|
|
|
|
|
#1 | |
|
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Quote:
It won't take much to deflect the ionized ISM. Unfortunately, a meaningful fraction is not ionized (estimates seem to range from 10-25%) and won't care about magnetic shielding, nor will dust. Of course, if you limit yourself to less than around .7c you can just use regular matter. Last edited by Anthony; 12-01-2020 at 09:02 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Niagara, Canada
|
My reading suggests that a metre of highly-hydrogenized armour (call it Wood or Ice in Spaceships terms; maybe something like pykrete) is a handy way to turn the neutral ISM atoms into separated protons and electrons, and my back-of-the-envelope-figuring from SS5p40 suggests it won't ablate too much from dust on the time-scales I'm interested in.
__________________
Thank you for your time, -- DataPacRat "Then again, maybe I'm wrong." |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 | |
|
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Niagara, Canada
|
Quote:
0.5c: 172,776 0.4c: 18,394 0.3c: 1,958 0.2c: 208 0.1c: 22 0.05c: 7.2 0.02c: 3.7 0.01c: 3.0 Even just 3 rem per second builds up to 95B rem per millennium-long voyage; bringing it down to a more reasonable number would be rather reassuring, and keep those fault-tolerant chips from having to tolerate quite so many faults. Given that PFs can multiply, I'm now thinking about stacking 5 75-rPF field-projectors in series, which would reduce that 95B dose down to a rather tame 40...
__________________
Thank you for your time, -- DataPacRat "Then again, maybe I'm wrong." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
The regular radiation rules assume gamma rays; low energy nuclei have much worse penetration. 0.2c is only 19 MeV/nucleon, even 0.5c is only 145.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Join Date: Dec 2013
|
Plus, at higher tech levels, radiation shielding can be combined with both radiation medication, and genetic engineering for radiation resistance, tolerance, and recovery.
Resisting +10% more Rems; tolerating a Rem dose +10% higher; and being able to recover from 0.5 Rems per year; would (calculated simply) combine into being able to handle +33.1% more Rems per year. And, if dosage remains below 6.05 Rems per year, you could also slowly recover from Rem overdoses.
__________________
In which I post about a TL9-10 solar system http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=169674 If you don't know why I said something, please ask. Assumptions are the death of courtesy. Disappointed in the behaviour I have too-often encountered here. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 | ||
|
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Niagara, Canada
|
Quote:
If so, a factor of 20 doesn't reduce a total accumulated dose of 95B rem by all that much... Quote:
__________________
Thank you for your time, -- DataPacRat "Then again, maybe I'm wrong." |
||
|
|
|
![]() |
| Tags |
| radiation, radiation protection, spaceships, tl10, vehicles |
|
|