SpaceX Dragon 2 Launches... US regains independent manned launch capability!

[cubby]

Honestly all he has to do is step back a bit and say 'Oh right, I didn't mean all Nuclear Fusion, I meant the use of Nuclear Fusion to harness stars in our and other galaxies'.

It's funny how stubborn he is going about it.

Agreed. He's also fundamentally against learning new things, too - but that's for another conversation.


I mean, look at his latest response:

I'm sorry but you're the one who thinks a Nuclear Fusion Reactor will produce the full energy output of a star. It's hard to top you in the stupidity contest, so there's one thing you're better than me at, I guess.

That's literally something he learned during this conversation in this thread, and now he's trying to push it on you/us as if we weren't the ones who explained it to him.

I'm not entirely sure he's not just trolling at this point.

[Triceron]

Except they don't, they harness a tiny, minuscule fraction of a star. If you had understood that we were talking about NUCLEAR FUSION and nowhere did I start talking about your tiny pathetic reactors that you thought could match up with the power of a star.

Again, Nuclear Fusion is literally what the reactors are doing. You're still using the same word and thinking that using capslock makes it different.

If you talk about Nuclear Fusion, then you're talking about the very thing reactors are creating.

There are stars out there that output less heat than a candle flame; as low as 86 degrees F (30 degrees C). For comparison, a candle flame can go up to 1070 degrees F (800 degrees C). Type 2 classification is not dependant on the amount of power output a star can give, it is about being able to harness a star on a galactic scale.

It is 100% relevant because the moment you can harness the full energy output of a star, that catapults you to a Type 2 civilization. Jesus, I'm rolling my eyes so hard I'm at risk of going blind right now.

Yes, that means building a megastructure around a star.

But you said "You understand what Nuclear Fusion is? It's literally the energy output of a star, that's what stars do, they produce fusion which is where they get their immense power from."

Which I continually tell you, Nuclear Fusion can be replicated in reactors and can be harnessed. On Earth. Right Now.

The 'power of a star' is relative, considering stars can burn at low temperatures. So you are not wrong in saying this is what srtas do, but you are wrong in assuming that it has to be associated to 'immense power'. That is like assuming creating fire has to be done through flamethrowers; when a simple match does the same thing.

Again, all you have to say is "Oh right, I didn't mean all Nuclear Fusion, I meant the use of Nuclear Fusion to harness stars in our and other galaxies'". Everything else you're trying to say is digging a deeper hole for yourself, just letting you know.

[Ubermensch]

That's literally something he learned during this conversation in this thread, and now he's trying to push it on you/us as if we weren't the ones who explained it to him.

I'm not entirely sure he's not just trolling at this point.

No, I had to explain to you what Nuclear Fusion actually is and what the difference between a star and your stupid little reactor really is. That's something I had to do, for a pair of so called intellectuals, you're really dropping the ball here, try harder.

- - - Updated - - -

Again, Nuclear Fusion is literally what the reactors are doing. You're still using the same word and thinking that using capslock makes it different.

If you talk about Nuclear Fusion, then you're talking about the very thing reactors are creating.

There are stars out there that output less heat than a candle flame; as low as 86 degrees F. Type 2 classification is not dependant on the amount of power output a star can give, it is about being able to harness a star on a galactic scale.

Your reactors are creating a tiny star that barely glimpses the true power of Nuclear Fusion. I've already provided you with a link that states how much power is required to become Type 2, you're really dropping the ball here, wipe that drool off your chin, pick up the damn ball and start running.

Which I continually tell you, Nuclear Fusion can be replicated in reactors and can be harnessed. On Earth. Right Now.

No, that's not actual Nuclear Fusion, you're just trying to mimic it in your pathetic reactors.

All you have to say is "I didn't know you were talking about Nuclear Fusion and not our pathetic little reactors that we honestly thought could produce the full output of an actual star like the Sun".

Just say it, say the magic words and the ass spanking will cease.

[Triceron]

Again, Nuclear Fusion is literally what the reactors are doing. You're still using the same word and thinking that using capslock makes it different.

If you talk about Nuclear Fusion, then you're talking about the very thing reactors are creating.

There are stars out there that output less heat than a candle flame; as low as 86 degrees F (30 degrees C). For comparison, a candle flame can go up to 1070 degrees F (800 degrees C). Type 2 classification is not dependant on the amount of power output a star can give, it is about being able to harness a star on a galactic scale.



Yes, that means building a megastructure around a star.

