Is Anyone Out There?

spendius wrote:

You're having us on Brandon.

You have got your "you"s a bit mixed up at the end.

Quote:
At such speeds, even a grain of sand will come on like an H bomb, but it's not like technical problems haven't been solved before.

Like send a space sweeper on ahead to clear the path. Or a magic beam maybe.

So, basically, you're saying that despite the immense distance the human race has come scientifically and technologically, from open heart surgery, to the stress and strain theories which make skyscrapers possible, to numerous manufactured products, to cell phones, you figure that this one is impossible. You appear to oppose science and technology (presumably unless you get sick), so exactly what sort of society do you want to live in?

0 Replies

Quote:

A knowledge of physics is sought in order to get money to impress ladies with. That's why it's popular with the speccy-four eyes spotty swots who can't smack a cover drive into the fence or shoot their cuffs.

In Umberto Eco's book The Island of the Day Before there is this-

"And finally, Roberto continued to argue, mine is the tale of love for a woman: now, only stories, and surely not History, deal with questions of Love, and only stories (never History) are concerned with explaining the thoughts and feelings of those daughters of Eve who from the days of the Earthly Paradise to the Inferno of the Courts of our time have always so influenced the events of our species."

I did a calculation in my head in the pub and I think half the speed of light represents 7 orbits of our globe every second.

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

spendius wrote:
You're having us on Brandon.

You have got your "you"s a bit mixed up at the end.

Quote:
At such speeds, even a grain of sand will come on like an H bomb, but it's not like technical problems haven't been solved before.

Like send a space sweeper on ahead to clear the path. Or a magic beam maybe.

So, basically, you're saying that despite the immense distance the human race has come scientifically and technologically, from open heart surgery, to the stress and strain theories which make skyscrapers possible, to numerous manufactured products, to cell phones, you figure that this one is impossible. You appear to oppose science and technology (presumably unless you get sick), so exactly what sort of society do you want to live in?

spendius wrote:

Quote:
A knowledge of physics is sought in order to get money to impress ladies with. That's why it's popular with the speccy-four eyes spotty swots who can't smack a cover drive into the fence or shoot their cuffs.

In Umberto Eco's book The Island of the Day Before there is this-

"And finally, Roberto continued to argue, mine is the tale of love for a woman: now, only stories, and surely not History, deal with questions of Love, and only stories (never History) are concerned with explaining the thoughts and feelings of those daughters of Eve who from the days of the Earthly Paradise to the Inferno of the Courts of our time have always so influenced the events of our species."

I did a calculation in my head in the pub and I think half the speed of light represents 7 orbits of our globe every second.

So, you fear to give a straight answer. Very well.

0 Replies

Brandon wrote-

Quote:

So, basically, you're saying that despite the immense distance the human race has come scientifically and technologically, from open heart surgery, to the stress and strain theories which make skyscrapers possible, to numerous manufactured products, to cell phones, you figure that this one is impossible. You appear to oppose science and technology (presumably unless you get sick), so exactly what sort of society do you want to live in?

I don't want to live in any sort of society. I want more prosaic things than that like good beer. I don't want things I have no choice over.

Flaubert compared a great temple to the wing of a fly resting in the sun on the stonework in order to dismiss the puny technology of man.

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

Brandon wrote-

Quote:
So, basically, you're saying that despite the immense distance the human race has come scientifically and technologically, from open heart surgery, to the stress and strain theories which make skyscrapers possible, to numerous manufactured products, to cell phones, you figure that this one is impossible. You appear to oppose science and technology (presumably unless you get sick), so exactly what sort of society do you want to live in?

I don't want to live in any sort of society. I want more prosaic things than that like good beer. I don't want things I have no choice over.

Flaubert compared a great temple to the wing of a fly resting in the sun on the stonework in order to dismiss the puny technology of man.

You have opined that the problem of shielding a starship from space matter is insoluble. This sounds a lot like saying that if man were meant to fly, he would have been given wings. As we all know, heavier than air flight was not an insoluble problem, and air transportation is now very routine. Does your latest comment mean that indeed this is what you believe, that this technical problem cannot be solved?

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

... I did a calculation in my head in the pub and I think half the speed of light represents 7 orbits of our globe every second.

That - unsurprisingly given the source - would be incorrect. The mean circumference of Earth's orbit is very nearly 580,000,000 miles, the accepted value for the speed of light is 186,000 miles per second. 7 earth orbits therefore equates to roughly 4,060,000,000 miles, a distance light would require just about exactly 6 earth days to travel.

0 Replies

However, if you were actually traveling near the speed of light then time for you would slow down and the trip would take no more than a few hours, depending on how close to the speed of light you are going.

0 Replies

timber-

Thank you for your correction. I was in the pub and I was also at sea level, more or less, and I was envisaging it going by the window.

A mere literary conceit designed to get a real feel of it. In the abstract it is difficult to do that and the unreality resulting allows room for fantastical speculations of the sort we have been witnessing.

If we had such a ship wouldn't there be arguments about where to aim it between different groups of scientists who had specialised in studying different minute parts of the sphere I mentioned? With the planet's energy resources invested, as has been said, wouldn't world government be a necessity to adjudicate who got the best jobs?

How big a larder would be needed? With no sunshine after you get out of the suburbs you couldn't recycle the shite.

And wouldn't flushing the toilet throw it off course?

Nick wrote-

Quote:

However, if you were actually traveling near the speed of light then time for you would slow down and the trip would take no more than a few hours, depending on how close to the speed of light you are going.

When would you arrive in their time?

0 Replies

edgarblythe wrote:

If humankind could ever ween itself away from wasteful wars, I believe space would beckon all the stronger.

