92 réponses à ce sujet

[Destructo-Bot]

BP20125810 wrote...

heat travels quickly through a vacuun. Youre all wrong, because the deep vaccum of space is sucking the heat out of the Normandy. it would only heat it up further if the vacuum was inside the normandy, but since the vaccum is outside, it would cool off.

So Bioware was right about this.

VY Canis Majoris is the largest star known to science. It takes up a space equivalent to our sun reaching from its curremt position all the way to Saturn's orbit. Like most stars, the gas it is comprised of is extremely hot, hundreds of thousands or millions of degrees. Yet you could move right through most of VY Canis without a ship or suit and not burn up.

Why? Its great size belies its mass. Its volume is nigh uncountably larger than out own sun, yet its mass is only 40x greater. This gives it a density hundreds of thousands times less than the atmosphere on Earth. Convection and conduction can play no part in heating you in this star, which leaves radiation.

Radiation is a poor way to transfer heat. Place your hand onto a heated frying pan and you'll burn yourself instantly from conduction. Place your hand above the skillet and convection will force you to move it. Place your hand under the skillet... radiation is much kinder to you where conduction and convection can't play a part. You can keep your hand in place all day there.

In order to transfer heat effectively, you really need a medium to transfer to. In the vacuum of space, there are only a few atoms in a given area. With nothing contacting the ship there is very little heat transfer, despite a massive difference in temperatures. Space is a giant insulator.

My post also explains why you can fly the Normady through some stars

Modifié par Destructo-Bot, 21 février 2010 - 10:09 .

[Flash_in_the_flesh]

Hopefire wrote...

"Combat endurance varies by ship design, and by the battle's location. Battles in the deep cold of interstellar space can go on for some time. Engagements close to a star are brief. Since habitable worlds are usually close to a star, battles over them are frantic."
 
Unless you're fighting in a nebulae that's gone cold, interstellar space and the high quality vacuum therein is where you'll heat up FASTEST. Seriously. Basic property of a vacuum, it has no temperature. There's a reason a thermos is vacuum sealed - you don't get crossover of heat across a vacuum. So, if the Normandy is hot from a battle, going into deep space isn't a good way to cool off. Finding a cold rock to rest against, somehow channeling waste heat into some sort of discharge, or basking in a cool nebulae would be a much better way of chilling out.

I wouldn't pay so much attantion to the cold part of "deep cold of interstellar space". It can be treated scientifically or just as a common saying. Just don't treat it literally and everything remains correct. Yes, vaccum is the greatest thermal isolator so the ship won't cool down by itself but the point in quoted fragment is about comparison of combat duration between interstellar and stellar space. You won't cool down in either situation but additional IR radiation from stars heats up ships and shorten the battles.

Modifié par Flash_in_the_flesh, 21 février 2010 - 10:22 .

[Decho the Dolphin]

ImperialOperative wrote...

You're comprehending it incorrectly. They aren't saying that the deep-space cools off the ships so that they can work for longer, it's that when they're close to the star the heat added by the radiation lessens the amount of time they can fight.

This.

[thegreateski]

Statement: Yes. being in vacuum does not reduce the heat being generated by your ship. Being close to a sun certainly does not help either.

Modifié par thegreateski, 21 février 2010 - 10:25 .

[Tony_Knightcrawler]

You're right about vacuum not having a temperature, but the reason they heat up faster near a star is because... the solar wind/radiation from the star heats up the ship. So you're wrong.

[GODzilla]

interstellar space and the high quality vacuum therein is where you'll heat up FASTEST.

Could you explain why? And please in the words so that a layperson just as me can understand it. Thanks in advance.

[ufoflieger]

GODzilla_GSPB wrote...

interstellar space and the high quality vacuum therein is where you'll heat up FASTEST.

Could you explain why? And please in the words so that a layperson just as me can understand it. Thanks in advance.

There's nothing to understand here, it's simply wrong.
You may have more matter in a solar system than in interstellar space, but still there is by far not enough matter to give off much heat to it. That means in the way you experience temperature when cooking water for example.
The only way to give off heat is through radiation, i.e. infrared radiation. But this works in dark space as well as in a solar system as on Earth. Vacuum bottles only prevent this by having a shiny surface - outside and inside. So the radiation is being reflected.
In the end, near a sun you would heat up faster because your ship would absorbe radiation emmited by the star while in dark space there wouldn't be a radiation source besides your ship.