But you said "You understand what Nuclear Fusion is? It's literally the energy output of a star, that's what stars do, they produce fusion which is where they get their immense power from."

Which I continually tell you, Nuclear Fusion can be replicated in reactors and can be harnessed. On Earth. Right Now.

The 'power of a star' is relative, considering stars can burn at low temperatures. So you are not wrong in saying this is what srtas do, but you are wrong in assuming that it has to be associated to 'immense power'. That is like assuming creating fire has to be done through flamethrowers; when a simple match does the same thing.

Again, all you have to say is "Oh right, I didn't mean all Nuclear Fusion, I meant the use of Nuclear Fusion to harness stars in our and other galaxies'". Everything else you're trying to say is digging a deeper hole for yourself, just letting you know.

You realize that to produce anything near the power of a star, you need a ton of hydrogen and the only hydrogen even close to that capacity are hydrogen planets. So your tiny star isn't going to need a lot of hydrogen but it's not going to produce much without enough hydrogen.

Again, this is a case of you saying something that is completely wrong but you are unable to accept or acknowledge it.

There are stars out there the size of a dime. If we are able to reach those stars and build a reactor around that star, then we are a Type 2 civilization. The point of being Type 2 is relevant to being able to achieve all technological advancements associated with harnessing the powers of celestial bodies; which includes but is not mutually exclusive to Nuclear Fusion.

[Ubermensch]

Again, this is a case of you saying something that is completely wrong but you are unable to accept or acknowledge it.

There are stars out there the size of a dime. If we are able to reach those stars and build a reactor around that star, then we are a Type 2 civilization. The point of being Type 2 is relevant to being able to achieve all technological advancements associated with harnessing the powers of celestial bodies; which includes but is not mutually exclusive to Nuclear Fusion.

You're again not able to accept the fact that we can't produce the full power of a star in your pathetic little reactors and therefore, it's not real Nuclear Fusion, it's just a glimpse of it. Like a bunch of apes attempting to harness fire and assuming that it's an atomic bomb.

Do not fear, you still have another chance to say the magic words and the ass spanking will end.

[Triceron]

No, that's not actual Nuclear Fusion, you're just trying to mimic it in your pathetic reactors.

Do you know what Nuclear Fusion is?

It's literally the reaction of fusing two elements to produce energy. That's all. It's not a complex term that is mutually exclusive to stars in the galaxy.

Reactors are not mimicing anything. They are literally fusing two(or more) elements to produce energy.

Again, you being dumb.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion

In nuclear chemistry, nuclear fusion is a reaction in which two or more atomic nuclei are combined to form one or more different atomic nuclei and subatomic particles (neutrons or protons)

What *you* want to say is stellar nucleosynthesis, which is specifically Nuclear Fusion within stars. But you didn't say that, you said Nuclear Fusion. And some other stuff about 'Producing Fusion' and 'Immense Power'. Quack Quack.

[Ubermensch]

Do you know what Nuclear Fusion is?

It's literally the reaction of fusing two elements to produce energy. That's all. It's not a complex term that is mutually exclusive to stars in the galaxy.

Reactors are not mimicing anything. They are literally fusing two(or more) elements to produce energy.

Again, you being dumb.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion

In nuclear chemistry, nuclear fusion is a reaction in which two or more atomic nuclei are combined to form one or more different atomic nuclei and subatomic particles (neutrons or protons)

What *you* want to say is stellar nucleosynthesis, which is specifically Nuclear Fusion within stars. But you didn't say that, you said Nuclear Fusion. And some other stuff about 'Producing Fusion' and 'Immense Power'. Quack Quack.

What you want to say is the magic words, because you and I both know that I'm not going to play into your game of word semantics and goalpost moving psychological mind-fuckery that you all like to do here. I'm a long-time lurker, I know what you guys like to do and how you do it.

Your tiny and pathetic reactors are just mimicking what a star can really do, you're grasping for a glimpse of it and you know this. Your "star" is tiny because you don't have the necessary hydrogen to fuel it, which to produce real Nuclear Fusion, you'd need hydrogen planets to fuel it and keep it running. That's why your scientists are still scratching their heads like the dumb apes they are.

Say the magic words, concede once and for all. If you think that this has a happy ending for you, you haven't been paying attention. It would've been different if you said "Nuclear Fusion Reactor" and conceded that it was just a tiny, pathetic wannabe star, I would've let you off for that. But you both wanted to pass off your pathetic little reactor as equal to our Sun, so you get the ass spank.