I think it works the other way. Colonize new areas, and the pressures that cause wars ease.

0 Replies

I contacted Geoffrey Landis and asked him if he would comment on this thread (I was hoping to get opinions from 'the horse's mouth' if possible).

He Emailed me a couple of times, and read a bit of our thread, but in the end, didn't feel able to comment...

Geoffrey Landis wrote:

Hi,
Well, I started at the end and scrolled a couple of screens in, back to about 22 Dec-- there's not much there for me to respond to; I think it might have been an interesting discussion at the start, but it seems to be too well developed to just jump in in the middle.

Sorry everyone, I tried. It would have been really great to get such a knowledgeable input to our discussion. Oh well.

0 Replies

COROT has been launched today:

COROT

0 Replies

ros quoted-

Quote:

Geoffrey Landis wrote:

Hi,
Well, I started at the end and scrolled a couple of screens in, back to about 22 Dec-- there's not much there for me to respond to; I think it might have been an interesting discussion at the start, but it seems to be too well developed to just jump in in the middle.

Which is a diplomatic way of saying that he has no answers to the very simplistic points I have tentatively mentioned.

0 Replies

I think it's arrogant to believe we're the only life in such a massive universe. I think a more intelligent life form would consider us little better than barbarians, and leave us well alone.

0 Replies

Wilso wrote:

I think it's arrogant to believe we're the only life in such a massive universe. I think a more intelligent life form would consider us little better than barbarians, and leave us well alone.

or eat us

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

ros quoted-

Quote:
Geoffrey Landis wrote:

Hi,
Well, I started at the end and scrolled a couple of screens in, back to about 22 Dec-- there's not much there for me to respond to; I think it might have been an interesting discussion at the start, but it seems to be too well developed to just jump in in the middle.

Which is a diplomatic way of saying that he has no answers to the very simplistic points I have tentatively mentioned.

No, he said that the thread is too far along for him to easily jump in as a guest celebrity poster. On the contrary, it's you who have consistently failed to even try to address my points:

Do you actually believe that it's impossible to address the issue of detecting large objects in a ship's path and shielding a it against small objects?

What is your beef with Galileo and why do you make up these lies about him?

You can't see any reason to study physics other than money? It's beyond your ken that someone might just find it fascinating?

How was this thread "derailed from the start?"

What is this great sin that the world's scientists have committed? Tell us plainly. What is the great sin in speculating about life elsewhere in the universe?

How does the large number of stars in the galaxy make it difficult to go from one particular star to another?

I have consistently responded to your points, why do you fear responding to mine? In my opinion, you use such oblique language simply because you fear stating your opinions clearly.

0 Replies

Brandon--Do not even engage Spendi-hes not worth your effort. HEs the Scut Farkus of A2k.
Francis, an aside, I heard a comment re: Jean Baptiste CAmille Corot. An American art hostorian said," that of the 2500 certified true Corot paintings, 7800 are in the US alone."

0 Replies

And a very HAppy New YEar to all.

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

Francis, an aside, I heard a comment re: Jean Baptiste CAmille Corot. An American art hostorian said," that of the 2500 certified true Corot paintings, 7800 are in the US alone."

You mean the guy said there are hosts of them? Laughing

(I've heard that already).

Happy new year for all of you!

0 Replies

Steve 41oo wrote:

Wilso wrote:
I think it's arrogant to believe we're the only life in such a massive universe. I think a more intelligent life form would consider us little better than barbarians, and leave us well alone.
or eat us

that would certainly settle the "who's the superior race?" question once and for all....I'll have to beef up my Klingon song list so I can dj the cook off.....

0 Replies

Brandon wrote-

Quote:

No, he said that the thread is too far along for him to easily jump in as a guest celebrity poster. On the contrary, it's you who have consistently failed to even try to address my points:

What! ?? 18 pages. Most of it fantasy.

I don't think you have made any points. That one about Daytona made me laugh.

Quote:

Do you actually believe that it's impossible to address the issue of detecting large objects in a ship's path and shielding a it against small objects?

Yes-in this context. Mr Landis could address that one couldn't he?

Quote:

What is your beef with Galileo and why do you make up these lies about him?

I have no beef. He was a great guy from what I've read. What lies?

Quote:

You can't see any reason to study physics other than money? It's beyond your ken that someone might just find it fascinating?

That's right. I've taught the subject. I had to use "special effects" to maintain my own interest.

Quote:

How was this thread "derailed from the start?"

I've answered that. You might as well discuss whether fairies exist or not.
Or ghosts.

Quote:

What is this great sin that the world's scientists have committed? Tell us plainly. What is the great sin in speculating about life elsewhere in the universe?

No sin. Just a scam. I don't mind scams. If you want a reason it is that it distracts some scientists from doing useful work in more useful areas. It's entertainment.

Quote:

How does the large number of stars in the galaxy make it difficult to go from one particular star to another?

I didn't say that. I said it is impossible. Is that heresy?

Quote:

I have consistently responded to your points, why do you fear responding to mine? In my opinion, you use such oblique language simply because you fear stating your opinions clearly.

You have responded to nothing yet. I don't fear anything. You have the assertion disease I'm afraid. Respond to the Eco quote. He's much more famous than Mr Landis. And miles more intelligent.

Here's another answer of convenience which means nothing.

fm wrote-

Quote:

Do not even engage Spendi-hes not worth your effort.

Although besides being another facile assertion in fm's usual mode it criticises you for responding and it criticises fm himself as he has responded to loads of my posts in the past in another place.

He doesn't like one of his pet areas of the strut stage to be rubbished.

0 Replies

Is Anyone Out There?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know