198 points

Yeah, but propelling them out of the solar system just sounds like the kind of fake-ending that ends up with the super villain coming back stronger in a decade. Have we learnt nothing from science fiction? You have to destroy your foes whilst you can.

permalink
report
reply
63 points

From the https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EvilOverlordList

4: Shooting is not too good for my enemies.

7: When I’ve captured my adversary and he says, “Look, before you kill me, will you at least tell me what this is all about?” I’ll say, “No.” and shoot him. No, on second thought I’ll shoot him then say “No.”

13: All slain enemies will be cremated, or at least have several rounds of ammunition emptied into them, not Left for Dead at the bottom of the cliff. The announcement of their deaths, as well as any accompanying celebration, will be deferred until after the aforementioned disposal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

Man, I haven’t thought of the Evil Overlord List in many, many years. Thanks for that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
55 points

The phantom zone ain’t gonna cut it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points
*

It blows my mind that this was cutting edge, jaw dropping graphics back in the day. A shape-shifting trapezoid with some panicked faces peeking out.

E. Nah now I’m thinking it’s a one dimensional parallelegram.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

That shit’s laughable, but then there was Superman III and the trauma it caused:

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

What blows my mind is that I could right now recreate this in moments on a cheap, low-power microcontroller.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Which angel is that?

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

Imploding submarines are far more efficient

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Okay when the options are throwing a football down field or up field, the option to hit a softball with a sledgehammer isn’t helpful.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Going easy on traitors is how Germany gave us WWII.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

But we gave him a nice little prison stay to write his manifesto in! Surely he learned his lesson and won’t attempt to overthrow democracy again, right?

…right?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

They can still come back from another parallel reality or some such - villains are like cats, they always come back (unless they are bored and then they don’t).

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

Sun’s bad then too. Don’t want them Voyage Homeing their way into the past

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Yes, one is a final solution, the other is just pushing your problems elsewhere without regard for who else it could affect.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

To the depths of Jupiter, then.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

https://youtu.be/zoCvqDd2_C8

Back when RT wasn’t shit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
99 points

It’s definitely harder to decay the orbit into the sun directly than it is to get to escape velocity. But to play devil’s advocate, there is probably a way to get them into the sun while being a similar cost to escape velocity. All you need to do is burn prograde to a super high aphelion, ride all the way out there to Pluto or whatever and then do a small retrograde burn to bring your perihelion inside the sun’s photosphere. When you then get back towards the sun years later you would slam into it with a sick velocity that I think would be worth the decades-long wait.

permalink
report
reply
55 points

This definitely reads like one of my KSP exploits…

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

Gravity assist with one of the larger planets to make a very narrow orbit seems to be the most efficient way. But you need the planets to align correctly to have an efficient route.

“I’ll launch you into the sun once there is an appropriate transfer window to Jupiter” just doesn’t have the same ring to it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

What if we catch a gravity assist off Jool, and do the retrograde burn at perijool to gain some free Oberth Effect DV?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

This guy orbital mechanics!

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

Jebadiah is always so happy to spend 52 years only to find himself stranded on Bop.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

I actually sent a rescue mission to save one of my kerbals and the science they had on board, and ended up needing to launch a mission to save the rescue mission…

Had to break it up into three launches, two to build the larger ship in orbit and one to fuel it up.

I learned a lot about orbital mechanics that day…

Total time in space was probably about 20 years…

And I may have forgotten about a kerbals in one or two plays…

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I remember there was a trick where you could transfer fuel around to move your center of gravity then rotate the ship.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I scrolled down specifically looking for a KSP comment, thank you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

That’s what I was thinking too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points
*

Alternatively you do like the Parker Solar Probe and do 7 Venus flybys, bleeding off a little speed each time with an inverse gravity assist.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Not an expert, but I’ve read it’s easiest to use jupiter to bleed off enough velocity to fall into our sun.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Yeah it probably is, my comment was really about raw deltaV numbers without using gravity assists.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Haven’t you basically done everything needed to escape the solar system by the time you do the burn to turn back again?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Yeah, you would only need to burn a little bit more on your initial burn, that’s why I said the cost would be similar.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Fair. Your way is certainly more epic.

permalink
report
parent
reply
51 points

Why is that - wouldn’t you be working against solar gravity? Like you don’t have to get them there quickly, just launch them in some orbit that will decay and be taken in?

permalink
report
reply
112 points
*

Because the Earth is really cookin’, and anything anyone you hurl toward the sun will inherit that orbital velocity as well, meaning that they’ll actually end up going around the sun, instead of into it. And due to the speed it would pick up on its way in, it would basically take up a highly-eccentric yet stable elliptical orbit.

“Well, what if we throw them in the other direction, to make up for it?” That’s called retrograde, and that’s basically exactly what you’d have to do: cancel out the Earth’s entire orbital velocity. Which would take a lot of energy, plus a couple of really exacting gravity assists from planets on the way in.