[cubby]

No, I had to explain to you what Nuclear Fusion actually is and what the difference between a star and your stupid little reactor really is. That's something I had to do, for a pair of so called intellectuals, you're really dropping the ball here, try harder.

Since you're resorting to lying now, we're done. Enjoy your trolling. Shit-posting really becomes you.

[Triceron]

You're again not able to accept the fact that we can't produce the full power of a star in your pathetic little reactors and therefore, it's not real Nuclear Fusion, it's just a glimpse of it. Like a bunch of apes attempting to harness fire and assuming that it's an atomic bomb.

Do not fear, you still have another chance to say the magic words and the ass spanking will end.

That's like saying lighting a candle isn't a real Exothermic Reaction.

Fancy word huh? But actually all it means is a reaction that releases light or heat. It's no less real than the same exothermic reaction that takes place in your car when it uses gas. Lighting a candle is not a glimpse at an Exothermic reaction. It is an Exothermic reaction.

Nuclear Fusion in a reactor can also output higher temperatures than the sun, creating a more stable reaction than the sun itself.

like a bunch of apes attempting to harness fire and assuming that it's an atomic bomb.

That's like saying if we derive our power from fire, why don't we just burn all our forests down.

It's because we're not all as stupid as people who think like that. We want to control and sustain our energy sources, not find the biggest source and tap into it willy-nilly.

[Ubermensch]

Since you're resorting to lying now, we're done. Enjoy your trolling. Shit-posting really becomes you.

Great gaslighting attempt, 11/10, it isn't going to work on me. I've remained consistent the entire time we've had this discussion. I said specifically "Nuclear Fusion", not your pathetic little reactor but actual Nuclear Fusion, like the one our Sun has. You knew that, you didn't want to concede.

- - - Updated - - -

That's like saying lighting a candle isn't a real Exothermic Reaction.

Fancy word huh? But actually all it means is a reaction that releases light or heat. It's no less real than the same exothermic reaction that takes place in your car when it uses gas. Lighting a candle is not a glimpse at an Exothermic reaction. It is an Exothermic reaction.

Nuclear Fusion in a reactor can also output higher temperatures than the sun, creating a more stable reaction than the sun itself.

You are still not conceding that a Nuclear Fusion Reactor is nowhere near the power of our Sun, is something wrong with that? Do you not like reality? Do you want me to show you a candle and claim that it's a nuclear bomb? No? Then concede right here.

[Techno-Druid]

Don't argue with him, he's just trolling at this point.

[Ubermensch]

Don't argue with him, he's just trolling at this point.

I have a feeling that both cubby and Triceron are trolling me. They've changed their arguments many times over and I've stuck to my guns behind one simple statement and fact: Nuclear Fusion Reactors will never produce the same level of power our Sun can produce, therefore, it's not a real star but a glimpse of a star.

We've got a long time to go before we can actually produce the power of a star but it's not in 50 years like these jokers claim.

[cubby]

Don't argue with him, he's just trolling at this point.

Agreed. I should have stopped awhile ago, I just didn't realize he was a shit-posting lying troll. Oh well.

Getting back to the topic, very cool that U.S. will have human rated space launched capability very soon. Well done SpaceX.

[Triceron]

You are still not conceding that a Nuclear Fusion Reactor is nowhere near the power of our Sun, is something wrong with that? Do you not like reality? Do you want me to show you a candle and claim that it's a nuclear bomb? No? Then concede right here.

I didn't claim a candle is a nuclear bomb. But they both use Exothermic reactions, yes. That is the nature of combustion. They both produce heat and light; that is what the word means.

If you claimed that the first time we used Exothermic reaction was the atomic bomb, I would correct you and say you are wrong.

That is what I'm doing here. Nuclear Fusion is a common reaction. It is not 'the power of the Stars'. What you are talking about is 'Stellar nucleosynthesis'.

You said we would never be able to harness or create Nuclear Fusion within our lifetime. That is wrong, because we can and are already doing it. Nuclear Fusion is literally fusing two elements to produce energy. You didn't say at what scale, and Nuclear Fusion Reactors do this very thing.

"Power of the Stars" doesn't matter because you used the wrong word. And you spent the last 4 pages trying to backpedal and deflect. Again, 'Power of the Stars' includes *less heat than a candle flame*

At no point did you compare Nuclear Reactors to the energy of the Sun. Cubby even corrected you multiple times until you began to make that claim; at which we realized you were using the wrong word and misunderstanding the whole concept of Nuclear Fusion.