[Thomas_R_Roy]

Even in a complete vacuum, you emit radiation (at the very least) in the form of infrared light waves. You could also vent tiny quantities of super-heating gases to cool down.

[yuncas]

Lukertin wrote...

Delta426 wrote...

Q= mc∆t
∆t= Q/mc
If there is no m where does all the heat go?

By your wonderful logic and science, the heat we experience from the sun shining on our face is magic

What should I call this? Perhaps excellence?  Hmmm Yes, I shall call it excellence! 

[Flash_in_the_flesh]

Thomas_R_Roy wrote...

Even in a complete vacuum, you emit radiation (at the very least) in the form of infrared light waves. You could also vent tiny quantities of super-heating gases to cool down.

I bet everyone agrees with that, that's what stars do - emit few kinds of radiation. I think the issue arouse because of the cold part of "deep cold insterstellar space". One might assume that vaccum is cold and cools down the ship. But of course "cold space" doesn't have to mean it's cold in there. It's just a common saying like hot temper

[Kolos2]

Thomas_R_Roy wrote...

Even in a complete vacuum, you emit radiation (at the very least) in the form of infrared light waves. You could also vent tiny quantities of super-heating gases to cool down.

not to mention, you could fart

oh spaceship, right, sorry

Modifié par Kolos2, 22 février 2010 - 12:24 .

[corebit]

Thomas_R_Roy wrote...

You could also vent tiny quantities of super-heating gases to cool down.

Does it involve pulling the finger first? :happy:

[JKA_Nozyspy]

Ehm, space is cold, thats why things freeze in it.

[Murmillos]

Flash_in_the_flesh wrote...

Thomas_R_Roy wrote...

Even in a complete vacuum, you emit radiation (at the very least) in the form of infrared light waves. You could also vent tiny quantities of super-heating gases to cool down.

I bet everyone agrees with that, that's what stars do - emit few kinds of radiation. I think the issue arouse because of the cold part of "deep cold insterstellar space". One might assume that vaccum is cold and cools down the ship. But of course "cold space" doesn't have to mean it's cold in there. It's just a common saying like hot temper

well, think of it as like the sun. The closer you are to the sun, the hotter the planets are - due to solar radiation. all space is "deep cold", but what they mean is the further you are away from a source of energy (such as a sun), the "colder" it is and the better the ability to disperse heat. You can't cool off on the sunny side of a wall, but you can cool off on a shaded part of a wall. That's what "deep cold insterstellar space" is.

[Lmaoboat]

The answer is that they use a tachyon beam or a graviton pulse. Wait, wrong franchise, I meant either a mass effect field or dark energy. What I'm trying to say is Mass Effect isn't as hard sci-fi people give it credit for.

[DaftPaycheck]

All this talk is getting me hot. /corny

[tetracycloide]

Flash_in_the_flesh wrote...
I bet everyone agrees with that, that's what stars do - emit few kinds of radiation. I think the issue arouse because of the cold part of "deep cold insterstellar space". One might assume that vaccum is cold and cools down the ship. But of course "cold space" doesn't have to mean it's cold in there. It's just a common saying like hot temper

Incorrect.  Average temperature 2-3 Kelvin.  Quite cold.  Density matters.  Pun intended.

Modifié par tetracycloide, 22 février 2010 - 03:02 .

[Flash_in_the_flesh]

Murmillos wrote...

Flash_in_the_flesh wrote...

Thomas_R_Roy wrote...

Even in a complete vacuum, you emit radiation (at the very least) in the form of infrared light waves. You could also vent tiny quantities of super-heating gases to cool down.

I bet everyone agrees with that, that's what stars do - emit few kinds of radiation. I think the issue arouse because of the cold part of "deep cold insterstellar space". One might assume that vaccum is cold and cools down the ship. But of course "cold space" doesn't have to mean it's cold in there. It's just a common saying like hot temper

well, think of it as like the sun. The closer you are to the sun, the hotter the planets are - due to solar radiation. all space is "deep cold", but what they mean is the further you are away from a source of energy (such as a sun), the "colder" it is and the better the ability to disperse heat. You can't cool off on the sunny side of a wall, but you can cool off on a shaded part of a wall. That's what "deep cold insterstellar space" is.

You don't need to explain it to me. I know physics, that's what I'm studying on university. I'm trying to guess why TC considered this fragment of codex untrue.

