications could forego wheel assemblages , using skids instead to reduce weight , increase internal volume  and reduce maintenance and procurement cost and labor requirements . 
 This aircraft could easily be based on Naval capital ships , and transport vessels as well . A net-capture , and lightweight bunker system would seem optimal here , as VTOL  maneuv-erability & compactness would be well above those of the large helicopters previously used . 
 Alright , there you have it folks , 
The " I live , we win ! " plane !
 
Your critiques are welcome ..P.M
 

8
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Do red-dwarf stars eat their planets?
« on: 18/09/2018 03:39:47 »
     Do Red-Dwarfs eat Rock.s ?
 Do red-dwarf stars tend to draw in , and ingest , their close-in rocky planets ? The answer , surprisingly , appears to be yes !  The mechanisms for such a draw-down appear to be both tidal-gravitational , and magnetic in nature . They mainly affect the closer in bodies , but since they are all tidally conjoined and synchronized , lowering one orbit lowers them all ( slowly ) .  It is stellar rotation that does the job.  If is fast ( Trappist1 ) then the stellar influence upholds the inner planet's orbits , while allowing further out planets to descend into resonant orbits with them .  If the stellar rotation is slow ( Proxima , Ross 128 ) , then the magnetic and tidal drag spirals the close-in planets into the red-dwarf , leaving only further out rocky worlds . 
 It is suggested here that a standard be established for the likelihood of planets around red-dwarf stars. Such should include stellar mass , rotation period , and age , as well as lithium presence . 
 P.M.
. Addendum-Modelling indicates that ALL stars slow their spin over time .  The above forces have greater effect upon more massive & luminous stars ; slowing them preferentially. Less appreciated , however , is the effect of photon-momentum transfer upon these stars .  The approaching side of the star emits higher-energy photons , than the receding side .  Over time , the greater recoil engendered by this , acts to slow the star's rotation .  Heavier , and much brighter stars , will be slowed much more quickly than dimmer stars , by this effect .  Once adequately slowed , these stars will begin to tidally slow their planet's revolutions , thus drawing them in , and eventually ingesting them .
 

9
New Theories / What is the best spaceship design?
« on: 16/09/2018 03:11:04 »
   Optimum Spaceship Design ?
 Let the assumption be that we have developed an effective Impulse Drive .  Not a rocket , not an ion thruster , but a powerful & efficient , nuclear-powered , drive mechanism . This being the case we can presume peak travel velocities in excess of 1 million miles per hour .  Although such a ship can afford to carry adequate radiation shielding for the job , interplanetary dust and debris pose a lethal danger .  At full speed , one pea-sized rock would impact a ship with more explosive power than a stick of dynamite .  Such an impact would punch through blunt shielding , wrenching the ship badly , and spraying deadly shrapnel through it's interior .  To prevent this , a different type of shield is necessary .  The most effective design would be a long cone .  This would be slightly wider than the ship , and held ahead of the ship by flexible mounts .  Constructed mainly of high-tech , impact-absorbing materials , it would be coated with a thick  layer of iron sand , contained within an aluminum skin .  The resultant composite effect would absorb tremendous  energy , and yet be reasonably light .
 The ship proper would be a long, thin , pencil-like design . In other words ; a Needle-Ship .  The crew working & living spaces would be directly behind the cone .  The supplies & auxiliary craft would be next , the Impulse Drive machinery would be after that , and the Reactors ( w/minimal shielding ) would be last .
Electric thrusters would arranged about the ship for fine attitude control .  Heat radiators , solar panels , antennas , etc. would all be arranged strategically on the ship exterior. 
 The final requirement would be the trajectory .  In order to minimize in-flight impacts , the ship would need to follow a parabolic trajectory , rising up above the plane of the ecliptic .  This would place the high-speed portion of it's course above 99% of possible impactors .
 A ship of this type would benefit from full recycling of organic waste products .  Pre-positioning of LNG would also improve capability .  A two-ship formation would magnify safety and redundancy , and possibly allow for tethered , centripetal gravity as well .
 Alright , this would kick 2001s Odyssey all over the place !
 Enjoy your new spaceship ! .P.M.

