#1 Posted by BiteMe-Fanboy (7594 posts) - - Show Bio
#2 Posted by Glitch_Spawn (17132 posts) - - Show Bio
#3 Posted by BiteMe-Fanboy (7594 posts) - - Show Bio

lol.

#4 Posted by Dracade102 (8167 posts) - - Show Bio

Just as planned.

#5 Posted by AtPhantom (14521 posts) - - Show Bio

I guess Republicans were right after all. Obama really is Palpatine in disguise.

#6 Posted by dccomicsrule2011 (23370 posts) - - Show Bio
#7 Posted by YourNeighborhoodComicGeek (19951 posts) - - Show Bio

LOL

I hope the "build a Master Chief" statue petition gets 25,000 signatures.

#8 Posted by umbrafeline (5300 posts) - - Show Bio

an actual deathstar? that sir and/or madam is irrevelant

just like the one featured in star wars: episode 4: a new hope and episode 6: return of the jedi.

If you ask me, I think Earth is the Death Star...or the Planet of the Apes.

Sure, with over 160 moons to choose from, you can give them Extreme Makeovers and convert them into Death Stars. All you need to understand is how to create MAGNETIC FIELDS to shield out COSMIC rays. Magnetic fields also protect any water from being photodissociated by solar uv. An Atmosphere on the other hand, blocks out gamma, uv and x-rays.

On the moon and Mars, you'll have to build mobile, local and global magnetic fields using Permanent Rare Earth magnets, Superconducting magnetic Rings (on the Moon) and molten liquid Dynamos (on Mars).

Generally speaking, dynamos will only work on planetary bodies which spin on their axis (Mars). The 3 requirements for a dynamo are: 1) molten liquid ferromagnetic materials such as iron, nickel and cobalt; 2) rotation; and 3) convection. I'd throw in some radioactive material like uranium, plutonium or thorium. And add some sodium (Na) and water for good measure, this'll ensure that your geodynamo is a roaring inferno.

The main field of the Earth near the core, is estimated to be on the order of 100,000 gauss, or 10 Tesla. However, on the surface, it's only 0.5 to 2.0 gauss, for the vertical and horizontal components, since magnetic flux diminishes as the inverse CUBE of the distance, R. Whereas gravity generally follows the Inverse Square law.

On planetary bodies which are tidally locked to their parents--that is, they don't spin on their axis--such as Earth's moon and the moons of Jupiter, Superconducting magnetic Rings could produce magnetic fields with sufficient amperage to create "global" magnetic fields. The rings can theoretically store a "persistent current" for 10^23 years (indefinitely). It would be positioned horizontally and sealed in a tank of liquid helium or nitrogen to keep it supercooled. It will range from 4 to 14 Tesla depending on the radius of the globe and the amount of iron, nickel and cobalt resident in the core to begin with. It would be imbedded at least 200' under the crust (but not near the core which is way deeper).

"Local" magnetic fields could protect a small community. A Samarium Cobalt magnet of 1 to 2 Tesla could be imbedded 10' under a compressed dome, protecting about 50 inhabitants from cosmic rays. Super pulsed fiber lasers, such as the Photonics IPG laser, will make lunar and martian excavations a breeze compared to conventional drilling equipment.

"Mobile" magnetic fields would simply be elongated bar magnets strapped onto a vest which would act as a"cosmic umbrella", blocking out cosmic rays while you're walking or working.

Source(s):

http://www.news.wisc.edu/2515

http://www.atmospheres.5u.com

http://www.magnet.fsu.edu/

http://openlearn.open.ac.uk/mod/resource… (persistent currents)

Incidentally, we actually CAN create a "Death Star" with modern technology. Unfortunately it would be a pale replica of the original, and even less useful. If you discount the fact that all of the coins and paper money in world combined to the effort would not even be enough to build the giant fusion reactor at the core, (not to mention that we havent technically invented that yet), and if you discounted the fact that we would need to electrolyze a small oceans worth of hydrogen to fuel it, and if you discounted the fact that our current capacity for lifting payloads into orbit would require several hundred years and another 2 or 3 times the money that the entire world currently has, just to bring up the materials to build the superstructure, never mind the hulls, or electronics, or other systems that would need to be in place. Finally if you discounted the time and money necessary to launch the mining and engineering effort that would be necessary to build the titanium hull plates, and the carbon fiber-ceramic ablative armor plates, it would then be very little problem building it. Provided you had a fully trained and qualified army of engineers and workers that could construct the object in orbit. Say 30,000 people. Who of course would also need to be paid, and housed, medically cared for, fed, and equipped, in space.

You see, you could make the argument that technology is at the absolute bottom of the problems and concerns we would need to grapple with in order to accomplish anything. Rarely is lack of technology the primary reason that we can't get something done. The real problem is even deeper than lack of money, time, or manpower. The real problem is that humanity is simply not advanced enough socially, psychologically, mentally, economically or politically to EVER accomplish any task that is even a quarter of the scale of a "Death Star". The technology itself is there, or at least very nearly there. it is everything else that would defeat the effort.