(Edit to add: I may have explained this poorly. Basically, if you don’t change your orbital speed at all, any movement you make toward or away from the host body means you just end up in an orbit of the same average distance, but in a more eccentric [elliptical] shape.)

By contrast, even though the escape velocity from the solar system is no slouch (42 km/s), you get to start with the Earth’s orbital velocity (30 km/s)–meaning you’re already a little under 3/4 of the way there. Plus, if you can make it to Jupiter and Saturn, you can get a significant gravity assist, and they’re much bigger targets for such a maneuver than Mercury or Venus are.

So, yeah, bottom line: you only need a delta-V of about 12 km/s to get out of the solar system, but a delta-V of 30 km/s to get to the sun without going into orbit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

That’s a great explanation, thanks! 🙏

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

So, yeah, bottom line: you only need a delta-V of about 12 km/s to get out of the solar system, but a delta-V of 30 km/s to get to the sun without going into orbit.

This is true, but the possibility of gravity assists mostly nullifies the difference. If you can get out to Jupiter you can basically choose: either let it sling you out of the system, or let it cancel out all your orbital velocity so you fall into the sun.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I feel like that might be difficult to do without just falling into Jupiter, but I am no rocket scientist.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

Why would you need to entirely cancel the earths orbital velocity, surely you just need to cancel a tiny bit of orbital velocity?

Edit: https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/43913/do-you-need-0-km-s-velocity-to-crash-into-the-sun

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Canceling out only a tiny bit puts you on an orbit similar to earth’s. You need to kill basically all of your momentum.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Good question, but if you cancel out only a little bit of orbital velocity, you just orbit in a little bit closer. Without any appreciable drag acting on you, there’s nothing that will keep your orbit decaying. You’ll just be in a smaller, perhaps slightly more eccentric orbit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

You can just change the shape of your orbit (but not your orbital energy) with the help of a sufficient gravity well from solar orbit, so it intersects with the Sun. Drag (aerobraking!) within the Sun will slow whatever is left of you enough to sap your orbital energy

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yeah, gravity assists are a cheat code here, but the delta-V is still being changed—just by stealing velocity from elsewhere.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

That’s assuming all cows are a point on a frictionless 2 dimensional plane.

  1. you don’t need to hit the sun dead center to be incinerated.

  2. the sun is huge

  3. you aren’t in a frictionless environment, your orbit will decay into the sun.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

These are all technically correct but fairly inconsequential. Even just to graze the sun you need to lose 90% of your orbital velocity. And although everything orbiting the sun will eventually fall in, the friction is really low. It will take billions of years to lose enough velocity to fall in.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

the issue is not counteracting gravity, the issue is decelerating enough to hit the sun

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

What’s wrong with them striking the sun at full speed?

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

The curvature of spacetime does wild shit to how you would expect physics to work. If you want to fall into a gravity well, you have to slow down or you’ll just slingshot past it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

The problem is, you have so much speed that you keep missing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

The reason you need to slow down is because you’re starting on Earth, which means you’re moving fast enough parallel to the sun’s surface that for every foot you fall downwards toward the sun, the sun’s surface curves away by 1 foot. This results in the nearly circular orbit around the sun we exist in.

If you start speeding up, the orbit becomes more elliptical, except your aphelion starts raising away from the sun because now you’re moving fast enough that you’ve moved more than 1 foot sideways in the time you’ve fallen 1 foot downwards.

Slowing down has the opposite effect. If you get your speed down to 0, you’ll fall straight down toward the sun as normal with gravity. But you don’t need to go all the way down to 0 velocity to enter the sun, you just need to slow down until your elliptical orbit brushes up against the sun’s surface. If you then want to speed back up to avoid falling into the sun, you need to do it parallel to the sun’s surface. At this point, speeding up toward the sun will actually make you fall into the sun faster.

So basically the problem isn’t that you’re moving too fast to fall into the sun. By virtue of Earth’s orbit, you’re moving too fast in a direction away from hitting the sun’s surface.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

That’s the thing - in space, orbits don’t decay. Orbital decay only happens if there’s dust or atmosphere that you bump into along your orbit to slow you down. But in interplanetary space, there’s no dust or atmosphere, and certainly not enough to decay your orbit fast enough to achieve results (otherwise, the Earth would have already decayed and melted in the Sun)

You need to spend fuel to lower your orbit to hit the Sun, and you need to spend fuel to raise your orbit to escape the solar system. It turns out to be really freaking difficult to hit the sun because it simply requires so much fuel to lower your orbit enough to hit the Sun.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Sir Isaac Newton is the deadliest son of a bitch in space

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Orbital decay isn’t just friction from particles, you also have imperfections in the orbit and other objects influencing the eccentricity over time. The moon has gravity too for instance.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

You are making 2 opposing assumptions there, 1) there is nothing to bump into in outer space, the earth picks up 43 tons of new mass every day.

  1. the earths orbit would decay, the earth is absolutely massive compared to the amount of mass gained, and also off gasses a significant amount of mass every day.

