Re: M$ 365 Down, Again

On 2/6/25 3:28 PM, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 06/02/2025 03:19, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote:

Anyway, sorry, I just CAN'T see any sort of useful
    and safe vacuum blimp. One goose bumps into the
    thing and it will all implode in an instant.
>

This is substantially correct. The strength to weigh ratio of a vacuum
filled  blimp or dirigible means it probably cannot exist at any useable
size

 If you can make small vacuum balls that float in the air, you
could potentially fill a blimp with them instead of gas. Or
instead of one hollow vacuum chamber, join the balls (or honeycomb
segments) up into one solid lighter-than-air structure of tiny
sealed vacuum chambers where only the outer ones are vulnerable
to impact.

   But ONE little dent compromising the structural
   integrity and ......
   In college I sometimes worked with vac drying of
   biological samples. We'd use like an 8-inch
   polycarbonate dome fitted to a gasketed metal
   plate. You'd think polycarbonate should be kinda
   indestructible ... but it kinda depends how
   people "cleaning" it heaped on abuse. I remember
   when one imploded - sounded like a damned bomb
   and blew out the glass of the fume hood, injuring
   a couple of students. The released fumes weren't
   so great for ya either but most went up the chute.
   There's always helium-3 ... 25% lighter ... but
   on earth it's kinda unobtanium.