8 minutes ago, studiot said:

Thanks for the lightening quick response, but do you know what the Beer Law refers to - it is not dispersion it is transmission.

You made a prediction, where did it come from ?

Sorry , but when I see 'beer law' a week after I subscribed I am not even gonna check if that actually is a thing...

But ok, if you insist.

It is one just of the properties of Graphene.

Joey

This is a better expalantion of Beer's Law than Wikipedia

Chemistry LibreTexts

The Beer-Lambert Law

The Beer-Lambert law relates the attenuation of light to the properties of the material through which the light is traveling. This page takes a brief look at the Beer-Lambert Law and explains the u...

Are you aware that 'disperse system' is also a specialist chemical term ?

It embraces mixtures where one material is distributed throughout another so that the result acts as a single entity.

As such it covers sols, aerosols, foams, colloids and so on

Another important Law is the Phase Rule, which can describe the range of temperature and pressure that your 2 component system can remain stable.

I am taking your proposal seriously and trying to discuss the details.

On 6/25/2025 at 2:57 PM, JoeyJoystick said:

Hi Studiot,

I am now. But Hydrogen and oxygen is water I believe. So that is not pollution in the long term, but it may have a small effect in thew short term. And it is short term, because the vast majority of it will be burned up in very close proximity of earth and quickly fall down again as water. I am not denying your correct, but I think the influence of this is negligible.

The rockets, of course, are re-usable. You would need quite a few of them. But hey, Elon shouted that he can launch StarShip for 2 million per trip (I calculated 10M. I struggle trusting Elon.).

Joey

On 6/25/2025 at 11:46 AM, JoeyJoystick said:

Now I'm gonna do something that is not fair, but since both the cost of the dispensers and the carbon are irrelevant to the total cost I am just going to focus on the transportation costs. Now SpaceX claims they will be able to fly StarShip for 2 Million per launch. Since Elon Musk has a bad habit of being wrong with numbers, I am just gonna take this immediately to 10 million USD per flight. with about 1 flight a day for 2 years this would accumulate to about 7.5 Billion USD. Compared to probably less than 1 billion for both the dispensers and the carbon.

How does is this compatible with this ?

Wikipedia SpaceX Starship

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

The vehicle consists of two stages: the Super Heavy booster and the Starship spacecraft, both powered by Raptor engines burning liquid methane (the main component of natural gas) and liquid oxygen.

Low Earth Orbit is defined as above 100km.

Here the air is at around about minus 100oC

The pressure depends upon the component here is the relevant equation and physics.

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

How does this information compare with your calculations ?

Edited July 1Jul 1 by studiot

On 7/1/2025 at 9:22 PM, studiot said:

How does is this compatible with this ?

Wikipedia SpaceX Starship

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

Low Earth Orbit is defined as above 100km.

Here the air is at around about minus 100oC

The pressure depends upon the component here is the relevant equation and physics.

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

How does this information compare with your calculations ?

Hi Studiot,

First of all my apologies for jumping to a conclusion a bit quickly with my remark on the Beer-Lambert Law. And needless to say now that I had obviously not heard from that. I had, however, tried to do something similar though. This is way better.

Thanks for the link, but I need a bit more time than I have have right now. I will compile something nice and come back later on this. There is more data available on the subject than I had imagined. And some of it is very promising because they have tested this is my understanding.

On a different note. I have a feeling I have derailed the original conversation. Please advise. I see you have been here a long time. I do not want to offend anyone.

Joey

Edited July 2Jul 2 by JoeyJoystick
comment.

Just now, JoeyJoystick said:

Hi Studiot,

First of all my apologies for jumping to a conclusion a bit quickly with my remark on the Beer-Lambert Law. And needless to say now that I had obviously not heard from that. I had, however, tried to do something similar though. This is way better.

Thanks for the link, but I need a bit more time than I have have right now. I will compile something nice and come back later on this. There is more data available on the subject than I had imagined. And some of it is very promising because they have tested this is my understanding.

On a different note. I have a feeling I have derailed the original conversation. Please advise. I see you have been here a long time. I do not want to offend anyone.

Joey

Thanks for the info, I had honestly thought that we were having (and still are) a reasonable discussion and that there was some misunderstanding so you had cracked a joke re Beer.

So yes come back when you have sorted your other business.

Please also look at my point about the fuel.

I don't know who posted the negative rep, I haven't done that since I was a rookie here in 20012/13.

So I have post a positive cancellation.

See yah.

2 minutes ago, studiot said:

Thanks for the info, I had honestly thought that we were having (and still are) a reasonable discussion and that there was some misunderstanding so you had cracked a joke re Beer.

So yes come back when you have sorted your other business.

Please also look at my point about the fuel.

I don't know who posted the negative rep, I haven't done that since I was a rookie here in 20012/13.

So I have post a positive cancellation.

See yah.

Hi Studiot.

I did not even know I had a negative. I was not referring to that. That is ok. What I meant was that I did not start this thread. I feel like I have changed the subject. That is not always appreciated. Hence, I worry I derailed the thread.

And, yes, I am serious about this. I am very aware that it is an outlandish idea, but I just like to look at things from different perspectives. Most of the time it is fairly obvious that the idea deserves a one-way ticket to the dust bin. But this time everything I looked up confirmed my idea, and I did not find much that I thought would stand in the way. And this is an exercise from which I learn a lot. I am hoping for you guys to proof me wrong. And you have made me aware of several mistakes already. But the mistakes go both ways I notice. Hence I said I need time for this.

Joey