Btw. we can talk about "hot" and "cold" only when there's some matter. We talk about temperature when atoms move and collide with each other. In perfect vaccum there's no matter, there's no temperature. No temperature doesn't mean it's zero, it means there's none. You can only disperse heat when you exchange your energy (heat) with other object of different temperature. Vaccum means emptyness, no exchange is possible. Only radiation is possible. Space can't help you to cool down, only you yourself are passively emitting radiation.

[tetracycloide]

Flash_in_the_flesh wrote...

You don't need to explain it to me. I know physics, that's what I'm studying on university. I'm trying to guess why TC considered this fragment of codex untrue.

Btw. we can talk about "hot" and "cold" only when there's some matter. We talk about temperature when atoms move and collide with each other. In perfect vaccum there's no matter, there's no temperature. No temperature doesn't mean it's zero, it means there's none. You can only disperse heat when you exchange your energy (heat) with other object of different temperature. Vaccum means emptyness, no exchange is possible. Only radiation is possible. Space can't help you to cool down, only you yourself are passively emitting radiation.

Incorrect

References: http://en.wikipedia....perature#Vacuum

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Hopefire wrote...

Unless you're fighting in a nebulae that's gone cold, interstellar space and the high quality vacuum therein is where you'll heat up FASTEST. Seriously. Basic property of a vacuum, it has no temperature. There's a reason a thermos is vacuum sealed - you don't get crossover of heat across a vacuum. So, if the Normandy is hot from a battle, going into deep space isn't a good way to cool off. Finding a cold rock to rest against, somehow channeling waste heat into some sort of discharge, or basking in a cool nebulae would be a much better way of chilling out. 

So how come the crew of the Apollo 13 mission almost froze to death?  Not trolling, honestly curious.

[didymos1120]

tetracycloide wrote...

Flash_in_the_flesh wrote...

You don't need to explain it to me. I know physics, that's what I'm studying on university. I'm trying to guess why TC considered this fragment of codex untrue.

Btw. we can talk about "hot" and "cold" only when there's some matter. We talk about temperature when atoms move and collide with each other. In perfect vaccum there's no matter, there's no temperature. No temperature doesn't mean it's zero, it means there's none. You can only disperse heat when you exchange your energy (heat) with other object of different temperature. Vaccum means emptyness, no exchange is possible. Only radiation is possible. Space can't help you to cool down, only you yourself are passively emitting radiation.

Incorrect

References: http://en.wikipedia....perature#Vacuum

It's not really incorrect.  It's more a point of view sort of thing.  Even physicists disagree on the point.  Yeah, you can assign a temperature to a perfect vacuum, but it's kind of a definitional technicality and an exception to how temperature is normally used.  For actual space, some accept the CMB as the temperature, but you can still technically argue that the vacuum proper, i.e. spacetime itself, doesn't really have any temperature at all, and it's only properly applied to matter/radiation.  But, for all practical purposes: yes, deep space is cold.  Of course, that's still different from saying any object in deep space will cool rapidly. 

[didymos1120]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...
So how come the crew of the Apollo 13 mission almost froze to death?  Not trolling, honestly curious.

Because it was designed assuming certain levels of average power use, and therefore to shed heat at a proper rate for that level.  When they were forced to operate well below that normal level (i.e., use as little power as humanly possible) heat was being shed faster than it was generated, so the temperature dropped quite low.

[LZIM]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Hopefire wrote...

Unless you're fighting in a nebulae that's gone cold, interstellar space and the high quality vacuum therein is where you'll heat up FASTEST. Seriously. Basic property of a vacuum, it has no temperature. There's a reason a thermos is vacuum sealed - you don't get crossover of heat across a vacuum. So, if the Normandy is hot from a battle, going into deep space isn't a good way to cool off. Finding a cold rock to rest against, somehow channeling waste heat into some sort of discharge, or basking in a cool nebulae would be a much better way of chilling out. 

So how come the crew of the Apollo 13 mission almost froze to death?  Not trolling, honestly curious.

First of all they were in an environment with an atmosphere that was not being heated enough to keep them comfortable.. and eventually their bodies would have equaled out to the temerature of the atmopshere in the cabin, denser than space so they'd lose energy to it faster than just radiating it into matter in the cabin and space.

But the near void of space is not an insulator by any means.

While the suns corona is 'hot' it isn't keeping the energy of the star confined like the contents of a thermos, energy is being lost to that massive volume of space, mostly as radiation. And in deep space the lack of conductivity to the vanishingly thin medium won't keep your ship from radiating energy either. The question is like asking if a ship in deep space was the same as it being inside a styrofoam cup. It ignores radiation. 