10
New Theories / How do proto-planets form?
« on: 15/09/2018 03:34:40 »
           Planetary Formation
   Why are planets so different ?
Why are planet.systems "         " ?
 Consider the initial conditions :
An interstellar gas & dust cloud , of variable mass , chemistry , temperature , etc. , undergoes gravitational collapse .  It inevitably forms an accretion disk .  A central body collects , and grows .  The heat of compression makes this gas-body glow red-hot .  IF this body grows massive enough , nuclear fusion begins in the core .  The non-nuclear bodies continue to accrete gas & dust , with proto-planetary bodies forming within their accretion disks .  The high-temperature radiation pressure preferentially drives lighter elements further out in the disks, while the heavier elements sink through the disk , settling in much closer to the central body .  This results in the inner proto-planets accumulating more heavy elements , and less lighter ones .  The outer proto-planets accumulate the opposite proportions .  The nuclear central bodies eventually become much hotter , reaching extreme temperatures even as the non-nuclear gas-bodies cool down .  This pushes their gas & dust much further out .  Lower gas/radiation pressures there , combined with greater gas & dust infall , allow the formation of gas giant  planets , along with widely-spaced rock/ice planets .  Proto-red dwarf stars rarely fulfill the conditions needed for gas giants  but do engender mini-Neptunes .  More of their hydrogen & helium are released to interstellar space by their weak gravity , but more of their heavier elements are retained , their much more dense accretion disks forming close-in , rocky-type planets .  The caveat here is that early in the red-dwarf  formation process , the lower temperatures would have allowed metal grains & droplets to sink through the accretion disk , onto the proto-star .  This effect would have been magnified by the powerful , nearby , stellar-magnetic field .  The consequence of this would be a proportionally lower metals content in the satellites of the red-dwarf/Jovian central body .  They would begin with a massive  volatiles complement , but heavy red-dwarf radiation-stripping would wittle these down over time , especially closer to the star .  "Jovian" satellites would not experience this , but would experience tidal-heating .  This also would induce loss of volatiles to space , especially closer to the gas giant .
 The take-away here is that there is a satellite formation process , akin to many distillation processes .  The primary factors affecting satellite system dimensions & characteristics are
A.- Initial formation-cloud mass .
B.- I.C. chem. composition .
C.- Cloud infall rate & timing .
D.- Proto-star mass & luminosity.
E.- Proto-star ignition timing .
F.- Collision & migration history .
 The conclusion is that this formation process is a constant continuum , ranging from Jovian-type central bodies , all of the way through the stellar sequence.  Although it is consistent , a multiple star-system origin can interfere with the process profoundly .  If the subject system is then gravitationally ejected , it may appear to be anomalously developed . 
 Alright , all wood-fires produce ashes .  The fires of the universe produce ashes too , and those make the craziest clumps !
 Adios , peoples !............P.M.

11
New Theories / Can cancers be treated by burning them with a hot probe?
« on: 12/09/2018 02:35:11 »
     Cancer Treatment Strategy
 New approach ; cook it in-situ !
Radiation does not kill all of it , chemotherapy does not kill all of it , laser-therapy does not kill all of it , electro-therapy does not kill all of it , even cryotherapy does not kill all of it .  Only a precisely placed , electrically-powered , burn-hot needle-bulb can actually cook 100% of the cells in a target area .  The key is constant identification of small tumors , and immediate out-patient cooking of them .  If this strategy is pursued relentlessly , the nascent mini-tumors will never get big enough to cause serious damage .  The additional use of immunotherapy will usually be the nail in the cancer's coffin . 
 The war on cancer must be fought for complete victory , not as a business , where highly-paid professionals make a rich living keeping cancer down , but not out .  For the sake of the human beings dying here , the paradigm must be broken , & modernised .
 Chase this enemy down , kill him where he lies .  Never let him gather strength , then he cannot really hurt you ! 
 Alright , made a sensitive point .
Adios ,  P.M.

