HW WHO...Quote:I think that when Einstein concieved his famous formula he used C squared as a convenient conceit to express a number too large for the mind to get a hold on and one that could not be refuted by scientific experiments but which some could flatter themselves they understood.
Incorrect again , and you say that youve been in the sciences? (laughs). {hint} what do F=Ma and E=Mc** have to do with each other?}
fm wrote-
Quote:Incorrect again , and you say that youve been in the sciences? (laughs).
Another meaningless assertion. Laughs. And you say you can speak English. A meaningless assertion has less meaning than a duck quacking.
Quote:what do F=Ma and E=Mc** have to do with each other?}
Go on then. Enlighten us all. I'm sure some of us at least would be happy to know.
well newton was a force to be reckoned with and einstein (well nobody ****ed with him) gave us the special and general theory of relativity. He was also a Jew.
I'll passover that temptation.
spendius wrote:Brandon-
I could see a point to attempting the fantastic scientific exercise that would entail were the sun's demise within a timescale we have the intellectual power to appreciate. I gather it is 4,000 million years off.
Having said that I still don't think it is possible to do what you say for the reasons I have given. I think that when Einstein concieved his famous formula he used C squared as a convenient conceit to express a number too large for the mind to get a hold on and one that could not be refuted by scientific experiments but which some could flatter themselves they understood.
Someone once claimed that a pilot of a jet plane at 700 mph returned to base a millisecond younger and a micro milligram lighter. Perhaps at high fractions of the speed of light a man might return to the pre embryo stage and become bodiless. He might even return to earth after it has ceased to exist and not just when his brothers were old and grey.
I think Einstein himself said that his photocell stuff was much more important that his grand theory.
You appear to have very little knowledge of the history of science. Aside from the fact that a hundred years of measurements have confirmed relativistic mechanics to many decimal places, and aside from the fact that particle accelerators are designed using relativistic, not Newtonian, mechanics and would not work if it were incorrect, you might want to look at the easily accessible paper, "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies," in which Einstein first derived Special Relativity. As I would assume any well educated layman should know, the equations are deduced mathematically from very careful reasoning, and are hardly careless speculation. I now consider it to be virtually impossible that you have taught Physics or anything like it.
Brandon -
Surely you must be aware that that lot means nothing.
It reminds me of Holden Caulfield's answer in the exam paper which his tutor read out to him with heavy sarcasm.
"Appear" lets you off the hook for a start.
"Little" is relativistic.
"Knowledge" is taken from books which cover very minute sections of a subject as vast as the history of science. The history of science is intimately interwoven with the history of everything else. There is no particle accelerators without economic surplus and political will. Rulers have ever seen science as a tool to help them rule. There are no demarcation lines between the history of science and the history of everything else except, of course, for the purpose of the promotion of college courses with a view to allowing the middle-classes to feel better about themselves whilst delaying their offspring's entry into the labour market.
I should think that the most expert student of the history of science will admit, assuming appropriate humility, that he knows very little about the subject if very little means a small proportion of what there is in the subject. 5% would be some feat.
Your post explains nothing and is essentially a long assertion with certain buzzwords gleaned from easily accessible sources added to give it credibility.
And you are perfectly free to consider anything virtually anything you wish. The fact that I have taught physics is proof that I know very little about the subject because anyone who knows a lot about it won't be teaching because of the wages and the working conditions. (I suppose there might be a few dedicated souls somewhere but I'm inclined to doubt it.)
A physics is only one of the sciences.
It might be useful to you if you took a little time to study how to express yourself in your native language and, if possible, allow that others may know how to read a little bit. "Very careful reasoning" is, again relativistic. Such phrases trip off the tongues of politicians on an hourly schedule. They can utter them without thinking.
FEMA was set up on the basis of very careful reasoning.
Quote: It might be useful to you if you took a little time to study how to express yourself in your native language and, if possible, allow that others may know how to read a little bit.
. Im betting that your comp skills are on the low end of average.
