Message-ID: <67a51b61@news.ausics.net> From: not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) Subject: Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc References: <2d7ff7c3-5aa6-acff-bf69-8aee193ce9ac@example.net> <38799da0-b66c-ef55-675c-b1b1068c4452@example.net> <12f8009a-b8a0-9f85-ba66-508512e93ab4@example.net> <67a28066@news.ausics.net> <5hqb7lxb81.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> User-Agent: tin/2.0.1-20111224 ("Achenvoir") (UNIX) (Linux/2.4.31 (i586)) NNTP-Posting-Host: news.ausics.net Date: 7 Feb 2025 06:28:18 +1000 Organization: Ausics - https://newsgroups.ausics.net Lines: 20 X-Complaints: abuse@ausics.net Path: ...!news.snarked.org!news.bbs.nz!news.ausics.net!not-for-mail Bytes: 2281 The Natural Philosopher 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. -- __ __ #_ < |\| |< _#