If orbits don’t decay, why do even high orbit satellites need to make elevation corrections?

If you put a small body into outer space it would absolutely be (slowly) effected by the miasma of particles out there.

And let’s not forget we don’t have a time table for reaching the sun, and we aren’t aiming for the middle of the sun to see results. And as you approach the sun you will bump into more and more particles as they too are being drawn around the sun.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Y’all need to pay some Kerbal Space Program. It’ll teach you more about orbital mechanics than a physics degree and a job at NASA (according to XKCD). The only problem is, once you have this knowledge, a lot of sci fi becomes annoying.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

You’re starting with the speed of the earth

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Ah… centrifugal force, ofc!:-)

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Why would an orbit decay without something to slow the spacecraft down like an atmosphere? The problem is that any object we launch from earth has a lot of orbital velocity, which makes it almost impossible to hit the sun directly, you would have to use a lot of complex gravity assists from the inner planets to take away enough momentum. Using gravity assists to accelerate outwards is much easier

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Why do you need to hit the exact center of the sun to have the desired results? Get it within the orbit of Mercury and I’ll be happy enough.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

That’s what the premise of this post was. It’s a common saying to “shoot something into the sun”, which sounds easy at first but is actually quite hard to do. That’s the joke

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I remember watching a video about that. The gist is that you have to leave earth orbit or something idk.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

You leave earth orbit into a solar orbit that is slightly shifted depending on which direction you were facing when you left earth’s orbit

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Short answer; the earth is orbiting really fast around the sun.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

To escape a body of mass you need to have enogh velocity (kinetic energy) to overcome the gravitational pull of that body. You can imagine it like a ball sitting in a bowl. With little velocity it will just roll back and forth but if it’s fast enough it can roll out of the bowl and escape it’s influence.

That critical speed is called “escape velocity” and it depends on mass and distance from a body. The escape velocity of earth (from the surface) is about 11.2 km/s and the sun’s escape velocity (from earth orbit) is about 42.1 km/s. Earth orbits around the sun at about 29.8 km/s. If you launch in the direction of Earth’s orbit, you will orbit the sun already at about 41 km/s, so you “only” need 1.1 km/s more to escape the sun, too.

If you tried to reach the sun, you could launch in the opposite direction leaving you orbiting the sun at about 18.6 km/s. Since there is almost nothing in space you won’t slow down from friction and the orbit won’t decay. Instead you’d have to accelerate opposite the direction you’re traveling. Now, calculating exactly how much you’d need to decelerate isn’t trivial since you don’t want a stable orbit but an elliptical orbit that just touches the sun at the closest point (perihel). I don’t know how much deceleration that takes, but it’s propable that it’s easier than accelerating by 1.1 km/s to escape the sun.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

It’s an easy talking point from the Internet and high school text books, it is disregarding of many actualities of our universe. It would be true if the sun were an infinitely small point on a 2 dimensional plane with a perfect lack of friction.

And while for instantaneous results it would be easier to get something out of the sun’s gravity well rather than hit the exact middle of the sun, practically, if you have time, and you don’t actually need it to hit dead center of the sun, it’s much cheaper and easier to incinerate something proximal to the sun than it is too send it out of the solar system.

Also let’s not forget gravity sling shots work in both directions.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

Launching someone straight into the sun is very very expensive but doing a gravity assist around Jupiter or something to redirect your orbit into the sun is much cheaper.

permalink
report
reply
22 points

Huh. I would have thought that once they break orbit that the sun’s gravity well would do the heavy lifting pulling.

permalink
report
reply
35 points

If you care to learn orbital mechanics, Kerbal Space Program is a great teacher.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

That one’s been sitting unplayed in my library for a very long time. I guess it’s time to give it a shot.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

And if you want more complicated orbital mechanics there’s a ksp mod: Principia which adds n-body orbital mechanics over ksp’s relatively simple patched conic orbital simulation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

“Breaking orbit” still leaves you in almost the same orbit around the sun as the earth. You need to slow down a lot to bring the periapsis of the orbit within the suns surface.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

Imagine that you’re standing on a train and have a baseball. If you throw the ball off the train, the ball will still have momentum in the direction of the train’s movement.

If you want to throw the ball to a friend the train just passed, you have to be able to throw the ball faster than the train is moving or it will never reach them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Now all im imagineing is a ball floating mid air and it’s beautiful

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Mythbusters did this! (Well, the ball fell to the ground, but for a split second it looked like it was hovering after being shot out of a cannon.)

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points
*

once you break out of earth orbit you are now in an orbit around the sun, similar to earths.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

The vessel would still have a lot of speed after escaping earth’s orbit, so the trajectory would become a large orbit around the sun. You still have to slow down by about ~30km/s (or ~100 000 km/h) to make that orbit intercept with the sun’s surface.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Science Memes

!science_memes@mander.xyz

Create post

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don’t throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 3.4K

    Posts

  • 83K

    Comments