FEMA Was a good idea, thats why Carter set it up from a bunch of competing agencies. The only problem with FEMA is that our present "president" has turned it into a haven for corrupt incompetents, starting with Joe "Big SKy" Allbaugh, who masterminded the "recycled grave" scam. and earned his boss about 135000$ for which there was a very quiet settlement while Bush was busy trying to convince people to vote for him in 2000.
We mereley took an old French idea and turned it into a way to slip the bound of Conservation of MAss.
spendius wrote:Brandon -
Surely you must be aware that that lot means nothing.
It reminds me of Holden Caulfield's answer in the exam paper which his tutor read out to him with heavy sarcasm.
"Appear" lets you off the hook for a start.
"Little" is relativistic.
"Knowledge" is taken from books which cover very minute sections of a subject as vast as the history of science. The history of science is intimately interwoven with the history of everything else. There is no particle accelerators without economic surplus and political will. Rulers have ever seen science as a tool to help them rule. There are no demarcation lines between the history of science and the history of everything else except, of course, for the purpose of the promotion of college courses with a view to allowing the middle-classes to feel better about themselves whilst delaying their offspring's entry into the labour market.
I should think that the most expert student of the history of science will admit, assuming appropriate humility, that he knows very little about the subject if very little means a small proportion of what there is in the subject. 5% would be some feat.
Your post explains nothing and is essentially a long assertion with certain buzzwords gleaned from easily accessible sources added to give it credibility.
And you are perfectly free to consider anything virtually anything you wish. The fact that I have taught physics is proof that I know very little about the subject because anyone who knows a lot about it won't be teaching because of the wages and the working conditions. (I suppose there might be a few dedicated souls somewhere but I'm inclined to doubt it.)
A physics is only one of the sciences.
It might be useful to you if you took a little time to study how to express yourself in your native language and, if possible, allow that others may know how to read a little bit. "Very careful reasoning" is, again relativistic. Such phrases trip off the tongues of politicians on an hourly schedule. They can utter them without thinking.
FEMA was set up on the basis of very careful reasoning.
Your post is nothing but a distraction from the relevant logic. My relative ability or inability to express myself, while possibly fascinating to some, is unrelated to the subject under discussion. Apparently you are someone who tries to prevail in arguments by attempting to lay down a myriad of irrelevant arguments to create a distraction. Time dilation arrives out of a theory which was derived by mathematical deduction from two well defined assumptions. The reasoning could be wrong, of course, but it is algebra, not the type of speculation you suggested. Your statement about the origin of C in the equations of Special Relativity indicates a level of knowledge inconsistent with a background in science, and reveals that you certainly have no such background. The fact that the existence of time dilation, and precisely the amount predicted, has been verified experimentally thousands of times during the past century, cannot be dismissed based on literary allusions, you fool.
fm wrote-
Quote:Im betting that your comp skills are on the low end of average.
One doesn't need much in the way of comprehension skill to detect certain words which have the effect of rendering a statement meaningless.
Brandon wrote-
I have decided to leave you to your boredom at work.
Keep in mind, Ros, that Brandon doesn't have (for which one ought to be grateful) the same experience of that meaningless drivel that you and i and FM have.
The issue of time dilation is an interesting one in terms of the Fermi paradox. As i've already pointed out, i have no objection to a contention that highly sophisticated technological civilizations would send out mechanized exploratory missions--and that such missions might have been here, and missed us, or been here, and been unknown to us. My objection has been consistently to the notion that such civilizations would have colonized the galaxy. The issue of time dilation is one thing which makes me think this is unlikely. A significant fraction of C, such as 10%, could carry a colonizing mission a respectable distance in terms of on-board time, but the energy requirements will be significantly large. This suggests to me that colonizing missions are only going to be sent forth out of necessity. If done carefully, i would think that a civilization could find a suitable home within a few hundred light years of the cradle planet, at most--and which are in relatively "young" systems, meaning that, barring catastrophe, they would have a few billion years, at the least, in their new home. A technologically sophisticated civilization would only have needed to move three or four times at the most, given what we believe the age of the universe to be.