12
Geology, Palaeontology & Archaeology / Spinosaurus : What was it?
« on: 10/09/2018 13:54:37 »
    Spinosaurus : Monster Cat ?
Did this thing live like a T.Rex , an otter , perhaps a seal ?  I put it to you that Spino was a gigantic  analog to a fishing cat , with the Jaguar being the best example  .  Spino.s legs were modest in length , and flat-footed .They were adapted both for running down prey while on mud & sand , and for swimming after it when necessary .  The legs were long enough to hold Spino.s body above the water when he was running through ponds & rivers in pursuit of prey .  The long arms & claws were for grabbing and holding struggling prey .  The crooked jaw was for holding and lifting heavy , slippery fish & crocodilians . The tail functioned much like a crocodiles whenever Spino. swam , and like a raptor's when he ran .  Last , but not least  was coloration .  Spino.s coloration was camouflage to fit his environment . His entire body , thin hump included , was sand-colored .  This fit the sandhill and dune terrain of N.Africa 100mya.  Whether stalking or resting , Spino needed to remain hidden from both competitors and prey .  Anything spotting a 60ft. long raptor is going to react .  This is also why Spino's skin was smooth , although hydrodynamic  effects counted somewhat . 
 The last puzzle here , is that thin hump .  The bone structure was similar to a bison , camel , or woolly-rhino hump , but disproportionately taller .  There were several likely functions  that the hump served :
A.- Fish attractor : Fish love both structure & shadow , easy meat !
B.- Fish chaser : Disc-shaped fish are more agile than straight ones
C.- Fish storage : Nutrition and water storage for lean times .
D.- Profile breaker : A sand-dune amongst sand-dunes .
E.- Upright.counter-balance : Body up front , hump in back .
Okay, weirdo dino. explained !
P.M.
Note : Spinosaurus' appearance stands in stark contrast to it's later , wading , analog Deinocheirus . This walking/wading , fish+water plant-eating dino , had a rough/thick insulating coat , colored black .Their arms+claws were also camo black . Their  deep , duckbill-like maw , was a dull-beige color . They did not crouch , but walked upright , much like wading birds of today. Functionally , this creature was much like an omnivorous heron , or perhaps , a stork .
Addendum : The two creatures DID share one outstanding feature ; their sizeable humps .  These massive protrusions acted as balance-weights for the animals , so that they could stand and/or run as needed , without falling forward , right onto their faces .  Deinocheirus had a straighter stance than Spinosaurus , so it needed less counterweighting .  Spino. had a tilted-forward stance , so it needed more .  Modern animals do not evidence this strategy ; the closest analog would be the Australian Kangaroo .  These marsupials have an unusually heavy tail , which acts as a counter-balance when they bound along at speed .


13
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Trappist 1 : Water-worlds or not ?
« on: 09/09/2018 15:54:16 »
    Egomen , start yer go-carts !
 Lately , certain esteemed "Astronomy Domine" researchers have been claiming that the the Trappist1 worlds are wrapped in
extremely thick water shells . My response is "Don't you believe it!" .  Developmentally , red-dwarf systems are close cousins to Jovian systems . Their dimensions , planetary mass-ratios , orbital characteristics , etc. , are all basically Jovian , writ heavy .  The immediate implication is that the compositions are ( were ) Jovian  also .  Formed with massive volatile shells , most of their original complement has been lost to red-dwarf radiation-stripping .  Those further out lost less , but still only retain a fraction of their original volume .  These planets now have low-densities not because of an excess of water , but because of a dearth of metals .  Both Mars and Luna are close by analogs of this type of rocky world . 
 Giant telescopic arrays may be able to image exoplanet surfaces , but only spectroscopy  will show how much leached-out salt is in the oceans .  Combined with age , this could indicate total oceanic volume , and thus oceanic depth.  Partial, and full , glaciation could greatly obscure such measurements . 
Alright , I let off some steam! P.M
 

