- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Space vs Oceans
Posted on 2/23/17 at 12:03 pm to mmcgrath
Posted on 2/23/17 at 12:03 pm to mmcgrath
quote:
We should spend more on both.
Just look at how much was spent in the last 6 months of the Pres Election. Just need to find a way to generate interest from investors to contribute towards exploration for the sake of exploration. It's not like all those contributors really expected "influence" directly so as to make their election spending yield a measurable ROI financially.
0
Posted on 2/23/17 at 12:15 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
There is a lot of ignorance in this post, especially the certainty of something that is inherently uncertain.
Do you think if we could go back in history (like Bill and Ted), even very recent history, and describe even the basic things we use everyday (cell phones, Internet, cars, refrigerators, televisions), that most people would believe those were possible (imagine Napoleon learning about modern warfare)? I would suspect not, so why we conclude the future would be any different?
Maybe we won't ever be able to do those things, but people far smarter than any of us have determined that they are at the very least theoretically possible. So it seems ignorant to so strongly conclude that it can't be achieved.
I get your perspective, but you're comparing periods of pre-enlightenment vs post-enlightenment.
There's been a knowledge revolution that has proven physical laws that can't simply be bypassed by theory.
There's really very little that we don't actually know about the limits of what's possible in physics and cosmology.
For instance, we know the mass of the Higgs boson and dark energy, as well as the frequency of string theory.
We have hit mathematical laws and empirical constants that simply weren't known or understood in the past.
Posted on 2/23/17 at 12:19 pm to BeefDawg
quote:
Travel to other worlds is never going to be possible.
Define "Other Worlds." Because Mars seems like a surefire thing within the century.
quote:
Building a craft that can travel fast and far enough to reach anything with possible life outside our galaxy? Also dumb, never gonna happen.
Define "Fast Enough." That's subjective relative to the goal.
quote:
The chance of humans blowing themselves into extinction is infinitely more probable than us ever accomplishing inter-stellar travel.
I agree with you that it's exceedingly unlikely (barring some major discovery that circumvents the laws of physics) that a biological human will achieve interstellar travel. That said, I think that the odds are good that at some point n years in the future, "humanity" (whatever it is at that point) will reach interstellar space.
Posted on 2/23/17 at 1:10 pm to Strophie
quote:
Define "Other Worlds." Because Mars seems like a surefire thing within the century.
Sorry, I was implying livable planets in other galaxies since that was the OP subject.
quote:
Define "Fast Enough." That's subjective relative to the goal.
It would have to be faster than light speed or all practicality breaks down.
Which is absurd since 1. humans can't possibly endure the acceleration G's to get up to that speed, and 2. the closer you get to light speed the heavier mass gets and time slows down.
Even if we created some kind of quantum molecular fields that shielded us from the gravitational forces, they couldn't prevent mass from expanding and time from slowing.
Not only can humans not withstand such forces, but there are no elemental compounds provided by the resources of our planet that could withstand them. Nor is there a means to even propel animate objects to such possible speed.
Posted on 2/23/17 at 1:19 pm to BeefDawg
quote:
Sorry, I was implying livable planets in other galaxies since that was the OP subject.
I figured, I was just verifying.
quote:
Which is absurd since 1. humans can't possibly endure the acceleration G's to get up to that speed, and 2. the closer you get to light speed the heavier mass gets and time slows down.
Humans can absolutely endure a G or two of acceleration. You could constantly accelerate at one G and reach 0.99999 c (the speed of light) in approximately 5 years. And a human would have no trouble withstanding that.
The issue would be somehow having a magical drive that could continue to accelerate for that long. And obviously we don't have anything like that level of technology, but it may be feasible in the future (EMDrive et al).
You're correct that there's no real way around time dilation from the perspective of viewers here on earth, though.
Posted on 2/23/17 at 1:50 pm to BeefDawg
quote:
Sorry, I was implying livable planets in other galaxies since that was the OP subject.
Yeah, but there are a hundred billion stars in our galaxy. If we don't make it beyond our own galaxy, I wouldn't actually see that as a failure.
Posted on 2/23/17 at 2:35 pm to BeefDawg
quote:Clearly you're more knowledgeable on this is subject than me, but how can you be so certain?
There's really very little that we don't actually know about the limits of what's possible in physics and cosmology.
And would say that physics (and physical since in general) had made some amazing discoveries and identified new principles on that time?
Because the Nobel Winning Physicist (first American), Albert Michelson, stated this in a speech in 1894:
quote:In other words, I think it's awfully short-sighted to assume we've nearly reached the maximum level of knowledge, since the limit of our knowledge is unknown until new knowledge is discovered, which often opens a door to an a whole new world of knowledge.
it seems probable that most of the grand underlying principles have been firmly established
Just look at Germ Theory. It was speculated by some over the course of history, but it wasn't until the mid-1800's that it was studied scientifically. Even then, one of the first to study it, Ignaz Semmelweis, had his work largely rejected by scientific community, and he was beaten to death by guards in an asylum before his work was accepted and validated.
Yet, despite thousands of years of no theory about germs (seems obvious now), serendipitous discovery to finally study it, and resistance to the study, once accepted, it opened science and medicine to countless lines of research, which spawned more research, and so on.
In other words, we've shown time and time again thst we don't know what we don't know. So arguing with certainty that we know that we've reached a point that we no longer don't know seems a bit arrogant, and frankly ignorant given that the same belief has been shown wrong time and time again.
Posted on 2/23/17 at 5:50 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
In other words, I think it's awfully short-sighted to assume we've nearly reached the maximum level of knowledge, since the limit of our knowledge is unknown until new knowledge is discovered, which often opens a door to an a whole new world of knowledge.
I wasn't implying we have nearly reached the limits of possible knowledge. That's of course not true.
Could we prove that a multi-verse exists? Sure. Could we prove that alternate dimensions exist? Quite possibly.
Could we travel to them? Physically, no. That doesn't mean we may not eventually figure out some way to transcend physical boundaries and project telepathy and reach some of these places with our mind. Who knows. But discussing this is practically entering the realm of magic and fantasy.
But physically, we've hit some boundaries and limits that are simply inescapable. Mathematical laws and real physical limits on what our planet can provide us in resources and periodic elements.
Unobtanium and Adamantium (science fiction compounds) and other fictional alloys and compounds don't actually exist and aren't possible and never will be, for example.
I mean the only chance we really have of inter-stellar travel is if we are somehow able to shed our physical bodies and insert our consciousness into something inanimate, and then survive millions of years of travel. And that's a crazy stretch without thousands of inconceivable other things falling into place too.
There's no problem with dreaming and talking about stuff, but at some point hard limits and boundaries have to come into the play before people start wasting time and energy and resources.
This post was edited on 2/23/17 at 5:53 pm
Posted on 2/23/17 at 10:54 pm to GumplandTiger
The upside to space exploration is much greater financially and it is the inevitable direction we must take for the survival of our species.
Posted on 2/24/17 at 5:59 am to GumplandTiger
The dear leader had NASA reaching out to Muslims.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News