Mechanized missions won't require many resources, nor very much energy, and can ignore relativistic time, if the technology behind the mission is sufficiently sophisticated. But colonizing missions are going to be very, very resource and energy intensive--you'll need lots of colonists, and the resources to keep them alive over long periods of time even given time dilation--unless very high fractions of C can be attained, which is inefficient over short distances (a few tens or hundreds of light years) because of the necessity to decelerate. Very high fractions of C would only be useful over very long distances (thousands of light years)--but in either case the effort is going to be profligate of resources and energy. Low fractions of C will be the most efficient, if a suitable candidate planet is within a reasonable range--nevertheless, it will be necessary to carry large amounts of resources with a colonizing mission. Even if a form of suspended animation were used, the colonists will need resources to survive until newly found resources can be exploited.
Once again, Brandon, great thread, despite the unnecessary distraction.
Setanta wrote-
Quote:Once again, Brandon, great thread, despite the unnecessary distraction.
What he means is thank you for providing him with a platform from which to declaim that pile of useless information.
The universe has no age. Age is a concept we humans employ.
Quote:thousands of light years)
Quoth he.
He'll be talking about the 4 o'clock from Spiral Nebbie arriving at platform 1 next. Anything is possible with time dilation isn't it.
Setanta wrote:...Very high fractions of C would only be useful over very long distances (thousands of light years)...
...Once again, Brandon, great thread, despite the unnecessary distraction.
Thank you very much.
The statement above is the only one I may not agree with. If, say, one were trying to reach the nearest solar system to ours, Alpha Centauri, 4.3 light years distant, going at 10% the speed of light, the mission would take about 43 years according to all observers. However, at 99% the speed of light, if this could be attained, although planet bound observers would measure a duration of about 4.3 years, the colonists would measure the trip as taking only about 7 1/4 months, as opposed to 43 years at the lower speed. At 99% of light speed, the ratio of trip duration for the colonists to trip duration for planet bound observers is about .1411. This reduction in trip duration is certainly desirable. The practicality of expending the energy to achieve this speed may be an issue, but the benefit seems great. They might, however, have to lengthen the trip to a couple of years in order not to exceed an acceleration and subsequent deceleration that their bodes could stand.
Branson and Rutan Form "TransLight InterGalactic Spacecraft Company"
Branson holds model of his new faster-than-light spacecraft LONDON (Reuters)--Billionaire entrepreneur Richard Branson has teamed up with aerospace designer Burt Rutan of Mojave-based Scaled Composites to form a new aerospace production company which will build a fleet of commercial faster-than-light spaceships using a tachyon-based warp drive.
Called "The TransLight InterGalactic Spaceship Company" the new enterprise will manufacture various spacecraft and market them to spaceliner operators. The main client would be Virgin InterGalactic, formed by Branson to handle trans-solar system and intergalactic space tourist flights.
"We'll quickly achieve faster-than-light speed with the new warp drive and be able to take paying passengers out to Pluto and back to Earth in under an hour," Branson enthused.
At present, seats onboard Virgin InterGalactic spaceships are price tagged at $200,000 each for voyages to the edge of our solar system, but Branson hopes that this seat price will drop over time.
"Our aim is to bring the price down," he said. "Once we get the bugs worked out of the new warp drive, we'll start taking passengers out for a week-long cruise to Alpha Centauri and back. We'll later schedule trips to all of the nearby stars that harbor Earth-like planets, and we'll seek out other lifeforms, going where no man or woman has gone before."
The new spaceship company is jointly owned by Branson's Virgin Group and Scaled Composites. Scaled Composites will be contracted for research and development testing and certification of a 9-person SpaceShipThree design, with Rutan heading up the technical development.
This advanced faster-than-light space ship will draw from Rutan's work on SpaceShipOne and the White Knight mothership. But SpaceShip Three will use an advanced tachyon-based faster-than light warp drive still under development.
