D4rk50ul808 wrote...
I read this whole thread and still don't know if my Shepard needs to wear his snuggy in deep space or not, this did not help me at all.
Depends on how long he's gonna be out there, but in general it's probably a good idea.
To whoever writes the Codex: Your vacuum sucks.
Débuté par
Hopefire
, févr. 21 2010 04:12
-
Ce sujet est fermé
- Show only BioWare posts
#76
Posté 22 février 2010 - 02:46
didymos1120
-
- Members
- 14 580 messages
Depends on how long he's gonna be out there, but in general it's probably a good idea.
Retour en haut
#77
Posté 22 février 2010 - 02:49
didymos1120
-
- Members
- 14 580 messages
Vena_86 wrote...
Well, according to Mass Effect 2 you can take a walk in vacuum with nothing but a breathing mask, covering a part of your face. That is more problematic than a codex line imo...
You could, provided it's a very short walk. You don't even need the mask, if it's short enough. Remember that scene in 2001 where Bowman blasts himself out of the pod and into the airlock after forgetting to take his helmet? Yeah, that'd totally work. Srsly. The only thing it got wrong was showing him taking a breath and holding it before he opened the hatch.
Modifié par didymos1120, 22 février 2010 - 02:49 .
#78
Posté 22 février 2010 - 04:19
khaos974
-
- Members
- 33 messages
Vena_86 wrote...
Well, according to Mass Effect 2 you can take a walk in vacuum with nothing but a breathing mask, covering a part of your face. That is more problematic than a codex line imo...
It's probably the law of time constraints and budgeting that permits this.
#79
Guest_Soverain_*
Posté 22 février 2010 - 04:36
Guest_Soverain_*
Guest_Soverain_*
-
- Guests
Hopefire wrote...
. 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.
that statement is WORNG, if you were right the earth would get no heat from the sun. the sun's heat travels accross a vacum as radiation thats how the sun heats the earth.
a vaccum in a thermas only prevents heat loss via conduction, the insides of the vaccum are silver to prevent the heat transfer via radiation.
in deep space a spacecraft would lose heat faster than if it were near a source of heat such as a star, that because a star would add more heat while heat in deep space would be lost more quickly
#80
Guest_Soverain_*
Posté 22 février 2010 - 04:52
Guest_Soverain_*
Guest_Soverain_*
-
- Guests
Flash_in_the_flesh wrote...
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.
and you call yourself a physics student, the basics about thermal energy is that its transfered from high temperature, to low temperature, whether that low temperature is in matter or a vacum its still low temperture and thermal energy transfer as heat will take place.
#81
Guest_Soverain_*
Posté 22 février 2010 - 05:05
Guest_Soverain_*
Guest_Soverain_*
-
- Guests
here is how i know heat works and how its applies to the normandy and other spaceships.
heat is thermal enery in transfer or on the move,
heat travels from high temperature to low temperature, that low temperature can be space/vaccum or matter.
how hot something is depends on the amount of thermal enrgey.
how this appllies to the normandy and heat loss.
lets use the deep space scenario, in deep space the normandy will lose heat, if heat is lost faster than the normandy can generate heat then the ship will be cold.
if heat is generated faster than the normandy can lose heat then the normandy will still be hot.
in order to keep at a certain temperature the normandy will have to lose heat at a certain rate compared to the rate of heat generation.
heat is thermal enery in transfer or on the move,
heat travels from high temperature to low temperature, that low temperature can be space/vaccum or matter.
how hot something is depends on the amount of thermal enrgey.
how this appllies to the normandy and heat loss.
lets use the deep space scenario, in deep space the normandy will lose heat, if heat is lost faster than the normandy can generate heat then the ship will be cold.
if heat is generated faster than the normandy can lose heat then the normandy will still be hot.
in order to keep at a certain temperature the normandy will have to lose heat at a certain rate compared to the rate of heat generation.
Modifié par Soverain, 23 février 2010 - 12:30 .
#82
Posté 22 février 2010 - 05:12
Besetment
-
- Members
- 347 messages
Whilst its true that space isn't really anything and doesn't have a temperature, objects in space do. Because theres no air that eliminates convection as a means of transfering heat by molecular activity. Theres no conduction either so whats left is radiation. Eventually an object in space will radiate heat until it settles at just under 3 degrees kelvin which is the temperature of Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR).
