4 ms·
What would be the economic implications of "float stone", that is a solid material which is lighter than air or at least neutrally buoyant? Say a molecular stru
by EthanHeilman 14y ago
What would be the economic implications of "float stone", that is a solid material which is lighter than air or at least neutrally buoyant? Say a molecular structure that creates pockets of vacuum at the micro scale.
- gonvaled 14y agoFloating buildings? Floating roads? Crazy things ...
- loceng 14y agoAvatar.
- arnarbi 14y agoStrap one on your back and you can swim in the atmosphere like a diver in water. Although it would have to be over 66 cubic meters for an 80kg person in 20°C air. If it is spherical, it would be c.a. 5 m in diameter.
- rossjudson 14y agoI would make mine in the shape of a giant hand. Then I'd take a picture and send it to Peter Molyneux.
- mortenjorck 14y agoThanks for the napkin calculation. How does that compare to the volume required for the amount of helium or hydrogen that would be required to achieve the same buoyancy?
- arnarbi 14y agoThis new material is 0.16 kg/m3, presumably if it's filled with vacuum.. Helium is 0.17 kg/m3 at 20°C and hydrogen is 0.09 kg/m3. At the same time, air is 1.2 kg/m3. So, the volume of each needed to lift 80kg (which would have to include the person and whatever structure to contain the material), is 80/(1.2 - density of material) m3. So: Helium: 78 m3, or sphere of diameter 5.3 m Graphene aerogel: 77 m3, or sphere of diameter 5.3 m Hydrogen: 72 m3, or sphere of diameter 5.1 m
- saalweachter 14y agoI wonder if you would create a hazard for rockets, once enough float stones had been dropped and were drifting around whatever layer of atmosphere they were neutrally buoyant with respect to. I guess it might not be a hazard at all. Firstly, they wouldn't be traveling at orbital velocities, and secondly, since the premise is that they are the same density as the air, hitting a float stone at Mach N might not be any worse than hitting the air at Mach N.
- keenerd 14y ago> since the premise is that they are the same density as the air, hitting a float stone at Mach N might not be any worse than hitting the air at Mach N. Dive into a swimming pool filled with water. Safe, harmless fun! Dive into a pool filled with solid ice. Ice is 10% less dense, so ten percent more safe and harmless and fun, right? Density is not the most important physical quality here.