SpaceShipOne successfully won the the $10 million Ansari X Prize last year with flights to the edge of space. Yet the new translight space vehicles are to be twice the size of the earlier designs and will be capable of leaving the solar system.
"We're taking the technology of SpaceShipOne and developing it into a next generation commercial vehicle with warp drive to give thousands of people the chance to experience the majesty of space," said Bill Bullhorn, President of Virgin InterGalactic.
Branson said that the commercial spaceship will carry 7 paying passengers, along with a two-person flight crew. "We have firm plans to get those translight warp-capable spacecraft built in two and a half to three years from now," he said.
Once the fleet of translight craft is built, a base from which to operate the spaceships is to be set up somewhere on Earth and the moon. "We still haven't decided where the Earth base will be," Branson said, adding that the space tourist-carrying vehicles could rocket spaceward from the Mojave, California desert, Las Vegas, New Mexico, or possibly Florida.
"Our principal aim behind this is not to make money. The principal aim is to reinvest any money we make into space exploration," Branson said. "We expect to double, triple, quadruple the number of astronauts in the next few years that have currently experienced space," he indicated.
To date Branson has about a 10,000 pioneers have been willing to pay $200,000 to be the first people to go for a tour of the solar system via Virgin InterGalactic. "These are the kinds of people who are going to enable us to bring the cost of space travel down," he added.
The story above is a satire or parody. It is entirely fictitious.
spendius wrote:Branson and Rutan Form "TransLight InterGalactic Spacecraft Company"
Branson holds model of his new faster-than-light spacecraft LONDON (Reuters)--Billionaire entrepreneur Richard Branson has teamed up with aerospace designer Burt Rutan of Mojave-based Scaled Composites to form a new aerospace production company which will build a fleet of commercial faster-than-light spaceships using a tachyon-based warp drive....The story above is a satire or parody. It is entirely fictitious.
And a thousand years ago, one could have written such a parody if someone said that someday people might fly from one country to another. Your argument seems to be that because it's impossible now, it will always be impossible, which is, of course, frightfully clever. You're a technophobe.
Quote:
The universe has no age. Age is a concept we humans employ.
Duhhhh. Howboutall the ET's out there, dont they have watches and calendars and mass spectrometers (for really deep time)?
I hope that wasnt an attempt to sound the sage of A2k. It rather came off like your soup was dribbling on your waistcoat.
As Wright once said
"Time is that which keeps everything from happening at once".. Now he was a sage.
Would it be beyond the bounds of possibility, given time dilation, that a dash in an alien type Morse code would last, say, 1000 years in our time and that we still have about 900 years of listening out to go through to get to the following dot or dash? (Dots only lasting about 200 years).
I'm not wading through 2 dozen pages to see what I've missed - if anything - so I will just respond to current points.
Setanta, perhaps there are aliens who evolved in a system where they had to hibernate for months or years at a time, or who have such naturally slow metabolisms that a few hundreds of years in space are achievable without large stores of food and air. Or they might build generation ships with a self-contained ecosystem that recycles everything and travel in space indefinitely.
So why haven't they stopped here? Perhaps they've been here and left, or passed us by because an oxygen atmosphere is lethal to them or we don't have the right trace elements. Maybe Earth is too hot or cold (they may have come during an ice age). Perhaps they came a million years ago and found no intelligent life, or 20,000 years ago and missed any pockets of civilization.
A civilization that has expanded to fill its planet may stagnate and lose its collective drive for exploration. They may lose interest in maintaining SETI transmitters after hearing no response for a million years. Why waste resources with so little possibility of return on investment? We have only been doing it for a few decades and people already want to give up.
Perhaps they decided it is pointless to try to maintain a dialog when responses take decades or longer. This is also a drawback to colonizing other planets. Your grandkids could be grown and have kids of their own before you even heard of their existence.
Brandon, alien species from high-grav planets might be able to withstand very high acceleration. Or they might genetically alter spacefarers to be more suited to life in a spaceship. What modifications to human astronauts would you make if genetic engineering was practical and ethically acceptable?
