|
Post by Lord Barbatos on Nov 5, 2011 9:45:37 GMT -5
Then they'll spend 50 times more trying to protect it from terrorists.
|
|
creator
Team Buster Ledger
It's time for Powergrids 2.0
Posts: 1,217
|
Post by creator on Nov 5, 2011 9:52:37 GMT -5
It's no problem, thanks for the confirm. This does puzzle me though. From my amateurish point of view, shouldn't the total amount of energy be more important than energy conversion? 200 kilojoules seems rather low for something that's supposed to tear apart space and time. Yes, but only in part. A key factor is how large an area the energy inhabits / is spread over. If all the enegy is focussed on an object the size of the head of a needle, the energy density is massively high, hence the workings of a nuclear bomb - ultra high energy in one spot. The advantage of this delivery system (a laser) over a nuclear explosion is the energy can remain mostly focussed. The explosion on the other hand by it's name spreads outwards. I was fortunate enough to recently meet up with the head of the UKs science and technology council who are playing a significant part in this project (we were both speaking to current university students about the benefits or coming to work for our respective organisations I.e. What is the graduate package like) and we had time for a drink after that and as we do, we talk 'shop' and this came up in discussion. Sometimes makes me wish I had gone in to government sponsored science like this instead of company sponsored like I am, as the science is so interesting and challenging. Lets compare my big project to this.......I'm working on a a series of new polymer composites to replace steels in the vehicles my company builds. Has the potential to reduce the vehicle weight by something like 40% and be 50% cheaper than the steel used. Massive cost saving potential, in the order of $350 million a year. But let's be clear, the laser is 'sexy', mine.....not so. Oh well. Maybe I can convince the board of directors to let me develop cab mounted laser anti theft devices for the vehicles..........I don't think they would go for it......(suddenly had this image of Dr Evil and the killer fish with the lasers....LOL)
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Stargrave on Nov 5, 2011 14:54:58 GMT -5
It's no problem, thanks for the confirm. This does puzzle me though. From my amateurish point of view, shouldn't the total amount of energy be more important than energy conversion? 200 kilojoules seems rather low for something that's supposed to tear apart space and time. Yes, but only in part. A key factor is how large an area the energy inhabits / is spread over. If all the enegy is focussed on an object the size of the head of a needle, the energy density is massively high, hence the workings of a nuclear bomb - ultra high energy in one spot. The advantage of this delivery system (a laser) over a nuclear explosion is the energy can remain mostly focussed. The explosion on the other hand by it's name spreads outwards. Ah, interesting. I was mostly talking about how they announced it as a 200 petawat beam, which, while technically completely accurate, seems a bit dishonest. But again, from an amateurish POV. LOL Everyone wants lasers and all the cool and shiny stuff. ;D I remember reading comments on a site when that US Navy rail gun was cancelled. Everybody went in an uproar over it until one guy came in and said "Guys? Nobody really needs this right now." At least this does have a good application. All I want is FRICKIN' SHARKS WITH FRICKIN' LASER BEAMS ON THEIR HEADS! If I ever make plans to take over the world, you're hired.
|
|
|
Post by Crom-Cruach on Nov 5, 2011 14:58:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Royal-Divinity on Oct 3, 2012 23:58:25 GMT -5
Anyway, I did some numbers and 200 petawats is roughly equivalent to one Tsar bomba (Most powerful explosive device in history, equal to 50 megatons of tnt) exploding every second. That seems like an insane amount of energy. However, seeing as it last a trillionth of a second (10^-12), that only adds up to 200 kilojoules of energy, which is about 50 grams of tnt or the energy of a single round from an A-10 minigun, which doesn't sound that impressive. Anyone want to double check me? Your numbers are fine actually. EDIT: Did not look at page three when posting this >.>
|
|