Besides, there's no point in talking about Dyson Spheres if you think stars 'produces Fusion'.

[Ubermensch]

I didn't claim a candle is a nuclear bomb. But they both use Exothermic reactions, yes. That is the nature of combustion.

If you claimed that the first time we used Exothermic reaction was the atomic bomb, I would correct you and say you are wrong.

That is what I'm doing here. Nuclear Fusion is a common reaction. It is not 'the power of the Stars'. What you are talking about is 'Stellar nucleosynthesis'.

You said we would never be able to harness or create Nuclear Fusion within our lifetime. That is wrong, because we can and are already doing it.

"Power of the Stars" doesn't matter because you used the wrong word. If you had said the power of 'Stellar nucleosynthesis' then yes, I would agree with you. But you didn't, and you spent the last 4 pages trying to backpedal and deflect.

And I stick to that statement and I will do so until the day I die. We will never be able to harness or create Nuclear Fusion within our lifetime. Whatever it is that you hope to create in your reactors is not real Nuclear Fusion, it's just a lesser version, just a glimpse.

Stop trying to gaslight me, stop trying to psychologically mind-fuck me, I did not backpedal and I did not change anything that I've said. I've stuck to the same exact statement I've stuck to for the last four or five pages. And that will not change, ever.

You can either choose to concede here or you can choose to fuck off, I've dealt with four pages of you clowns trying to sweet talk me and look down on me when you had to be told that your reactor wouldn't produce anywhere near the power our sun produces. Stop trying to sound smart and stop trying to play your semantics game as well.

Here is the argument: you cannot produce real Nuclear Fusion within our lifetime.

You wanted to play semantics, you wanted to win and you tried to bully me with two people thinking that it'd force me to flee or concede. You're going to have to bring a lot more people and some moderators to get what you want from me. I was never wrong from the beginning while you both were, you didn't like that thought so you continued to come back for more.

I've repeated myself as much as I could and I don't believe it's necessary to repeat myself again.

[Triceron]

And I stick to that statement and I will do so until the day I die. We will never be able to harness or create Nuclear Fusion within our lifetime. Whatever it is that you hope to create in your reactors is not real Nuclear Fusion, it's just a lesser version, just a glimpse.

This is like saying a Matchstick doesn't really create fire, it just burns and is a glimpse at fire, a lesser version.

Does a matchstick produce fire? If you believe no, then I accept your opinion.

I am not a doctor, and I don't have the cure for stupidity.

[Ubermensch]

This is like saying a Matchstick doesn't really create fire, it just burns and is a glimpse at fire, a lesser version.

Does a matchstick produce fire? If you believe no, then I accept your opinion.

I am not a doctor, and I don't have the cure for stupidity.

You're not going to bully me into changing my argument, this is the argument right here, your reactor is not equal to a star, therefore it is not a real star and therefore, not actual Nuclear Fusion but a valiant attempt at creating it, but still quite pathetic.

[Grimbold21]

Yes, but when are making it to the 1300 ring gates to other systems?

[Worgar]

I like how this thread went all futurism.

Let's put a Dyson sphere in simple terms.

If the Sun makes up 99% of the mass in the solar system, do you think the remaining 1% will be able to encompass it?

Since people are interested in the concept.

i hope we go the supreme commander route and just build mass converters

[Ubermensch]

I like how this thread went all futurism.

Let's put a Dyson sphere in simple terms.

If the Sun makes up 99% of the mass in the solar system, do you think the remaining 1% will be able to encompass it?

Since people are interested in the concept.

I'm writing a sci-fi where several thousands of years after humanity was attacked by an advanced race and was nearly wiped out, they entered an era where they went extinct. The last of the humans were nothing but uploaded minds inside a vastly complex matrix system as A.I took over and propagated over several galaxies over a period of 500 million years building Dyson Spheres and learning about their universe. Which all ends after a big war happens and destroys most of the A.I swarm, which forced humanity to return and fight this war thousands of years later under a dystopian, totalitarian regime that had reverse engineered tech mixed with what they knew of before they left Earth.

So Dyson Rings/Spheres/Swarms and Type 1 or higher Civilizations is something of great interest to me, since I create and write about them in acute detail, cataloging them into my book. Along with the multi-dimensional beings that prospered in the New Universe after the old one was destroyed by a major event.

Interesting video by the way.