General > General Technical Chat
Russia and China to Build a Nuclear Plant on the Moon.
Bud:
--- Quote from: tggzzz on April 26, 2024, 09:13:59 am --- Get out your red-blue anaglyphs, and see the football :)
--- End quote ---
It worked! 👍 :D
tggzzz:
--- Quote from: Bud on April 26, 2024, 06:32:51 pm ---
--- Quote from: tggzzz on April 26, 2024, 09:13:59 am --- Get out your red-blue anaglyphs, and see the football :)
--- End quote ---
It worked! 👍 :D
--- End quote ---
Fun, isn't it. APOD has stereo anaglyphs infrequently, so I keep my anaglyph specs handy. A few examples:
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap221217.html
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap240117.html
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap211023.html
That last one is a good example of why stereo photos can be better than flattie photos.
But then I've been taking stereo pictures for 40 years, and have a pleasant collection of vintage glass stereoscopic slides.
https://vintagestereoscopicglassslides.wordpress.com/
GigaJoe:
Have some fun ...
A cooling dome on the image at the first post .... in the vacuum ... is everything all right, I guess so ...
Then ... each and every nuclear station on earth , fall under basic Carnot Cycle , where active body , transfer energy from hot side to the cold side, release energy, that transformed, and then cool down even more for efficiency, by water or air cooling such as dome .... That Carnot Cycle give you about 30-40% efficiency , the rest dissipated in a thin air. so - 1000 kW electrical nuclear unit about 4200 kW Thermal power, and 3000 kW dissipating as a waste
Space reactors - same principles, atoms divided , emits energy and absorb by active body, usually liquid metal, then a difference, instead steam turbine, a thermoelectric generator. due to not much temperature different , overall efficiency quite mediocre ... for 1000W thermal power probably 70W electrical .... the rest 900+ watts need to dissipate , usually by emitters, due to vacuum ...
technically gases can be used to spin turbines in a space, Problem A- gas will be lost , need replenish, B- low efficiency due to gas masses, C- heavy spinning turbine not for a long time. D - everything sealed as part A. E- deal with hot gases , that a headache, metals absorb it and changing internal structure , etc ...
if ... thermoelectric .... then 40kW electrical transfer to 500 kW thermal , and rather heat the core of the moon , I have no clue how to dissipate it ...
I think It great, and absolutely doable project, with minimal investment (pen and paper don't cost much), with very solid result ...
tatel:
--- Quote from: CatalinaWOW on March 07, 2024, 04:43:44 pm ---It is certainly doable. My previous comment wasn't an endorsement of western safety standards. In the west we are trending towards finding that a one in a million chance of someone getting a hangnail is unacceptable. People in the US are currently going crazy over a vacuum thermos that has a lead seal that is not externally accessible, and claiming a billion dollars of emotional damage from being in the airplane that lost a window.
--- End quote ---
Yeah, after Fukushima all that hype about western secure designs is now clearly understood as BS, one only needs just a functional brain. But, hey, we are winning 3 to 1! Not to mention TMI and those "incidents" while developing the thing because then our advantage would be mostly against de Olympic sport ideals...
soldar:
--- Quote from: vk6zgo on April 25, 2024, 11:35:40 pm ---Which was what I meant to convey, but stuffed it up.
I was thinking about how the moon presents the same side to us, & that there was always some part of the moon lit by the sun.
I neglected the fact that we don't see all of the same side, all of the time.
--- End quote ---
The far side of the moon or the occult side of the moon, as opposed to the near side of the moon or the visible side of the moon.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version