Also the other thing that has been observed about people and animals that have been exposed to vacuum or near vacuum is moisture boiling off the tongue and eyes which has a cooling effect and maybe that goes some way towards explaining why space is often referred to as being cold. I guess it literally is in the 10 seconds before you lose consciousness and experience all the moisture at the surface of your body evaporating.
Also the other thing that has been observed about people and animals that have been exposed to vacuum or near vacuum is moisture boiling off the tongue and eyes which has a cooling effect and maybe that goes some way towards explaining why space is often referred to as being cold. I guess it literally is in the 10 seconds before you lose consciousness and experience all the moisture at the surface of your body evaporating.
Modifié par Besetment, 22 février 2010 - 05:14 .
#83
Guest_Soverain_*
Posté 22 février 2010 - 06:34
Guest_Soverain_*
Guest_Soverain_*
-
- Guests
the reason for the boiling effect of animals when exposed to a vacum its because the boiling point of water at atmospheric pressure is 100degress celsius but the boiling point of wate in a vacum as deomstrated on nation geographic is lower than room temperature.
if a human were exposed to a vacum even at room temperature water would boil in his/her body and he/she would die.
if a human were exposed to a vacum even at room temperature water would boil in his/her body and he/she would die.
#84
Posté 22 février 2010 - 07:36
Foofad
-
- Members
- 95 messages
Do you guys even know what you're arguing about anymore? The last two pages have been reiterations of previous points.
Things we all agree on: Whatever local conditions are, the heat generated from combat means you need a bigass radiator or a super efficient one.
If you're close to a star, it's going to get hotter, quicker - by SOME amount.
What everyone doesn't seem to agree with is the degree to which it matters. The thermal radiation of a star is absolutely going to warm up the ships the closer they are, there is no question about that. But I'm not convinced that it would add any significant amount of heat unless you were super close; and there's no reason for anyone to fight right next to a star. In that respect, the codex is probably exaggerated - there's no reason why battle should be more frantic in the Green Zone around a star.
And until someone actually starts putting up some real numbers - i.e. ship internal temperature, rate of dissipation, heat generation by use of ship components, and additional heat from solar radiation at the range we're talking about (i.e. 1 AU or thereabouts) - the thread isn't going to go anywhere.
Things we all agree on: Whatever local conditions are, the heat generated from combat means you need a bigass radiator or a super efficient one.
If you're close to a star, it's going to get hotter, quicker - by SOME amount.
What everyone doesn't seem to agree with is the degree to which it matters. The thermal radiation of a star is absolutely going to warm up the ships the closer they are, there is no question about that. But I'm not convinced that it would add any significant amount of heat unless you were super close; and there's no reason for anyone to fight right next to a star. In that respect, the codex is probably exaggerated - there's no reason why battle should be more frantic in the Green Zone around a star.
And until someone actually starts putting up some real numbers - i.e. ship internal temperature, rate of dissipation, heat generation by use of ship components, and additional heat from solar radiation at the range we're talking about (i.e. 1 AU or thereabouts) - the thread isn't going to go anywhere.
#85
Posté 22 février 2010 - 07:49
LZIM
-
- Members
- 129 messages
Taiko Roshi wrote...
Delta426 wrote...
Farkingrouse wrote...
Its only a game... calm down.
The difference between good, immersive science fiction and crappy star trek, is the science part.
+1. Well said good sir.
should have posted something that eloquent.
#86
Posté 22 février 2010 - 08:31
Foofad
-
- Members
- 95 messages
Another note - Mass Effect's pseudo-science uses *liberal* amounts of handwavium and unobtanium, so any kind of scientific argument about precisely what's going on is only valid up to a point.
#87
Posté 23 février 2010 - 02:04
Bob5312
-
- Members
- 184 messages
Foofad wrote...
And until someone actually starts putting up some real numbers - i.e. ship internal temperature, rate of dissipation, heat generation by use of ship components, and additional heat from solar radiation at the range we're talking about (i.e. 1 AU or thereabouts) - the thread isn't going to go anywhere.
I said it yesterday, but I'll repost it:
Given that the solar constant is 1400 watts per square metre (the amount of energy per square metre per second incident from the sun at the Earth's surface), the surface of a ship would already be absorbing a great deal of energy from the star. Given Stefan's law for the energy radiated by a hot body, for the ship to be in thermal equilibrium (for it to re-radiate the absorbed energy from the star) it must have a temperature of about 400 K (125 degrees Celcius, or 260 degrees Fahrenheit). This is hot enought to boil water, and certainly hot enough to cook any crew inside without insulation and a heat dissipation mechanism. (Which presumably the ship would have. I have also assumed that the ship is totally black, you could probably reduce the temperature a little bit just by painting it white).