The only technologies in Star Wars that we could not build at this time are the following:

1) Lightsaber (would require the ability to use gravitons to locally bend space-time) estimated time to discovery - unknown pre-requisite technologies remain undiscovered.

2) Ray-shielding/forcefields (also requires the ability to manipulate gravitons) estimated time to discovery - unknown, closest similar technology currently available is electromagnetic or electric field shielding.

3) Repulsorlift (also requires the ability to manipulate gravitons) Closest similar technology available - VTOL vectoring nozzle thrusters.

4) Autonomous robots (requires invention of artificial neural net) Research currently underway - estimated time to capability - 10 to 25 years.

5) Handheld energy weapons ie: blaster pistols and rifles. (Requires room temperature superconductor batteries and capacitors) Estimated time to discovery 25 to 30 years. Closest available technology vehicle mounted microwave and laser weapons.

6) rebreather technology (the devices that qui-gon and obi-wan placed in their mouths so that they could breathe underwater) (Requires nano-technologically engineered electrolytic reactors AND room temperature superconductor technology) Estimately time to capability 25 to 30 years.

7)Portable fusion reactor (the device Luke plugged R2D2 in to recharge him when they landed on Dagobah to meet yoda) Requires fusion, room temp super conductor, AND nanotechnological engineering. Estimated time to capability 40 to 50 years. Closest available technology - hydrogen fueled, internal combustion, rotory engine driven conventional generator.

8) Hyperdrive (roughly equivalent to Star treks "warp drive" - requires technology that is now currently only theorized to be possible) Time to discovery - unknown. Closest available technology - nuclear powered particle supercollider drive. (Although technology IS currently available, no such device has been built to date)

Of the Star Wars technologies that we DO actually have, only a few are notable.

1) Turbolaser - Believe it or not we actually could build such a device with current technology, although it would be enormously expensive, and even more expensive to actually power up. (Turbolasers were the large turrets that were firing at the fightercraft attacking the Death Star before they actually blew it up.) Unfortunately even a nuclear reactor couldnt power a device such as the Death Stars main gun. We would have to wait for fusion power for that, if fusion is even capable of it i dont know. If not we would have to wait for anti-matter reactors which will likely be a 100 year wait or more. That is if you wanted the same power potential of the actual Death Star main gun.

2) Plastisteel and permacrete - We can make steel and concrete with many different properties. We are advanced enough in materials science to make nearly any surface

their argument is invalid

#9 Posted by mrdecepticonleader (17606 posts) - - Show Bio

@umbrafeline: Wow you have put alot of thought into this.

The second Death Star is different to the first one.It is much larger.

#10 Posted by _slim_ (13058 posts) - - Show Bio

lol

#11 Posted by InnerVenom123 (29499 posts) - - Show Bio

@dccomicsrule2011 said:

#12 Posted by umbrafeline (5300 posts) - - Show Bio

@mrdecepticonleader: that is because i asked a similiar question on yahoo answers a few years ago. and since i can only select one answer as the winner. i had to think long and hard of the best two replies that i received. which is something el presidente and the vast majority of the aspargan public do not comprehend. i admit i dont understand but i know its unfeasible

#13 Posted by mrdecepticonleader (17606 posts) - - Show Bio

@umbrafeline said:

@mrdecepticonleader: that is because i asked a similiar question on yahoo answers a few years ago. and since i can only select one answer as the winner. i had to think long and hard of the best two replies that i received. which is something el presidente and the vast majority of the aspargan public do not comprehend. i admit i dont understand but i know its unfeasible

Yeah building a death star or anything from Star Wars for that matter is unfeasible,though why would it be feasible its fiction

#14 Posted by umbrafeline (5300 posts) - - Show Bio

@mrdecepticonleader said:

@umbrafeline said:

@mrdecepticonleader: that is because i asked a similiar question on yahoo answers a few years ago. and since i can only select one answer as the winner. i had to think long and hard of the best two replies that i received. which is something el presidente and the vast majority of the aspargan public do not comprehend. i admit i dont understand but i know its unfeasible

Yeah building a death star or anything from Star Wars for that matter is unfeasible,though why would it be feasible its fiction

i think its because obama has raised taxes on some people, pushing us to a fiscal cliff and the fact that people are still outraged that he got re-elected. some people are dumb, like those who want a deathstar built. thats what i think

#15 Posted by mrdecepticonleader (17606 posts) - - Show Bio

@umbrafeline said:

@mrdecepticonleader said:

@umbrafeline said:

@mrdecepticonleader: that is because i asked a similiar question on yahoo answers a few years ago. and since i can only select one answer as the winner. i had to think long and hard of the best two replies that i received. which is something el presidente and the vast majority of the aspargan public do not comprehend. i admit i dont understand but i know its unfeasible

Yeah building a death star or anything from Star Wars for that matter is unfeasible,though why would it be feasible its fiction

i think its because obama has raised taxes on some people, pushing us to a fiscal cliff and the fact that people are still outraged that he got re-elected. some people are dumb, like those who want a deathstar built. thats what i think

Just reading the article made me laugh.People obviously signed the petition for a joke no one in their right mind could honestly think it would be possible.