6 ms·

I see another misunderstanding then. With this method the actual probe would use nuclear material to melt its way through the ice. In addition, the heat of the

I see another misunderstanding then. With this method the actual probe would use nuclear material to melt its way through the ice. In addition, the heat of the nuclear probe on one side and the ice on another (or melting ice) would make for the ideal conditions of a peltier (or just use a traditional RTG) device to power onboard sensors and electronics. The fiber optic cable is only for communication.

throwup238 2y ago
> use nuclear material to melt its way through the ice All 300 watts of it? It's not going to even make an indentation, let alone through 10s of km of ice.
- sandworm101 2y ago
  Simple reactors can be designed to be turned up and down according to need. A 300w RTG is more than enough to run all the necessary electronics. The ice-melting 30,000w+ heater can be a second rector that is spooled up only when ice needs melting.
  - dylan604 2y ago
    we're attempting to search for life and the thing you want to do is use radioactive heaters? we deliberately crashed a satellite into the planet to avoid having it potentially contaminate the moons we are curious about, and yet you're thinking they'd just irradiate everything like this? it's really just not logical
    - ceejayoz 2y ago
      The concern is more spreading Earth life. NASA's Planetary Protection team (which is a delightful job title) is largely concerned with sterilizing stuff we send out so any discovery of microbes on Mars doesn't turn out to be hitchhikers. Even a fully fleged nuclear reactor isn't gonna do much damage to Europa and potential life. Swimming in a nuclear reactor's fuel pool is quite safe; water's some of the best shielding we have. https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/ https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/
      - canadianfella 2y ago
        [dead]
    - sandworm101 2y ago
      In the outer solar system, under miles of ice, in total darkness and cold .. it is nuclear or nothing. Short of antimatter batteries, there is no other source of power that would be even theoretically suitable.

throwup238 2y ago

> use nuclear material to melt its way through the ice All 300 watts of it? It's not going to even make an indentation, let alone through 10s of km of ice.

sandworm101 2y ago
Simple reactors can be designed to be turned up and down according to need. A 300w RTG is more than enough to run all the necessary electronics. The ice-melting 30,000w+ heater can be a second rector that is spooled up only when ice needs melting.
- dylan604 2y ago
  we're attempting to search for life and the thing you want to do is use radioactive heaters? we deliberately crashed a satellite into the planet to avoid having it potentially contaminate the moons we are curious about, and yet you're thinking they'd just irradiate everything like this? it's really just not logical
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    The concern is more spreading Earth life. NASA's Planetary Protection team (which is a delightful job title) is largely concerned with sterilizing stuff we send out so any discovery of microbes on Mars doesn't turn out to be hitchhikers. Even a fully fleged nuclear reactor isn't gonna do much damage to Europa and potential life. Swimming in a nuclear reactor's fuel pool is quite safe; water's some of the best shielding we have. https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/ https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/
    - canadianfella 2y ago
      [dead]
  - sandworm101 2y ago
    In the outer solar system, under miles of ice, in total darkness and cold .. it is nuclear or nothing. Short of antimatter batteries, there is no other source of power that would be even theoretically suitable.