Any additional heat generated by the ship's internal systems will increase the temperature further; this heat is due only to the star (for a star like our sun, at 1 AU). So, yes, there will be a lot of extra heat for the ship to deal with: we can assume that heat dissipation technology can deal with the heat generated by combat in deep space or the heat absorbed from a nearby star, but is overwhelmed by both sources of energy at the same time.
#88
Posté 23 février 2010 - 03:02
Flash_in_the_flesh
-
- Members
- 277 messages
Soverain wrote...
Flash_in_the_flesh wrote...
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.
and you call yourself a physics student, the basics about thermal energy is that its transfered from high temperature, to low temperature, whether that low temperature is in matter or a vacum its still low temperture and thermal energy transfer as heat will take place.
Oh, but, but. Wrong.
What we call a temperature is a kinetic energy of atoms. There are no atoms in perfect vaccum. You cant assign values like temperature, mass, velocity, etc to nothing. (OK, yes, it is possible to use zeroth law of thermodynamics and say that vaccum is in equation with object which radiated its energy to the point of absolute zero temperature, thus the vaccum is also at zero temperature but all of this is hypothesis.) To which object you want to assign these values in perfect vaccum? To transfer heat from one object to another through conduction, first you need two objects. To which object you want to transfer that energy? Dont answer, these are rhetorical questions.
The reason objects cool down in perfect vaccum is radiation, not heat conduction.
Of course there is no such thing as perfect vaccum in real life. Yes, it was hypothecical perfect vaccum I was talking about in previous post. Read it carefully.
And please dont be so hasty in instructing others in topics you lack knowledge.
#89
Guest_Soverain_*
Posté 23 février 2010 - 12:36
Guest_Soverain_*
Guest_Soverain_*
-
- Guests
Flash_in_the_flesh wrote...
And please dont be so hasty in instructing others in topics you lack knowledge.
I DONT LACK KNOWLEDGE, I JUST DONT HAVE SUFFICIENT KNOWLEDGE!
#90
Posté 23 février 2010 - 12:41
Flash_in_the_flesh
-
- Members
- 277 messages
Soverain wrote...
Flash_in_the_flesh wrote...
And please dont be so hasty in instructing others in topics you lack knowledge.
I DONT LACK KNOWLEDGE, I JUST DONT HAVE SUFFICIENT KNOWLEDGE!
Yet you accused me of insufficient knowledge.
#91
Guest_Soverain_*
Posté 23 février 2010 - 03:52
Guest_Soverain_*
Guest_Soverain_*
-
- Guests
Flash_in_the_flesh wrote...
Soverain wrote...
Flash_in_the_flesh wrote...
And please dont be so hasty in instructing others in topics you lack knowledge.
I DONT LACK KNOWLEDGE, I JUST DONT HAVE SUFFICIENT KNOWLEDGE!
Yet you accused me of insufficient knowledge.
well we both misjudged each other then, i am sorry.
#93
Posté 23 février 2010 - 06:09
ufoflieger
-
- Members
- 70 messages
Bob5312 wrote...
Given that the solar constant is 1400 watts per square metre (the amount of energy per square metre per second incident from the sun at the Earth's surface), the surface of a ship would already be absorbing a great deal of energy from the star. Given Stefan's law for the energy radiated by a hot body, for the ship to be in thermal equilibrium (for it to re-radiate the absorbed energy from the star) it must have a temperature of about 400 K (125 degrees Celcius, or 260 degrees Fahrenheit). This is hot enought to boil water, and certainly hot enough to cook any crew inside without insulation and a heat dissipation mechanism. (Which presumably the ship would have. I have also assumed that the ship is totally black, you could probably reduce the temperature a little bit just by painting it white).
Any additional heat generated by the ship's internal systems will increase the temperature further; this heat is due only to the star (for a star like our sun, at 1 AU). So, yes, there will be a lot of extra heat for the ship to deal with: we can assume that heat dissipation technology can deal with the heat generated by combat in deep space or the heat absorbed from a nearby star, but is overwhelmed by both sources of energy at the same time.
This. Further discussion is pretty much needless.
