Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
OMG, why do so many people quote from fictional books?
To counter others who quote from the same?
OMG, why do so many people quote from fictional books?
They would still work, but their sights would have to be adjusted.
Now that I think of it the thin and/or nonexistent atmosphere on Mars could, possibly, have an affect on the combustion of bullets. I say "possibly" because I'm no physics expert. Part of me assumes that combustion requires oxygen in order happen, but, not being an expert in this type of science I can't say for sure.
Of course we have combustion of rocket fuels in space but I can't assume that the combustion of bullets is of the same physics and chemistry. Perhaps someone here would know the answer?
What Jim said, guns don't depend on the ambient oxygen presence, oxygen's already present for the firing process to work. Low gravitational effects would be good for the gun because if you're shooting someone in Mars, all you really care about is the horizontal displacement, the vertical displacement wouldn't really matter except for long distance shooting like snipers, but I'd guess that with low gravity, you can get better accuracy than you'd do on Earth. And another reason for that would be the little to no atmosphere which gives you little to no frictional forces for the bullet to travel against. Only problem I can think of is a thermal concern. If it's too cold, the firing mechanism might not discharge, might have to adjust for that.
Wonder if it's possible for a gun to be shot into orbit cause of a low gravitational field, that'd be cool. Little instant bullet satellites.
What Jim said, guns don't depend on the ambient oxygen presence, oxygen's already present for the firing process to work. Low gravitational effects would be good for the gun because if you're shooting someone in Mars, all you really care about is the horizontal displacement, the vertical displacement wouldn't really matter except for long distance shooting like snipers, but I'd guess that with low gravity, you can get better accuracy than you'd do on Earth. And another reason for that would be the little to no atmosphere which gives you little to no frictional forces for the bullet to travel against. Only problem I can think of is a thermal concern. If it's too cold, the firing mechanism might not discharge, might have to adjust for that.
Wonder if it's possible for a gun to be shot into orbit cause of a low gravitational field, that'd be cool. Little instant bullet satellites.
The gun may fire once, but the thermo difference between the side of the gun in sun or shade, the oil that keep the action moving smooth, will not "flow", will turn into little spheres and float away, would make the gun useless.
A rail gun will work fine.
To counter others who quote from the same?
Orbital construction of spacecraft. I really think that the ability to bypass the need for escape velocity rockets will be a huge advantage in spaceflight tech.
Yes, but you're still going to have to get people and building supplies up there to begin with. This is a process that will have to be repeated ad nauseum. You'll also have to get people and supplies/payload down to Earth ad nauseum. You'll also have to spend years training a huge cadre of people to work in space -- I mean literally work in space; space suits, blow torches, rivets, etc. And of course you have theimmediate problem of addressing the health affects of living in space for extended periods of time. This isn't a minor issue, in fact, it's issue #1 to surmount more than likely. After all, if living in space has deleterious affects on our health then what's the point?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying we shouldn't figure out how to surmount these issues, rather, I'm saying that we have to seriously consider them before pouring billions (trillions) into venturing out into space.
I really don't know how guns operate but isn't the oil applied onto the surfaces and wouldn't it stick to the surface rather than break up and start floating away in little spheres? I mean imagine a small blob of water in space, it's not going to suddenly start breaking up into little blobs, it'll remain in tact due to surface tension. If you imagine the original blob getting smaller and smaller, the less likely it is to break apart. With the gun, the 'blob' so to speak is really small and clinging to a more uh clingy surface, I'd imagine it'd be really difficult for it to break that surface tension and break away into little spheres. Again, I don't know how guns work so might be wrong about this with respect to guns. I mean, the lube job happens to work here on earth and the reason being the surface tension, don't see why the same principle won't extend to space where there's less external forces (no wind/air resistance, lower gravitational effects, etc.). There's no force that's constantly trying to break up blobs.The gun may fire once, but the thermo difference between the side of the gun in sun or shade, the oil that keep the action moving smooth, will not "flow", will turn into little spheres and float away, would make the gun useless.
A rail gun will work fine.
Now I don't know how
I really don't know how guns operate but isn't the oil applied onto the surfaces and wouldn't it stick to the surface rather than break up and start floating away in little spheres? I mean imagine a small blob of water in space, it's not going to suddenly start breaking up into little blobs, it'll remain in tact due to surface tension. If you imagine the original blob getting smaller and smaller, the less likely it is to break apart. With the gun, the 'blob' so to speak is really small and clinging to a more uh clingy surface, I'd imagine it'd be really difficult for it to break that surface tension and break away into little spheres. Again, I don't know how guns work so might be wrong about this with respect to guns. I mean, the lube job happens to work here on earth and the reason being the surface tension, don't see why the same principle won't extend to space where there's less external forces (no wind/air resistance, lower gravitational effects, etc.). There's no force that's constantly trying to break up blobs.
-------
Now I don't know much about economics, but for some reason, the government seems to be like a train system operator to me, redirecting money here and there while keeping some of it for continued functionality. And, personally, I'd rather see money being redirected toward science ventures rather than lining the suits of executive bank operators and just general rich scumbags. I'd rather the money go towards this whole idea of a mars mission which would involve employing the use of scientific knowledge, science related industries, engineering, and promoting space travel, instead of it going towards rich scumbags who continue to promote this hedonistic, consumerist society and promoting the related industries of luxury and just general bullshit, which just make all of our lives and theirs a meaningless, pointless existence.