142
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2023
142 points (98.6% liked)
Technology
58144 readers
4368 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Complete dead-end technologically and politically, so this is basically just a gift to Lockheed. Lobbyist deserves a promotion!
Why do you think so?
I can see launching nuclear payloads being a tough sell politically but the technological principles are sound.
It's also worth noting that past mars solar panels start to be functionally useless, so we use...nuclear powered spacecraft... to generate electricity when needed and have done for half a century. It's not like nuclear stuff in space is a new idea
We even detonated atomic bombs in space
It's actually much much less dead-end than chemical rockets are. There's a lot of technological possibility for nuclear rockets, thanks to the energy density of nuclear power.
In theory you could even do fusion rockets in the far future, but we'd need to figure out fusion for that first.
But like, fusion rockets might be the holy grail for space travel, short of maybe antimatter rockets (but you can imagine the complications in that). This chain of technologies is absolutely something worth exploring.