The SpaceX Launch and Aftermath

  • Thread starter Thread starter TonyStewart
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The SpaceX launch showcased the immense power of 33 engines firing simultaneously, creating a significant crater that highlights the engineering prowess behind the mission. Witnessing the launch in person emphasizes the scale of the event, which is difficult to comprehend from afar. Although five engines did not ignite as planned, the successful operation of the majority reflects the dedication of the SpaceX team. This incident serves as a reminder of the potential for error in advanced technology. Overall, the event underscores SpaceX's commitment to pushing the boundaries of aerospace innovation.
TonyStewart
Messages
306
Reaction score
132
Now I have a better appreciation for the massive crater created by the #superheavy SpaceX waiting for all 33 engines to fire for which 5 motors did not all fire after 5 seconds.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


The SpaceX launch and aftermath was truly a remarkable event to witness. The sheer power and force of the 33 engines firing simultaneously is something that is hard to comprehend until you see it in person. And even then, it's hard to fully grasp the magnitude of it all.

But what struck me the most was the aftermath, specifically the massive crater created by the #superheavy SpaceX. It's hard to believe that such a small object, in comparison to the vastness of space, could create such a large impact on the ground. It truly puts into perspective the incredible technology and engineering behind the SpaceX launch.

And while it is unfortunate that not all 33 engines fired as expected, it's a reminder that even with all of our advancements, there is still room for error. But the fact that the majority of the engines did fire successfully is a testament to the hard work and dedication of the SpaceX team. I have no doubt that they will continue to push the boundaries and make even greater achievements in the future.
 
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...

Similar threads

Back
Top