The Ship Model Forum

From Wiki:

Esther Dyson is the daughter of physicist Freeman Dyson and mathematician Verena Huber-Dyson, and sister to digital technology historian George Dyson. After graduating from Harvard in economics, she joined Forbes as a fact-checker and quickly rose to reporter. In 1977, she joined New Court Securities as "the research department," following Federal Express and other start-ups. After a stint at Oppenheimer covering software companies, she moved to Rosen Research and in 1983 bought the company from her employer Ben Rosen, renaming it EDventure Holdings. She sold EDventure Holdings to CNET Networks in 2004, and left CNET in January 2007 when CNET declined to continue her PC Forum conference.


Publications and business ventures
Currently, Dyson is a board member and active investor in a variety of start-ups, mostly in online services, health care/genetics, and space travel. Her next (2008) Flight School workshop will take place June 4 to 6 in Boulder, Colorado.

Previously, Dyson and her company EDventure specialized in analyzing the impact of emerging technologies and markets on economies and societies. She created the following publications on technology:

Release 1.0, her monthly technology-industry newsletter, published by EDventure Holdings. Until 2006, Dyson wrote several issues herself and edited the others. When she left CNET, the newsletter was picked up by O'Reilly Media, which appointed Jimmy Guterman to edit it and renamed the newsletter Release 2.0, which is also...
Release 2.0, her 1997 book on how the Internet affects individuals' lives. Its full title is Release 2.0: A design for living in the digital age. The revision Release 2.1 was published in 1998.
Release 3.0, her bimonthly column for the New York Times, distributed via its syndicate and reprinted in Release 1.0 (now defunct).
Release 4.0, her weblog. On March 4, 2005, this weblog de facto moved to Dyson's Flickr account

Gerarddm wrote:From Pykrete to bashing poor ol' Jimmy again. How tedious you can be.

Seems all I did was mistakenly attribute the Nobel to the worthy Dr. Dyson (who, except for environmental policy has been in your camp far longer than mine). Dyson suggested a comet could be hollowed out and used as a space vehicle in a way not too different to our "Pykrete landing ship". I was corrected by a certain someone who said Dr. Dyson was not worthy of the award, so I apologized, and as a backslap reminded that person that perhaps the Nobel is not worth it in any event based on the fact that it had been awarded to two of these three people in one event for bringing peace to the Middle East, and in the other for making a Powerpoint presentation on a very difficult to prove thesis.

Gerarddm wrote: BTW, noted computer guru Esther Dyson is his daughter.

Being unfamiliar with her area of work, perhaps you could elaborate....

From Pykrete to bashing poor ol' Jimmy again. How tedious you can be.

But getting back to a semi-thread, the Dyson 'sphere' was brilliantly conceived, but I was taken by the Ringworld concept.

BTW, noted computer guru Esther Dyson is his daughter.

I'll be darned. I had it in my feeble old mind that Dyson had a Nobel in the late 1960s.

So you will leave it with Arafat, Carter and Gore. Good company I'd say.

Werner wrote:If you had even bothered to read any basic text on Dyson's "sphere", you would know he never called it that. He called it a "habitat". and it was never envisioned as a solid sphere (ala Star Trek), but a cloud of asteroid sized habitats.

Once again your superior wisdom triumphs over the Nobel Committee. Perhaps I could convince you that they have also conferred the award in error to Jimmy Carter, Yassir Arafat and Al Gore.

No, I don't think the Nobel committee made errors in awarding the prize to any of these people.

They certainly didn't make an error in awarding it to Dyson since they never did award it to Dyson.

Werner wrote:If you had even bothered to read any basic text on Dyson's "sphere", you would know he never called it that. He called it a "habitat". and it was never envisioned as a solid sphere (ala Star Trek), but a cloud of asteroid sized habitats.

Once again your superior wisdom triumphs over the Nobel Committee. Perhaps I could convince you that they have also conferred the award in error to Jimmy Carter, Yassir Arafat and Al Gore.

No, I don't think the Nobel committee made errors in awarding the prize to any of these people, and they certainly didn't make an error in awarding it to Dyson since they never did award it to Dyson.

If you had even bothered to read any basic text on Dyson's "sphere", you would know he never called it that. He called it a "habitat". and it was never envisioned as a solid sphere (ala Star Trek), but a cloud of asteroid sized habitats.

Once again your superior wisdom triumphs over the Nobel Committee. Perhaps I could convince you that they have also conferred the award in error to Jimmy Carter, Yassir Arafat and Al Gore.

Was his Nobel prize in astronomy or spaceship construction? If so, by all means , ask for all of it it back. And then some for this Dyson sphere.

chuck wrote:

Werner wrote:Interesting that Dyson thought of using a comet as a space ship by using kind of a reverse of this idea.

Except the puffball would probably blow apart when one tries to pressurize the living spaces.

I suppose we should ask for his Nobel Prizes back...

Werner wrote:Interesting that Dyson thought of using a comet as a space ship by using kind of a reverse of this idea.

Except the puffball would probably blow apart when one tries to pressurize the living spaces.

Interesting that Dyson thought of using a comet as a space ship by using kind of a reverse of this idea.

Well I see the Pykrete as being a cocoon. So have the innards of ths ship built so they insulate the cavaties of the vessel while stopping that heat getting through into the Pykrete shell. A ship within a ship if you wish.


I wonder how Pykrete would stand up to an Exocet or similar missile?

HMAS wrote: Now, how to stop the troops inside freezing during transit!

Burning oil drums and Reggae music!



Jorit

chuck wrote: The fact that an iceberg is 95% underwater might make a pykrete landing craft impractical on any beach whose slope doesn't drop vertically to the abyss.

Yes but as the design was symmetrical as opposed to a "normal iceberg" the underwater portion would be comparable to a huge landing craft .
Now, how to stop the troops inside freezing during transit!

Build a gaint ramp!

Jack Ray wrote:I wonder how the Pykrete carrier would have held up as part of Murmansk convoy covering force?

How about as a giant fortified landing craft? Able to land an entire armored division on Utah Beach in one trip!

Jack

The fact that an iceberg is 95% underwater might make a pykrete landing craft impractical on any beach whose slope doesn't drop vertically to the abyss.

Jack Ray wrote:
How about as a giant fortified landing craft? Able to land an entire armored division on Utah Beach in one trip!

Actually, the great landing pontoon built for the proposed landings in 1918 was just that - designed to deliver hundreds of men, tanks and artillery and pushed by two 12in monitors.

Jorit

And you could have built-in heavy gun positions to blast the German Atlantic wall at close range. Talk about siege tower!

That isn't such a bad idea actually. Disgorge a whole tank squadron in one go.

I wonder how the Pykrete carrier would have held up as part of Murmansk convoy covering force?

How about as a giant fortified landing craft? Able to land an entire armored division on Utah Beach in one trip!

Jack