13
   

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive"

 
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 05:16 am
@Setanta,
I never procrstinate so getting a star now will save us some time later hen everyones trying to pile into the "mother ship"

Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 05:20 am
I should probably start a thread about it, but the prospects for crewed inter stellar flight are extremely poor, in my never humble opinion.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 05:25 am
@Setanta,
I see that alpha centauri has the known planets and Barnards was due to some bad math and dirty equipment.

Thats why Penzias and Wilson made busy cleaning the pigeon **** out of their radio telescope.

PSSST, never say never in science , Cave men , were sitting around saying "We aint never gonna have television".
I would imagine that the new James Webb orbiting telescope, due to go up in 2018, will do some glassing at exoplanets. Its gonna be focused on the infrared
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 05:31 am
We've got more than a dozen orbital telescopes up there now, so another one likely won't solve the problem of more demand for eyeball time than capacity.

I wasn't saying never, i was saying not any time soon. Why would the people of this planet accept severe material sacrifices, possibly for more than one generation, just to benefit a few hundred, or a few thousand colonists, at most--in a venture for which there will never be a return on the investment? That's why i say social resistance will likely be the biggest barrier. People read too much science fiction. They don't seem to ever invest much time in considering the practical aspects of space travel.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 05:44 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
I never procrastinate so getting a star now will save us some time later hen everyones trying to pile into the "mother ship"


Doing something a few billions years ahead of any need is way beyond worrying about not procrastinating.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 05:48 am
@Setanta,
Quote:
few thousand colonists, at most--in a venture for which there will never be a return on the investment?


Depend on how you define return on investment such as taking out an insurance policy on the survive of the human race.
Setanta
 
  0  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 05:52 am
@BillRM,
You see, this is why it's silly to talk to you. You must know almost nothing about human nature if you think the majority of humanity care more for the prospect of the long term survival (survival, dipshit, not survive) than they do for their immediate material security.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 08:26 am
@Setanta,
OK, eventually Ill buy that. However, weve got these very rich guys who look on such activities as just aniother way of keeping "score"> SO WHY NOT LET EM??

The privateley funded space race with Musk an all the others sounds interesting as hell and its way more interesting than the canned feed from NASA.

Ultimately, as the time approaches a few BILLION YEARS from now, it will become an immediqte concern that will occupy all of the planets minds. I only hope that the dying of our sun will be a gradual ascent into Kelvin temperatures so that the population can acclimate to the concept of "We gotta get the hell outt here"

What with all the possible star deaths that could be possible in our neighborhood, the approach of Andromeda, an the real possibilities of instantaneous death via a gamma burst from some unknown source, we should be paying attention.
(Ive always been a long range planner )
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 08:35 am
@farmerman,
What we really need is a way to survive a vacuum metastability disaster.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 08:37 am
@oralloy,
that too. (I have no idea what that is?) Sounds serious
mark noble
 
  0  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 09:09 am
@TomTomBinks,
Not ridiculous, at all.
Physicists are dogmatised with 'potentials' - That's why they are lost in mathematical formulas that are 'pretty', if you like shite, and obscure because
They equate to bugger-all, in reality.
mark noble
 
  0  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 09:12 am
@oralloy,
Hawkin is also a fraud - He accepts 'theories' and projects them as reality.
farmerman
 
  3  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 12:30 pm
@mark noble,
you know this how?
farmerman
 
  4  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 12:33 pm
@mark noble,
Quote:

Physicists are dogmatised with 'potentials' - That's why they are lost in mathematical formulas that are 'pretty'
sounds like another clueless flunker of anything mathematical. If you dont know whats going on, try to ridicule those who do.
mark noble
 
  0  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 12:36 pm
@farmerman,
You know this, otherwise..... How?
0 Replies
 
mark noble
 
  0  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 12:42 pm
@farmerman,
Or, stick with dogma and defend yourself against it (religiously) anyway you can.
Show me 'ONE' Theory that works in real terms?
farmerman
 
  3  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 12:46 pm
@mark noble,
puhleeze. If you're really that stupid, I cant help you. Try reading , it opens many worlds(If you are able to understand whats written)
mark noble
 
  0  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 12:51 pm
@farmerman,
Yeah - That's an answer.......
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 01:06 pm
@mark noble,
Quote:
Or, stick with dogma and defend yourself against it (religiously) anyway you can.
Show me 'ONE' Theory that works in real terms?


You got to be kidding me as every damn day of your life is base on technology that theory had made possible.

Let see our world wide communication networks follow Maxwell theories and equations base on those theories to say nothing of the microwave you are likely to do your cooking with.

An of course SR theory is used in the GPS systems and so on.
Tes yeux noirs
 
  3  
Reply Tue 19 Apr, 2016 01:09 pm
@mark noble,
Quote:
Hawkin is also a fraud

I've seen this lots... Hawkin, Hawkins, Hawkings, how is it that people claim to know enough to slag off a one time Lucasian Professor of Mathematics, yet can't spell his name?


 

Related Topics

The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/05/2020 at 02:46:48