spendius wrote:Shame on you Chum.
Let him demonstrate his vulgarity for all to see and as often as possible.
It discredits all the positions he supports.
I agree I should not let myself get caught up in futile augmentation even if I remain polite, OTOH isn't an amusingly large portion of A2K exactly of this nature? Not that that is a justification, mind.
farmerman wrote:A photon is a particle , thats how E=mc** works, AND radio waves through atunneling diode go faser than C and they are part of the Emag spectrum. . You people need to stop buying these concepts of limits. Just because we dont have any evidence , doesnt mean that it wont come.
Why just last week (or maybe it was just before Christmas) A UFO hovered above the OHare Airport . It was seen by several credible witnesses. It hovered then streaked up so fast that it created a large hole in the overcast, that let in the sun.
Graviton propulsion sez I..
You people will be arguing about this phenom while scientists are plugging away. The radio wave throughthe tunneling diode was done at Lincoln Labs and the neat thing was that it behaved relativistically, in that thw signal arrived at its destination before it left the transmitter.
We need to think more weirdness and stop buying this "infinite mass" ****.
RF through a tunneling diode @ C+? This is news, this is nifty. BTW I always considered a photon a wave-a-cle, what say you?
Chum-
I rather think fm was jesting.
You were jesting weren't you fm?
OK, Brandon, i'll defer to your math, because i've never claimed to be strong in math. The question then becomes how much mass you'll have to accelerate at 1 G, which is a consideration based upon how many colonists would be "on board" and how much mass in resources are going with them. As i've pointed out before, upon arrival, colonists will need resources upon which to survive until they can reliably produce the necessary resources at their new colony. This has been a central point of my objections to that part of the Fermi paradox which suggests that a technologically sophisticated civilization will colonize continually--it is a suggestion which ignores the resource requirement, and what i consider the likelihood of many demands upon available resources. That's why i consider the probability that such civilizations would send out mechanized exploratory missions most probable.
Somebody give FM a beer and settle him in a quiet corner.
You run whining to the moderators whenever it pleases you, Chum . . . if you will willfully lie about what i've written, either because your reading comprehension is so poor that you've failed to understand a clearly written sentence, or because you're trying to erect a strawman by quoting me as having written something i have not written--i'm very likely to state that it appears to me that you are a liar.
Chum-
The general position your have complained about is one where the critic seeks to have everyone dance to his tune and preferably in chains.
He forgets "cuincungue in arte sua perito credendum" which means "every man is to be trusted in his own art".
All critics assume a dictatorial power and the habit, and it is only a habit deriving from long practice, provides them with an assurance to offer the ipse dixit, the assertion without proof for which I haven't the slightest veneration, as if it's validity was confirmed merely on the evidence of them having gobbed it off.
In times of ignorance, and we are assuredly living in just such a time, critics assume a dignity which gives precedence to their own spoutings over the genius of the works they have the impudence to address themselves.
They are invariably of a shallow disposition and capability and mistake form for substance. In a word pedantic. They adhere to the letter of the law rather than its spirit. Barrack room lawyer types.
They latch on to accidentals and are blind to the general drift, the substance, and the laws of discourse become no longer founded on the practice of the author but on their own methods which are all they can manage.
Hence the foundationless assertions which don't deserve notice.
I have (alas again) reported Sentena as "attack on a member" based on his following text:
You run whining to the moderators whenever it pleases you, Chum . . . if you will willfully lie about what i've written, either because your reading comprehension is so poor that you've failed to understand a clearly written sentence, or because you're trying to erect a strawman by quoting me as having written something i have not written--i'm very likely to state that it appears to me that you are a liar.
Your nobility is breath-taking. If you will lie about what i've written, i will routinely conjecture that you appear to be a liar.
no spendi, I was not kidding. You can look it up, however, your intellectual ambiguity is part of your charm.
spendi as opposed to spendi, which is ipse wiki
I'm inclined to wish that was the case fm.
But I have been forced to conclude otherwise.