14
New Theories / Can an Impulse Engine be made?
« on: 06/09/2018 02:11:02 »
Can an Impulse Engine be made.
 In a nutshell , yes !  The real question is ; can a strong , extremely high ISP ( above 50K ) reaction engine , be built ?  No nuclear-thermal , or ion engines , fit the bill .  They fall short on at least one count .  Nuclear- explosion engines  ( including pellet ) are impractical , & fusion is a pipe dream .  What is needed is a nuclear-mechanical drive .  This would be a nuclear-powered  high pressure system , fielding 1 million psi.+ , & yielding exhaust velocities approaching 1M mph ! The pressure-chamber would be held at 250°F .  This would keep the methane liquid, but the metal strong . Solar power& capacitors could be used , but compact nuclear reactors would be much more powerful & effective .  High power/efficiency would enable much more shielding , & much shorter transit times .  Very long electro-thermal  exhaust pipes would magnify the exhaust velocity. Coiled versions would work for SSTO shuttles .  This propulsion architecture would give mankind the Solar system right off the bat . 
As the cartoon character used to say ; " Oh Magoo , you've done it again ! ".                P.M. 

15
Geology, Palaeontology & Archaeology / Which of these marine monsters would win in a fight?
« on: 04/09/2018 19:12:24 »
How do the top marine monsters stack up to each other ?
I shall consider six cow gulpers as my contenders . 
All matches are "Cage Matches" ; held in a smallish bay .
First up is the " Man with a bat ! ", Aust Colossus  : 90 feet long , bite-tooth-less , flat-bodied , but with a club on his head for ram-beating his prey to death . 
Edged out by giant Mosasaur : 
60 ft. long , heavy lizard body w/ -eel-like tail for power-twisting . Monstrous triangle-shaped maw , a box-like skull for horrific twist-offs , superior agility and smarts.
Edged out by Basilosaurus :
70 ft. long , heavier , smarter, and w/ better endurance/metabolism
Beaten solidly by Megalodon :
60 ft. long , much heavier , much better armed , possessing extra-powerful , cookie-cutter bite .  Uses wound , and wait , strategy .
Edged out by Ultra Kronosaurus :
..."Vengeance from the Deep" , jaw kept at University of Oxford . Killer of Monster of Arrumberri .
60+ ft. long , bite power : close to Megalodon , bite depth : 2 x Meg. , teeth : bone-shattering 14" railroad spikes ; effect of bite : Long , flexible head/neck gives  first-bite . The agile power-head , exposes opponent's guts on 1st good bite .
 Agility : Superior to Meg. , Endurance/Metabolism: superior to Meg., Intelligence : superior to Meg.
 Beaten by Livyatan MelvillI :
Almost 80 ft. of heavy muscle .
All of U.K. advantages writ large EXCEPT offensive agility .  This counter-balanced by much superior intelligence using equal defensive agility .  The whale's sonic shockwave weapon would confuse & disorient it's opponent , it's ship-sinking ram would rupture said opponent's organs . These two weapons giving it the opportunity to use it's skull-severing bite , almost at will .
Finally , the bronco-buck of this behemoth would amputate the Appalachian Mountains !
As Bill Duke said in Predator 1 ,
 " NO CHANCE  !! " .
 Alright , Ding-freaking-Ding !
...   P.M.

16
New Theories / Discussion on Reactionless drive (extracted)
« on: 23/08/2018 18:34:45 »
RE: Alan Calverd
I would like to hear your take on Thermal Mass .  This being the increase in invariant mass caused by significantly raised or lowered temperature .  It is a tiny , but measurable difference .  This means that raising & lowering the temp. of a free-piston in an engine could give you a weak , but extant , reactionless drive .  Whoa , Unnecessary Zoom !  Unnecessary Zoom ! 
Now my head won't fit through the door dagnabbit !
Otay , need wood saw . Bye , PM.
*Note-The main body of this discussion is located on NSF thread : Reactionless Drive possible ?

Pages: [1]
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.084 seconds with 57 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.