The ship would be subject to energy lost as radiation as consequence to operation until the ship got cold enough tha it would stop losing energy to the void. Everything in the ship is the same temperature as space. If most of that energy is lost by radation, that's not an inconsiderable amount of energy being lost over time.

But would be a very different question if the deep void of space medium wasn't a void, but instead was a liquid or highly conductive solid. 

Consider a heating element on a stove, red hot, turn the power off and it cools down, even in atmosphere, very quickly.

The topic question is if that heating element, without current to resist anymore (or even with it) would radiate energy less quickly to the void of deep space because it is so thin. 

The example given in this thread, again for any who might have missed it, the sun, pretty freaking far away does give off tremendous amounts of radiation.. if the void of space was an effective insulator at all we wouldn't get light or heat from the sun, it would be totally black, insulating the sun's energy, or the energy of a ship, completely from escaping. does that mean the deep void of space is an insulator because the medium isn't sucking heat out of stuff like touching a hot stove element? not if a ship with red hot radiation fins is letting off massive amounts of energy by radiation. Because they are hotter they will cool down until the are they at the same energy state as surrounding space. Which is also what ships would be insulated from the 'cold' of space.

I'm just wondering about the difference between deep space, super thin compared to the sun's corona with is marginally thicker, making a whole hell of alot of difference if your ship if light reflective in the first place*. If you're ship is not able to deflect solar radiation, yeah it will superficially be warmed a very maginal  amount. Nothing that should make firing a directed energy weapon system, and otherwise cooling hot components any harder.

*One thing would be having a reflective ship. Another would be using meta materials that bend light away/around. In this way your ship can keep radiating off energy on all it's surfaces like it would in deep space. AND why would you really want to waste that energy anyway? You'd have to keep recharging your ship. Good design would be trying to recapture that energy and convert it back to useful forms.

Modifié par LZIM, 22 février 2010 - 05:04 .

[Flash_in_the_flesh]

tetracycloide wrote...

Flash_in_the_flesh wrote...

You
don't need to explain it to me. I know physics, that's what I'm
studying on university. I'm trying to guess why TC considered this
fragment of codex untrue.

Btw. we can talk about "hot" and
"cold" only when there's some matter. We talk about temperature when
atoms move and collide with each other. In perfect vaccum there's no
matter, there's no temperature. No temperature doesn't mean it's zero,
it means there's none. You can only disperse heat when you exchange
your energy (heat) with other object of different temperature. Vaccum
means emptyness, no exchange is possible. Only radiation is possible.
Space can't help you to cool down, only you yourself are passively
emitting radiation.

Incorrect

References: http://en.wikipedia....perature#Vacuum

Flash_in_the_flesh wrote...

Space can't help you to cool down, only you yourself are passively emitting radiation.

Every body radiates energy thus passively reduces its temperature. I'm saying that space won't help you to cool down. Object can cool down only thanks to it radiating its own energy. There's no exchange of energy between objects because perfect vaccum is empty, its nothing in there, thus it's not an object. Vaccum is a perfect thermal isolator. It won't cool down any object, the object is cooling down itself by radiation.

Does vaccum has zero temperature or none? I guess you can call nothing something, thus zero is something yet there's nothing. This way we are back at the point of vaccum being or not being an object. In linked explanation there's a gas in perfect vaccum which radiated its energy to the point of absolute zero. This way vaccum achieved the state of absolute zero temperature but is it still a vaccum if there's a gas in it? Does the vaccum has zero temperature or the gas? Semantics and pretty fun discussion. Sadly it leads to nowhere.

Modifié par Flash_in_the_flesh, 22 février 2010 - 04:38 .

[didymos1120]

LZIM wrote...

I'm just wondering about the difference between deep space at 2.7 kelvin and being near a star making a whole hell of alot of difference if your ship if light reflective in the first place. If you're ship is not able to deflect solar radiation, yeah it will superficially be warmed a very maginal  amount. Nothing that should make firing a directed energy weapon system, and otherwise cooling hot components any harder.

Well, the reflective issue is mostly moot in ME.  One, directed energy weapons are in the minority.  Two, how many ships with mirror finishes have you noticed?  Sure, they all reflect light to some degree, but I can't think of one silver hulled classic SF style ship appearing in-game ever.  Three, you probably wouldn't want to be so reflective if you plan on fighting around plentiful sources of light: your lovely shining vehicle will make a lovely, stand-out target.  Four:  visible light ain't the only radiation a star produces anyway.